US Army Considers Adopting an Interim Battle Rifle in 7.62NATO: eventually adopt 6.5

[stanc]

At least 50% of a Rifle Squad's firepower comes from weapons that aren't M4s, and they are belt-fed. 75% of a Platoon's firepower comes from the Weapons Squad, where the M240s are manned in the gun teams.

How are you defining "firepower"? By my count, the weapons mix is:

Squad - at least 6 M4 vs 2 M249 (75% M4 / 25% M249)

Platoon - at least 28 M4 vs 6 M249 vs 2 M240 (78% M4 / 17% M249 / 5% M240)

These guys making these imbecilic comments need some counter-arguements to their BS, because a lot of people, including those in the military, seem to think that Infantry Squads and Platoons walk around with everyone carrying M4s with no ability to reach out to 1800m (Max effective range of the M240 with plunging fire).

??? I have never seen anyone criticize the M4 for being unable to reach out to anywhere near 1800 meters.

But I guess because a few riflemen per fire team are equipped with M4s makes us out-gunned against PKM and SVD. Just ignore all those guys humping 7.62 NATO weapons. That's just your eyes playing tricks on you.

Nope. It's that some folks (PEO Soldier, for example) think it'd be a good idea for all men in the squad/platoon -- not just a few individuals -- to have a weapon capable of 800-meter engagements.