Considerations on the Evolution of War

[stanc]

Shoulder-fired weapons with an effective range much less than a PK-family machine gun would be at a significant disadvantage. In this case, weapons with a GPC-like range would prove useful. In order to achieve an overmatch, something more along the lines of a .338 NM* would be required.

It depends on how much overmatch is desired. Something like 6.5x47 Lapua or 6.5 Creedmoor ought to provide overmatch, but with potentially lighter weapon weight than for .338 NM.

That's one thing that bothers me about the GPC. It may only provide parity, but the Army typically espouses overmatching capability.

Needed immediately: The troops need a portable device to locate the source of incoming enemy fire. As stupid as it may seem, I have yet to see any battle footage where our soldiers could see over or around their cover.

That's surprising, because there are many videos showing soldiers looking over or around their cover. (There seem to be an astonishing number of mud brick walls in Afghanistan!) Here's one:

[video=youtube;ncxkFzaBqPo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncxkFzaBqPo[/video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncxkFzaBqPo

Hell, periscopes were common in WWI. Our guys have helmet cams to watch each other but no "enemy cams" or even simple periscopes to spot the enemy shooting at them.

WWI was a static war, with soldiers in trenches where periscopes were in stationary positions. They weren't carried by troops on patrols or raids.

I'm inclined to think that small, easily-portable periscopes wouldn't help much. As in the video above, soldiers having a clear view often can't see the enemy. Perhaps FLIR might work?