From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Cybershooters,
I remember reading a series of articles (in Combat & Survival magazine I
think) on the US Army's new rifle project in the late 1980's. The G11 was one
of the four entries to it - the others were a pair of flechette rifles and a
modified M16 firing duplex ammo.
Of the four, I believe that the M16 duplex team had their heads screwed on
most firmly. Sure, it wasn't the most advanced piece of kit and was only a
limited improvement on the original rather than the step change of the G11.
The winning factor for me was the simplicity and relative cheapness of the
ammo compared with the alternatives. Duplex 5.56mm ammo would have been far
cheaper and easier to make, and therefore more likely to be adopted by
government bean-counters, notwithstanding any technical arguements.
The stupid part really though was the objective - to double the number of
hits scored in combat conditions by US troops. According to the articles,
most troops were so bad that when under stress they were just as likely to
score with random blasting as they were with aimed fire.
Surely the solution to this problem is better training. What is the point of
using technology to achieve what time and just a little extra money could do
what could be done in just a few weeks on the range?
James
-------[Cybershooters contacts]--------
Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website & subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
