Nightcrawler:
Well, all I can say to that is that our first role in the USAF was to gain air superiority so that we could do it to them without having to worry about being done by. Air superiority was Job One - for the USAF, while undoubtedly the Army and Marines were wondering when the "over-rated flyboys" would deign to wander by to help out with the tanks. Air superiority doesn't mean you'll win, but you sure lose more slowly.
I'm certainly not an expert on infantry weapons, but equally certainly, I was as much of an expert on Pentagon-think as anyone gets who has to work there. Individual weapon effectiveness and cost are never the only criteria in a weapons selection process. Absolutely key to it is tactical employment and how it supports the mission of the unit. I certainly wouldn't argue with you (or anyone) about the effectiveness of any given weapon, but I repeat that that isn't the whole point. Your devil's advocacy does raise good points - I read it when you first threaded it. Suppose, however, that a Department of the Army planner writes a requirement, and gets it approved through channels, that all infantry squads have to have organic helicopter air defense capability, maximum of a fifty-pound combat load-out, and aren't expected to operate away from transport at night. This is purely hypothetical, of course, but wouldn't this have an impact on what equipment the squad carried? My point wasn't that the 12-inch barrel was either useful or not useful - it was that the 12-inch barrel implies the presence of a requirement. Perhaps that requirement isn't close-quarters-cities; perhaps it's "all squads will operate from inside a Bradley AFV." I don't think this is true, but the presence of a 12-inch barrel at least implies that the requirements have changed.
Edited to say: Oh, the references to SAWs at 300+ yards are comments from Army friends who weren't as interested in the employment of rifles even as much as I was. I gained the impression that they thought of them as little more than a self-defense weapon - certainly not useful for offensive operations in the open. Again, that was my impression of their impression.
Jaywalker
Well, all I can say to that is that our first role in the USAF was to gain air superiority so that we could do it to them without having to worry about being done by. Air superiority was Job One - for the USAF, while undoubtedly the Army and Marines were wondering when the "over-rated flyboys" would deign to wander by to help out with the tanks. Air superiority doesn't mean you'll win, but you sure lose more slowly.
I'm certainly not an expert on infantry weapons, but equally certainly, I was as much of an expert on Pentagon-think as anyone gets who has to work there. Individual weapon effectiveness and cost are never the only criteria in a weapons selection process. Absolutely key to it is tactical employment and how it supports the mission of the unit. I certainly wouldn't argue with you (or anyone) about the effectiveness of any given weapon, but I repeat that that isn't the whole point. Your devil's advocacy does raise good points - I read it when you first threaded it. Suppose, however, that a Department of the Army planner writes a requirement, and gets it approved through channels, that all infantry squads have to have organic helicopter air defense capability, maximum of a fifty-pound combat load-out, and aren't expected to operate away from transport at night. This is purely hypothetical, of course, but wouldn't this have an impact on what equipment the squad carried? My point wasn't that the 12-inch barrel was either useful or not useful - it was that the 12-inch barrel implies the presence of a requirement. Perhaps that requirement isn't close-quarters-cities; perhaps it's "all squads will operate from inside a Bradley AFV." I don't think this is true, but the presence of a 12-inch barrel at least implies that the requirements have changed.
Edited to say: Oh, the references to SAWs at 300+ yards are comments from Army friends who weren't as interested in the employment of rifles even as much as I was. I gained the impression that they thought of them as little more than a self-defense weapon - certainly not useful for offensive operations in the open. Again, that was my impression of their impression.
Jaywalker
