09-12-2017, 06:28 PM
LRRPF52 Wrote:If one were to read the diplomatic cables of the 1930s even today, it would change much of the way you view the history of that era.I'm always glad to gain knowledge. Please cite any such cables dated before the .276 was cancelled in 1932.
LRRPF52 Wrote:Also, look at how many carriers were built from other ships or purpose-built in the 1930s. 3 carriers were built from 1934 to 1940, to add to the existing Langley and Lexington.Conversion of the Saratoga was ordered in 1922.
Construction of the Ranger began in 1931.
Construction of the Yorktown began in 1934.
Considering that Japan and Germany didn't really start "misbehaving" until 1937 and 1939, respectively, I'm not seeing a linkage.
Looks to me more like a gradual introduction of a new class of ships that the leadership recognized as superior to legacy platforms.
LRRPF52 Wrote:I think a combination of factors came into play that prevented the .276 Pedersen from being adopted, many of them potentially more valid for the decision-makers if we were to see their perspective and what they were factoring into the process.Concur.
LRRPF52 Wrote:Either way, it retarded small arms cartridge development for the infantry rifle in the West by decades...I question that. Even if the .276 Pedersen had been adopted, it would have been only marginally better than keeping .30-06 for the infantry rifle.
First, the T3E2 Garand was nearly as big and heavy as the M1 Garand, so it would still have been necessary to develop and field the M1 carbine.
Second, the ballistics would not have satisfied the SCHV folks in the Army, so we would still have ended up with the 5.56 cartridge and M16 rifle.