08-22-2022, 11:56 PM
LRRPF52 Wrote:Hmmmm, where I have I heard all of his points before?
Meanwhile, "a DoD entity" who got sick of their SR-25s and SCAR-Hs weight/maneuverability, is using 12 - 18 6mm ARC, after telling Hornady 6.5 Grendel was fine for what they wanted.
[video=youtube_share;urEKLym1LGw]https://youtu.be/urEKLym1LGw[/video]
Key takeaways:
Ammo and rifle too heavy
Cant carry enough rounds for Riflemen for the last 100yds fight
Surface Danger Zones on military bases cant support the effective range and ballistic reach of the M5
M250 NGSW SAW is a great replacement for the SAW and M240 to out-range the PKM, while being lighter
Better to issue M250s to each Rifle Squad, with M5s only as DMRs, everyone else still carry M4s.
Get rid of 7.62 NATO
I didn't watch 25 minutes of the video, but from what I saw.
Green Beret? Really? Not sure I care what he has to say about what is good for the average Joe in the regular service. His world view is highly specialized.
He wants a light weight, belt fed machinegun that is very accurate. How much weight are you really saving as a percentage of total loadout? 5%? I bet the total load for a regular Joe is significantly different (more) than a Green Beret. 2 long barrels with mass to soak up lots of heat before you have to switch barrels, bipod, 800 - 1200 rounds, optical sight, binos, 2 to 3 man team . Less weight means more jump and recoil. Accurate? What is this a machine-sniper-gun? Cone of fire at 1000 yds is 20 to 40 feet, Good! Anyone outside the Marine Corps ever heard of a "combined arms dilemma"? Machineguns don't kill that many people. Never have. What they do, is get people to sit the fuck down while you get closer to them or call in indirect fire.
If I was special, and in an 8 man team, with 200 to 1000 enemy fighters within 30 minutes of me, no reinforcements for 2 to 4 hours, completely outside of the umbrella of artillery, I guess I would want a light weight machinegun.