Re: HIGH TECH WONDER INDIVIDUAL WEAPON

At 7:09 PM -0800 2/1/02, John Atkinson wrote:
>
>You know, we just had a discussion wherein it was
>claimed that safeties on pistols are bad because
>people get too nervous to use them properly in combat.
> Now you want some dumb 18-year old private to lase a
>target, adjust his computer and act as a mini
>artillery piece?  Bullshit!
>

As opposed to a spotter keying in a code and lasing a target. Or a 
mortarman adjusting fire in the correct direction in a battle? Or a 
grenadier giving the correct windage? Or a LT reading his GPS unit, 
correctly identifying a target and

>
>Actually, they carry rifles in the US Army.  Not
>enough M-4s to go around.  And they have a number of
>SAWs and M-240s as well.

Yep full sized M-16's. That fits real nice in the fighting 
compartment of that M-1 Abrams. Right in there next to the driver. 
And the Gunner doesn't have a problem at all of getting to his M-16 
when getting out does he?

Also note, "some armies". The US isn't adopting the PDW concept as 
far as I know. Other armies. Some have adopted them for spec ops due 
to more compact size and higher magazine capacity.

But you're right. FN doesn't know anything about predicting the 
prevailing winds of armament technology. They were completely wrong 
in their prediction of the general adoption of 7.62x51mm and the 
design of the FN Mag. And their FN Minimi is completely off base for 
what the US or any other nation needed when they did their bid for 
the weapon.

--
Ryan Gill	  |	   |	     rmgill@mindspring.com
		  |	   |
		  | O--=-  |
		  |_/|o|_\_|
		  / 00DA61 \
	       _w/|=_[__]_= \w_
	      |: O(4) ==    O :|
	      |---\________/---|
	       |‰|\	    /|‰|
	       |‰|=\______/=|‰|