tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146148016062694502.post6321897324272210569..comments2024-01-05T12:03:52.460-05:00Comments on No Lawyers - Only Guns and Money: When You Really Need To Reach Out And Touch The TalibanJohn Richardsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03151468462458613615noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146148016062694502.post-85380977201499996282012-05-17T10:29:42.524-04:002012-05-17T10:29:42.524-04:00In the Norma Lapua comparison I believe they both ...In the Norma Lapua comparison I believe they both use the same bullet, just seated deeper in the Lapua case. Both cartridges are based on a .416 Rigby parent with the Norma being shorter and with less taper and sharper shoulder. Still, you lose about 6.5% case capacity compared with the Lapua which may be negated by the need to seat bullets deeper to maintain OAL.Uncle Larhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04008207593205949098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146148016062694502.post-549975093324261692012-05-17T07:28:06.353-04:002012-05-17T07:28:06.353-04:00@Patrick: Thanks for the insights into the DoD'...@Patrick: Thanks for the insights into the DoD's weapons programs. And I agree that any new weapon may be too late for our soldiers and Marines in Afghanistan other than SpecOps.John Richardsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03151468462458613615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146148016062694502.post-5618330913610607692012-05-16T12:53:26.440-04:002012-05-16T12:53:26.440-04:00As a side note, the time it takes to put a new sys...As a side note, the time it takes to put a new system into place is so long that by the time this is fielded we will be out of AF. So it's chances of touching the Taliban are small, at least at the large-unit level.<br /><br />Vendors are shopping new stuff for the DoD because the DoD identified several "gaps" that need filling long-term. Short of foreign-sales (not likely) and some small-unit trials, this gun would not see general service for maybe 5-7 years. And that is rushing things.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15503108698273933109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146148016062694502.post-40500319885976234762012-05-16T12:47:56.442-04:002012-05-16T12:47:56.442-04:00@Sendarius: Block upgrades fix issues in existing ...@Sendarius: Block upgrades fix issues in existing hardware. This is not commercial space where a failure/issue in a selected product opens the door to competition. Federal programs are such a bitch to propose, award and maintain that you cannot just "buy a better one." So the solution to issues is to stay with what you got and make it work. <br /><br />So the best way to get the sale is to propose something that "fills a gap". Hence, the reason GD will push this as a gap-filler in lighter-weight long-range and probably some anti-materiel (equipment killer) at less-than-long range. They will surely claim that it won't have the vehicle-stopping power of a .50 at long range, but it will stop the type of non-armored vehicles seen at some engagement distances (think: delivery trucks at 500 yards), and in a much lighter package (ammo + gun). Whether it is true or not (and I am not qualified to say they would be as my expertise is not small firearms), the claim lets them market this not as a replacement, but as solution to an unsolved problem. That's how the system works, like it or not. <br /><br />I have seen defense programs of all scales ECP'd (extended scope, etc.) and re-awarded that were dismal failures. Usually the reason is that the incumbent claims they can fix the problem faster than the government can procure a new solution. In 7 out of 10 such cases I see, the incumbent wins. We can complain, but the simple truth is that the DoD cannot just buy things. There are myriad reasons why, but oversight and transparency demand certain processes that just do not exist in commercial spaces. I can buy from anyone for any reason (I run a company), but the government must maintain rules and procedures aimed at "fair" practices. The ultimate irony is that the largess in regulation - aimed at including more firms - has limited bidding to only those firms that can understand and meet the onerous burdens placed upon them by the process. See "Federal Cost Accounting Standards" and "Systems Engineering Process" for more examples. <br /><br />So if you want to sell a new gun to the DoD, it better be a NEW gun that doesn't do what other guns do.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15503108698273933109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146148016062694502.post-88943939324412603102012-05-16T11:54:17.487-04:002012-05-16T11:54:17.487-04:00Given the repeated reported issues with the M-60 r...Given the repeated reported issues with the M-60 relating to run-aways and cook-offs, why wouldn't they make this in 7.62x51? Either instead or as well.<br /><br />I suppose you would have to paint them different colours if the same gun came in two calibres though.Sendariushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13286039362709773644noreply@blogger.com