Platoon Weapons

[William F. Owen]

Don't "get" the "no one has really done the testing" thing. I think there is plenty of evidence that shows that light, fast bullets don't penetrate, and don't produce secondary effects anywhere near as well as heavier, slower projectiles.

You are correct. There is lots of data on the purely mechanical terminal effects. In 5 years of research I have found no open source data (or even foot prints of proprietary data) that any testing has been done on the tactical applications, human performance, or comparative organisations of the employment of PDWs.

Wilf, how would you test terminal effect? Gelatin, auto glass, intermediate barriers, what kind of testing do you think is necessary?

Pick a well reasoned criteria and test against it. Personally, I think the mechanical testing is not that important. Bullet design and testing is far from complex, and there are legal issues to contend with as well. Penetration is still the simplest, least contentious and easiest to achieve effect.

So, how does the enemy respond differently, when confronted with squads of PDW's?

Did the Germans respond differently to squads of Soviets equipped with PPsH, or any other weapon? This question assumes tactical problem to be in isolation.

To repeat, I am no saying, every man should have a PDW or even which PDW. I think big bullets are good. Big Bullets coming from GPMGs and Long range rifles is more effective than than from IWs. The concern and the only reason to look at this, is the issue of carried weight. I am not suggesting squads equipped with PDWs. I am suggesting optimising functions within the platoon, based on carried weight. That may mean, giving some, (or even a lot of) men PDWs