Until you have dealt with the “user” you have no idea just how resistant to change is the military mind. They are very conservative, they stick to what they know, and you have to force them to change. Let me summarize how they think about hardware: they like what they have, they want something better but only a little different, and they totally reject revolutionary change. Pointy sticks had to be wrestled out of the hands of Troglodyte Infantry, and until the day they died, retired Troglodyte NCO's complained that the replacement stone tip spears were never as good as their old pointy sticks.
You want to hear them complain: change the uniform. Change the fatigue hat to a beret, change from brown shoes to black shoes, change the camouflage pattern, change the outfit. Howling cats are positive music compared to what you will hear. I worked for a retired Marine. In his opinion the Marine Corp had gone to hell in a handbasket because now, the uniform had the name of the Marine above the pocket. Before, no name; a Marine was a Marine was a Marine. Now that everyone has a name, they are all individuals, and the Marine Corp is no longer any good as a fighting unit.
All the reasons created not to change, were variations of all the reasons ever invented to maintain the status quo. Any person, right now, can come up with many reasons not to do something; don’t think the clever minds at the top of the Army food chain could not also come up some really good sounding reasons to do nothing, all of which are excuses to stay with the familiar.
Besides the Infantry, you would have had the Frankford Arsenal guys complaining about the costs of change. Changing cartridges would have been an additional work burden. There would have been legions of groups all loudly providing reasons why a change of caliber was bad, because in the final analysis, it would have required them to do more work. When a group does not want to do something, forcing them to act would have been financially painful. Do not doubt that passive-aggressive behavior exists within the Ordnance Department.
I think the 276 Pederson group lost their champion. Someone up high recognized that a change of caliber was needed, but that person was not in a position of influence long enough to push the change through. The next bunch, they decided to “do nothing”, and the do nothings can find a million and one reasons to “do nothing”.
The 276 Pederson was a lost opportunity, it was the right cartridge at the right time, and the Army totally flubbed it. The consequences of missed opportunities are never good, in the end, the 308, the short 30-06, was replaced by a cartridge inferior to the 276: the 223.
You want to hear them complain: change the uniform. Change the fatigue hat to a beret, change from brown shoes to black shoes, change the camouflage pattern, change the outfit. Howling cats are positive music compared to what you will hear. I worked for a retired Marine. In his opinion the Marine Corp had gone to hell in a handbasket because now, the uniform had the name of the Marine above the pocket. Before, no name; a Marine was a Marine was a Marine. Now that everyone has a name, they are all individuals, and the Marine Corp is no longer any good as a fighting unit.
All the reasons created not to change, were variations of all the reasons ever invented to maintain the status quo. Any person, right now, can come up with many reasons not to do something; don’t think the clever minds at the top of the Army food chain could not also come up some really good sounding reasons to do nothing, all of which are excuses to stay with the familiar.
Besides the Infantry, you would have had the Frankford Arsenal guys complaining about the costs of change. Changing cartridges would have been an additional work burden. There would have been legions of groups all loudly providing reasons why a change of caliber was bad, because in the final analysis, it would have required them to do more work. When a group does not want to do something, forcing them to act would have been financially painful. Do not doubt that passive-aggressive behavior exists within the Ordnance Department.
I think the 276 Pederson group lost their champion. Someone up high recognized that a change of caliber was needed, but that person was not in a position of influence long enough to push the change through. The next bunch, they decided to “do nothing”, and the do nothings can find a million and one reasons to “do nothing”.
The 276 Pederson was a lost opportunity, it was the right cartridge at the right time, and the Army totally flubbed it. The consequences of missed opportunities are never good, in the end, the 308, the short 30-06, was replaced by a cartridge inferior to the 276: the 223.
Last edited:
It has few superior attributes and many more inferior attributes for a rifle intended for use in combat. 
It is not even the best of the 7.62X51 rifles. :banghead:
