posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 07:13 PM
a reply to: Echo3Foxtrot
The thing most frustrating about the 249 is it was the worst gun of the competitors in the competition that lead to it's adoption.
We could have had either of 2 guns that would've served us immeasurably better.
1. HK21/23: AKA the best gun HK ever made, unfortunately for them they haven't built anything truly decent since! If we had gone this route we
wouldn't be seeing idiotic and criminally expensive mk46/48 guns or the even more ludicrous m240L! Not only that but our infantry could literally
have a precision DMR 5.56 lmg 7.62 lmg 5.56/7.62 IAR and a LRRP/ Special purpose 7.62/5.45x39 belt /magazine fed all in ONE GUN!! Can you imagine how
much money we would save both by the MASSIVE buy of a single platform allowing economy of scale pricing to kick in! Also when we deploy to places we
could tailor the ratio of 5.56 to 7.62 guns in our units by switching out a shockingly small number of parts! And perhaps even more advantageous is in
wanat like situations a few spare belt feed mechanisms would've allowed us to switch several standard guns to belt fed configuration to replace the
guns knocked out early in the fight! Finally it doesn't take a genius to see several SAFE and INEXPENSIVE ways to pretty significantly lighten the
gun without chopping barrels stupid short or making titanium receivers.
This gun was in my opinion the real star... Light, compact, extremely high reliability potential, chock full of innovation, and probably the cheapest
gun to acquire in quantity if the right manufacturers were used. While it didn't have some of the features available in hk21/23 they would all be
pretty simple to retrofit in if desired. Also this gun was LIGHT! Had it got procured and were it in service today it would be even lighter by quite a
bit today! It would pretty easily be engineered to have a super simple caliber change superb barrel change kinematics and ergonomics like HK, a
magazine feed switch adapter would also be downright SIMPLE to build and dead nuts reliable like HK's (also it would likely be selectable side feed
adapter allowing the DMR/IAR version to achieve super low prone positions etc) and a host of other benefits like very easy adaptation to solenoid
fire, ease of mounting for coax pintle RWS helicopter gun pylons etc (plus it's design means you could very easily design custom shells to enclose
the mechanism in meaning you could have heavily armored casings for RWS systems corrosion resistant ones for naval vessels and ones with integrated
fire control and other accessories) also the early ammo box system would be a huge boon to RWS mount versions allowing simple and cheap automatic box
change setup with several boxes on tap before you have to get out of vehicle to reload! Oh and unlike current guns where it can be a depot level task
or plain not possible to switch between configurations this wouldn't even require a tool set! This again means all 5 branches can get guns off the
same production lines and even combined buys for rock bottom pricing and the ability to quickly get more guns to a hot spot because you can pull them
from any branches closest stores!
Beyond all of that, I believe a large caliber version of this design could easily be developed as well. Making for lighter, cheaper, much more
versatile systems than the current large caliber choices...
But instead... Fn hurts alot when you get the bill got the contract.