06-30-2011, 08:24 PM
Stan, Tony, et. al.,
We need to understand the arguments and technologies, e. g., plastic-cased 5.56 and bursting 12 gauge shells not from the likelihood they will be introduced, but from the point of view of arguments to against implementing something new.
Someone clinging to the notion that the 5.56 and the 7.62 are perfectly fine and "the best we can do" will gleefully grab these and even very speculative emerging technologies to "prove" that we need do nothing.
This makes the chore of advocating a new cartridge, or anything else new, enormously more difficult. So, whether one or more of us is convinced something will or won't happen, we need to carry options to deal with those alternatives.
For example, Tony argues that the imminent to near-term implementation of plastic-cased ammunition in 5.56 and 7.62 can be a trigger point opening the door for a unified cartridge. Not all of us draw the same conclusion. Nonetheless we spend a lot of time debating the configuration and merits of that cartridge.
Similar attention needs to be given to equally plausible alternative paths. To repeat my previous post, we need to consider the alternatives and dispense with them, even our favorite ones, on arguments more convincing that "that has been tried before." Technology changes with time, and that change opens the path to implementing long-standing ideas previously discarded because the then-new technology, threat, or fiscal environment couldn't support implementation.
We need to understand the arguments and technologies, e. g., plastic-cased 5.56 and bursting 12 gauge shells not from the likelihood they will be introduced, but from the point of view of arguments to against implementing something new.
Someone clinging to the notion that the 5.56 and the 7.62 are perfectly fine and "the best we can do" will gleefully grab these and even very speculative emerging technologies to "prove" that we need do nothing.
This makes the chore of advocating a new cartridge, or anything else new, enormously more difficult. So, whether one or more of us is convinced something will or won't happen, we need to carry options to deal with those alternatives.
For example, Tony argues that the imminent to near-term implementation of plastic-cased ammunition in 5.56 and 7.62 can be a trigger point opening the door for a unified cartridge. Not all of us draw the same conclusion. Nonetheless we spend a lot of time debating the configuration and merits of that cartridge.
Similar attention needs to be given to equally plausible alternative paths. To repeat my previous post, we need to consider the alternatives and dispense with them, even our favorite ones, on arguments more convincing that "that has been tried before." Technology changes with time, and that change opens the path to implementing long-standing ideas previously discarded because the then-new technology, threat, or fiscal environment couldn't support implementation.