Re: [GZG] Failed to deliver the first time - SG 2

["John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/11/06, Glenn Wilson <glenn-wilson-1950@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Working on having each SG2 force a 'bit different' in equipment...
>
> I see the a 9 possible combination for fire arms:
>
> 1. LTAR and SAW
> 2. LTAR and Rotary SAW
> 3. LTAR and Gauss SAW (?!?)
> 4. AAR and SAW
> 5. AAR and Rotary SAW
> 6. AAR and Gauss SAW (??)
> 7. Gauss AR and SAW (??)
> 8. Gauss AR and Rotary SAW (?)
> 9. Gauss AR and Gauss SAW
>
> Which, if any, of these strike you as an 'out of line' (ignoring $$ cost in
> Real Life) combination for a platoon?

3 and 7 are wierd because if you're shelling out for gauss weaponry in
one category, why are you using a inferior weapon in the other
category?

Having said that, in the history of small arms procurement I think you
can find wierder decisions than any of those above.

John
--
"Thousands of Sarmatians, Thousands of Franks, we've slain them again
and again.  We're looking for thousands of Persians."
--Vita Aureliani
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l