Improved Infantry Squad Capabilities Article

[Tony Williams]

This article provoked me: Arming the Next Infantry Squad.

Add that to this one: PEO Solder report on Battlefield Effectiveness. Some extracts:

“A Soldier must be able to engage the threat he’s faced with – whether it’s at eight meters or 800,”

Ultimately, Army service rifles must be general purpose in nature and embody a series of tradeoffs that balance optimum performance for a wide range of possible missions in a range of operating environments. With global missions taking Soldiers from islands to mountains and jungles to deserts, the Army can’t buy 1.1 million new service rifles every time it’s called upon to operate in a different environment.

Ultimately, the “best” weapon for an operator with a unique target set will not be the same weapon as the best weapon a large Army facing a wide range of targets.

To be effective in all scenarios, a Soldier needs to have true “general purpose” rounds in his weapon magazine that are accurate and effective against a wide range of targets.

Weapons….must be accurate and capable of engaging the enemy at overmatch distances.

All of which makes a powerful case for general-purpose rifles and ammunition effective at all small-arms combat ranges.

So why is the US Army buying new 5.56mm carbines? There seems to be a disconnect somewhere...