12-11-2011, 03:38 AM
The question is: How long are we willing to milk the longevity out of 7.62 NATO? Is there any receptiveness to replacing it, given its entrenchment in vehicle-mounted systems, and favorable barrel life?
The reality is that 7.62 NATO will be around for at least the next 10-15 years at a minimum, and is not likely to be looked at as a problem due to the mistaken thinking that carbines & 5.56 are broken. As the bean-counters and corrupt procurement vultures try to replace 5.56, they meet immediate institutional resistance from Special Operations units in the US, England, Australia, Northern Europe, and Eastern Europe. Even the majority of combat arms troops report that 5.56 does what it is intended to do, and state satisfaction with it.
It's very difficult to show the military what it needs, because whoever is making that call has their own idea of what is needed. I think the biggest potential benefits to dismounted Infantry would be a totally new LMG concept as I have described, a multi-shot grenade launcher like the Marines have adopted, and a platoon-level organic indirect fire asset that is precision-guided: basically a small mortar that the lead fire team can lase onto target. That would be a big game-changer. No need to dial-in the tube...just point in the general direction of the enemy and let the lead team guide the munition. Air-burst and other types of warheads would be great for a fleeting enemy of dismounts in the open.
The reality is that 7.62 NATO will be around for at least the next 10-15 years at a minimum, and is not likely to be looked at as a problem due to the mistaken thinking that carbines & 5.56 are broken. As the bean-counters and corrupt procurement vultures try to replace 5.56, they meet immediate institutional resistance from Special Operations units in the US, England, Australia, Northern Europe, and Eastern Europe. Even the majority of combat arms troops report that 5.56 does what it is intended to do, and state satisfaction with it.
It's very difficult to show the military what it needs, because whoever is making that call has their own idea of what is needed. I think the biggest potential benefits to dismounted Infantry would be a totally new LMG concept as I have described, a multi-shot grenade launcher like the Marines have adopted, and a platoon-level organic indirect fire asset that is precision-guided: basically a small mortar that the lead fire team can lase onto target. That would be a big game-changer. No need to dial-in the tube...just point in the general direction of the enemy and let the lead team guide the munition. Air-burst and other types of warheads would be great for a fleeting enemy of dismounts in the open.