Grendel LMG

[pinzgauer]

Is this because of more rounds on-board, or heavier, more stable weapon, or longer barrel, or sustained rate of fire, or what?

Cuz the sighting system is the same. IAR barrels can be same length as SAW barrels. IARs can be made heavier or have mechanisms to reduce recoil. Am probably missing something, but only difference I see is number of rounds on board. And then we're debating speed of mag changes vs. belts, mags in common vs. specialized item that is a belt, and continuous or long bursts vs. short bursts. Cuz you can change a mag in the brief downtime after a burst.

More stable platform, easier to use on bipod (belt's vs mag), bigger optic, etc. My son's direct and team experience is they can get hits at distance with the SAW that they could not with M4's, and would be unlikely with M27 even in single shot aimed fire.

It's not that an HK auto rifle could not do single shots at the same range with similar or better accuracy. It's short burst, suppressive fire. And the PL's who train and fight with them that I know do not want to lose that. It's not a good tradeoff.

Go do the experiment- put your AR on a bipod prone, and try running through 6 mags in rapid succession. Still 20 short of a belt, and you've had to disrupt your aim/position (think prone) multiple times.

Similar input on the 249... it's not as inaccurate as many say (gunner quality/setup vs platform) and when well maintained is more reliable than it's rep. But that is very unit/training/discipline dependent. And there are some raggedy-ass 249's left in inventory. But a front line unit may be dealing with much newer, latest optics, etc.

The article's points are largely an echo of the Marine Auto Rifle argument points. And there is strong suspicion in some ranks that the Marine Auto Rifle case was just a back door to get the HK into mainstream inventory ("Does it make sense to have both the M4 and the M27? They are so close. let's just simplify")

House clearing? sure M27 would be handier than a 249, but then again, it's not your main tool there anyway. Neither are what you'd want. But that is a very small part of the mission big army IN has to deal with.

Ammo weighs what ammo weighs. Belts or in mags. So it's really just the weapon weight difference that you are talking unless you just plan to abandon suppressive fire as a tactic.

Likewise, all of this assumes appropriate ROE and availability/usage of company/BN level assets (crew served and mortars, etc). Stick a squad or Platoon out on it's own without those, and the need to keep suppressive fire only increases.

Some here on the board have direct experience, maybe can comment. This is just what I'm hearing from someone who is currently using them in the intended role.