03-13-2012, 06:58 PM
Belgium and FN made the right choice by not allowing Deutschland to manufacture the FAL under license, since Germany has the largest and most efficient manufacturing base in Europe. They are second to the US in global exports, so it makes every bit of sense that FN held onto their patent.
The .280 Enfield was an attempt at balancing firepower and maneuverability for the individual service rifle, and did a fine job of it from a rifle aficionado's perspective.
The 5.56 was a duty position specific cartridge meant to provide Submachinegun firepower like the MP44, with rifle performance via high velocity. It did and does exactly that within realistic engagement distances of individual riflemen. Is it ideal in longer range contacts in mountainous terrain? No, but there are duty positions within the Rifle Squad to deal with those, who aren't well-suited to clearing mud huts, where the M4/5.56 shines.
The .280 Enfield/EM-2 Bullpup system would still offer the compactness for Close Quarters work, but with a slight recoil and muzzle blast penalty that 5.56 doesn't have. Even the Grendel with 100gr bullets has a significantly louder muzzle blast and more muzzle climb than a 5.56, but I agree that it would still make an awesome assault rifle/DMR/LMG cartridge for someone who is looking to simplify their manufacturing logistics base.
5.56 is a deadly killer on 2-legged critters, and I have seen it first-hand more than once. The hype about Small Caliber High Velocity is not hype, it actually does what it was meant to do, and terribly well within 150yds. From 150yds on out, most assault rifle and battle rifle cartridges produce clean wounds anyway, so 5.56 makes more and more sense when you see how it actually performs. There is a ton of disinformation about it in gun ragazines, the internet, and gunshops.
The .280 Enfield was an attempt at balancing firepower and maneuverability for the individual service rifle, and did a fine job of it from a rifle aficionado's perspective.
The 5.56 was a duty position specific cartridge meant to provide Submachinegun firepower like the MP44, with rifle performance via high velocity. It did and does exactly that within realistic engagement distances of individual riflemen. Is it ideal in longer range contacts in mountainous terrain? No, but there are duty positions within the Rifle Squad to deal with those, who aren't well-suited to clearing mud huts, where the M4/5.56 shines.
The .280 Enfield/EM-2 Bullpup system would still offer the compactness for Close Quarters work, but with a slight recoil and muzzle blast penalty that 5.56 doesn't have. Even the Grendel with 100gr bullets has a significantly louder muzzle blast and more muzzle climb than a 5.56, but I agree that it would still make an awesome assault rifle/DMR/LMG cartridge for someone who is looking to simplify their manufacturing logistics base.
5.56 is a deadly killer on 2-legged critters, and I have seen it first-hand more than once. The hype about Small Caliber High Velocity is not hype, it actually does what it was meant to do, and terribly well within 150yds. From 150yds on out, most assault rifle and battle rifle cartridges produce clean wounds anyway, so 5.56 makes more and more sense when you see how it actually performs. There is a ton of disinformation about it in gun ragazines, the internet, and gunshops.