Quote:
Originally Posted by Forte Smitten Wesson
On good, another boring AR-15 style rifle to replace an otherwise perfectly functional rifle which only has issues that manifest under extreme conditions which have never once occurred in the field during its entire life in military service.
Truly the best replacement made by any military since the U.S. Military decided to replace the Beretta M9 with the SIG M17.
Honestly though, why? Why do military forces across the globe waste money by replacing firearms which have served them well for decades, that their personel is already familiar with, and it would be much cheaper to just stick with the same platform and request any changes/upgrades are deemed necessary, especially when the new weapon they choose isn't really much of a tangible upgrade to the last to begin with?
|
I asked somebody I know who has connections in the Bunderwehr about the G36 issues. He reckoned that the G36 had been known to be a dog for some time, but much like our own procurement process, getting some of those in charge to admit they bought a pup can be difficult. There was also strong resistance to buying a "quick fix" replacement like (shudder) the M4. Not designed by a German? Made largely by a Belgian company (FN)? Nope, that wasn't happening.
No doubt H&K will appeal the decision, and reading the specs of the different weapons, Haenel MK 556, HK 416 and HK 433, you have to wonder what the deciding factor might be.