04-29-2022, 04:45 PM
The real problems are:
Organizational culture: Risk-averse officer and senior NCOs who are generally incompetent in all things military history and Infantry-related, no real exposure to foreign cultures, no real understanding of terrain and how to think.
Weight: Linked ammunition especially is heavy for 7.62 NATO, and thereby constrains maneuver and energy of gun teams and Riflemen who have to carry extra linked ammo.
These problems are overcome with all the other systems in the Army, USMC, and Air Force that more than compensate for their failings in a conventional fight, where Infantry plays a limited role, and more mechanized infantry are the ones who will actually see relevance after multiple layers of echelons of fire.
If you go look right now at all the funded Army systems, you will have a very hard time even picking out NGSW from the mix.
Far more consequential and heavily-funded programs rule that budget, and when you see what they are, you realize how relatively-meaningless small arms actually are.
Examples:
UH-60V
HIMARS
A-ISR
AH-64E Digital Long Bow Networked Apache
MLRS
Multiple types of UAVs
Medical Vehicles
New Family of Trucks
AMPVs
M1A2 SEPv4
New NBC vehicles
New mobile EW vehicles and systems
Etc. etc. The last time I looked at it, it became a time-consuming process that would require a funded research project just to get a baseline handle on everything theyre working on to upgrade the Army. NGSW is lost in the list easily, nowhere near as funded as most of these other programs that are much more effectual on the battlefield.
The same goes for personnel allocation to the various Career Management Fields. You want your best and brightest going to Aviation, Artillery, Armor, Intelligence, and fields where leaders are managing expensive systems and highly-trained technicians that maintain and employ those systems.
Infantry is typically looked at with very minimal emphasis by many in the Army once you get to the Pentagon level. The older I get, the more I see why that is instead of faulting them for it.
Its hard for us to accept as gun folks, but just the way it is.
If we had more civilian ownership of tanks, artillery, helicopters with rocket pods, etc., wed get it.
Organizational culture: Risk-averse officer and senior NCOs who are generally incompetent in all things military history and Infantry-related, no real exposure to foreign cultures, no real understanding of terrain and how to think.
Weight: Linked ammunition especially is heavy for 7.62 NATO, and thereby constrains maneuver and energy of gun teams and Riflemen who have to carry extra linked ammo.
These problems are overcome with all the other systems in the Army, USMC, and Air Force that more than compensate for their failings in a conventional fight, where Infantry plays a limited role, and more mechanized infantry are the ones who will actually see relevance after multiple layers of echelons of fire.
If you go look right now at all the funded Army systems, you will have a very hard time even picking out NGSW from the mix.
Far more consequential and heavily-funded programs rule that budget, and when you see what they are, you realize how relatively-meaningless small arms actually are.
Examples:
UH-60V
HIMARS
A-ISR
AH-64E Digital Long Bow Networked Apache
MLRS
Multiple types of UAVs
Medical Vehicles
New Family of Trucks
AMPVs
M1A2 SEPv4
New NBC vehicles
New mobile EW vehicles and systems
Etc. etc. The last time I looked at it, it became a time-consuming process that would require a funded research project just to get a baseline handle on everything theyre working on to upgrade the Army. NGSW is lost in the list easily, nowhere near as funded as most of these other programs that are much more effectual on the battlefield.
The same goes for personnel allocation to the various Career Management Fields. You want your best and brightest going to Aviation, Artillery, Armor, Intelligence, and fields where leaders are managing expensive systems and highly-trained technicians that maintain and employ those systems.
Infantry is typically looked at with very minimal emphasis by many in the Army once you get to the Pentagon level. The older I get, the more I see why that is instead of faulting them for it.
Its hard for us to accept as gun folks, but just the way it is.
If we had more civilian ownership of tanks, artillery, helicopters with rocket pods, etc., wed get it.
NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO
CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor
6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:
www.AR15buildbox.com
CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor
6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:
www.AR15buildbox.com