Check out the article by SMALL ARMS DEFENSE JOURNAL. The Marine Corps continues to fail to explain the whys behind the decision to field the M27. The concept seems at best shallow and at worst a waste of money. SMALL ARMS DEFENSE JOURNAL is at least beginning to fill in the missing pieces. I haven't been a reader but I think I might start if this is the type of writing they do!
The russians use a similar weapon since the 1950s,the RPK.The british use a heavy barrel version of their SA-80 as a light suport weapon...Only to realise that a rifle cant do a LMG work and adopt the FN MINIMI(M-249)...To me this seems to be a classic case of the USMC trying to field a M-16A4/M-4 replacement under the budget radar...if the realise that the HK416(pardon me,the M-27)is better thant the DI AR-15s tham you can bet that the USMC will the release a requirement for a ligther IAR without the bipod(lol).If field tests show that the weapon is not superior to the M-16/M-4 them this wepon will be another Stoner M-63...used in small numbers by marines and SEALs and fade in to oblivion...
ReplyDelete