New Army "Caliber Configuration Study"

[LRRPF52]

How do you expect it to be brought into action "when really needed" if it isn't with the patrolling unit???

The greater cartridge weight only means that fewer rounds could be carried by the patrol. It should be fairly obvious that if a 27-lb M240B and (for example) 1200 rounds of 7.62 ammo can be carried on patrol, it would be just as easy to carry a 24-lb LWMMG and 650 rounds of .338 ammo.

I spent literally years humping weapons that are heavier than 24lbs. The SAW with paratrooper stock, optics, and OTN configuration is heavier than 24lbs. The M60 with PVS-4 and mount was heavier than 24lbs. The M240B empty is 27.6lbs, no optics, no OTN accessories, no rail system.

The PKM is ~17lbs, and getting lighter. The KAC LMG is ~ 11lbs. For dismounted movements, 11H's used to break down the M2 .50 BMG, and strap it to ALICE Pack frames, then assemble it before emplacing on a SBF position. The GD .338 MMG would allow you to bring in a lot more firepower on foot, without disassembling the gun.

I've mentioned it before, but I would really like to see more 60mm mortars with PGM warheads linked at the local level, with integrated terminal guidance in a Land Warrior format that we could manage at the Company, Platoon, and Squad. That would be a game-changer. 5.56 carbines are just for local security, and close quarters clearance most of the time anyway. The intermediate fight is usually dealt with using LMG's, MMG's, and DM's if you have well-trained DM's.