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?
|
Your post says it all for me. Yet they continue on. Russia is getting the AK-12 which looks like an AK-74 with improved furniture. The Marines are getting the HK. None of these rifles seem like a dramatic step forward to me. People keep complaining about how terrible .22 caliber service rounds are but armies keep issuing them. I guess these changes give the sense of progress.
I read that the U.S. Army is working on plastic cased ammo in a larger caliber. I hope they don't screw this up and get American soldiers killed over it.