04-08-2014, 12:54 PM
Stan, you have been arguing that the links "aren't proven to be doable" for several years -- back to 2010 or 2011 to my direct knowledge and I infer for much longer than that. Every one of us now understands that US has exclusively used links for more than 50 years. That means that we also agree that a link system will need to be developed and proven as part of a serious development program.
We count on you to point out gaps in logic and knowledge deficiencies as discussions move forward. Looking back over the past four years and more of our discussions, I begin to see that one of the best contributions you can make is to post a list of critical issues and your understanding of their development status.
Recognize that others will add to the list and that some will not concur with either your assessment or the larger community judgement of status. That is normal and reasonable. The resulting discussions will help the right folks build a more effective development plan.
The link issue but one item on that that will need to be worked. The question of link 'do-ability' has been beaten to death. It is time to put it on the shelf in favor of issues more critical to what will result in an adoptable squad and platoon level light and medium machine guns. Keep it on your list, however, because developing and proving link system function will be a critical part of a serious development program.
Further, engineers and other folks familiar with this class of work are very much in accord that functional and reliable links can be developed for this cartridge. That engineering consensus tells us that we can put links on the list of things to be worked, but they are not the show-stopper implied by the repeated and overly lengthy debate.
Let's move on and work some of the other issues -- we will count on you reminding the community if link development doesn't show up as part of a comprehensive R&D plan.
We count on you to point out gaps in logic and knowledge deficiencies as discussions move forward. Looking back over the past four years and more of our discussions, I begin to see that one of the best contributions you can make is to post a list of critical issues and your understanding of their development status.
Recognize that others will add to the list and that some will not concur with either your assessment or the larger community judgement of status. That is normal and reasonable. The resulting discussions will help the right folks build a more effective development plan.
The link issue but one item on that that will need to be worked. The question of link 'do-ability' has been beaten to death. It is time to put it on the shelf in favor of issues more critical to what will result in an adoptable squad and platoon level light and medium machine guns. Keep it on your list, however, because developing and proving link system function will be a critical part of a serious development program.
Further, engineers and other folks familiar with this class of work are very much in accord that functional and reliable links can be developed for this cartridge. That engineering consensus tells us that we can put links on the list of things to be worked, but they are not the show-stopper implied by the repeated and overly lengthy debate.
Let's move on and work some of the other issues -- we will count on you reminding the community if link development doesn't show up as part of a comprehensive R&D plan.