New Army "Caliber Configuration Study"

[stanc]

You can spend hours debating these sort of points, because there isn't one correct set of designations, and they are affected by how the weapon is used as well as by its characteristics.

I'm not going to debate that. I'll just say that I disagree that there isn't one correct designation, or how the weapon is used affects its designation. The M249 is used in the automatic rifle role, but it's still a light machine gun, and the Army classifies it as an LMG.

There are a number magazine-fed weapons from years gone by which were classified back then as machine guns, not automatic rifles. There are belt-fed guns like the M1919 LMG, which today would more properly be considered a MMG. There is also a Japanese LMG (Type 11?) which was fed via rifle stripper clips, but that doesn't make it a rifle. Do we set about re-classifying all of those obsolete and obsolescent weapons to meet current standards? Or do we just let their historical designations stand, and place our attention on current and future weapons?