What a topic! All that I have read is very interesting and informative. I am an avid reader of military history and current military affairs. I spent time in the Marine Corps, but never saw combat. I am familiar with weapons because of the time I spent in the Corps and the last 16 years in Law Enforcement.

I read an article a couple of years ago about research conducted at the end of WWII relative to squad size and the squad leaders ability to have effective control. If I remember correctly the research concluded that the ideal size of a rifle squad was 7-9 men. I have served as a fire team leader, squad leader and acting platoon sgt, but never in combat. During training exercises I found it challenging to lead three other Marines, but not hard. Squad leader was more difficult and acting platoon sgt was tough. I do believe age and more so experience are the deciding factors. To most of you this is duh statement.

I find the Distributed Operations concept of the Marine Corps very interesting. Where I diifer is with the squad command structure. With this I believe a 12 man squad lead by a E-6 with one of the fire team leaders acting as an assistant squad leader with the rank of Sgt to be reasonable. The squad would look like this:

SL - E-6
DM - E-3/E-4
GR - E-2/E-3
SAW - E-2

ASL/FTL - E-5
RM - E-4
RM - E-2/E-3
AR - E-2

FTL - E-4
RM - E-3
RM - E-2/E-3
AR - E-2

With the interest in rifle grenades making a comeback and the Marine Corps looking to replace the SAW with an Automatic Rifle, the composition of the three fire teams changes. The SL commands the support unit and directs the squad. I would assume with his rank of E-6 he has been in the infantry for 6-10 years and would have a wealth of experience (that's probably changed with Iraq and Afghanistan). The support squad has a designated marksman or DM, the grenadier humps a M32 multi-barrel grenade launcher, and the SAW man has a 7.62 AR.

The other fire teams have a Sgt to lead all eight Marines as well as provide leadership from a breaching position into the assault.

I have no idea which AR the Marine Corps will choose, but I like the Land Warfare M6A2 - which may also be fired from the open bolt.

I have read a great deal about bullets and which one the military should change to. 5.56, 6.5, 6.8 and 7.62. Also which rifles - HK416, M16A4, XM8, SCAR, LW, etc. It gives me a headache. I feel like the guy in Hamburger Hill talking about which eye to close when a flare goes up and which pill to use to clean his water. I fould a website that provide a lot of great info about the 5.56 and what the round is capable of doing when it is modified. When I write modified I mean 55 grain, 62 grain, 77 grain, etc.

With the military being the military I will venture that there is no change and the 5.56 stays so with that I go with a M16A6 (made up), which is a 5.56 caliber, 16.1 inch barrel with the LR 300 upper receiver. This will allow the stock to telescope and fold, which would be beneficial in vehicles and CQB. The buffer spring is moved to the front of the receiver from the stock. The automatic rifleman will hump basically the same weapon, but capable of firing from the open bolt (maybe a little longer barrel). The AR in the support fire team will have a 7.62 version of the 5.56 AR (def longer barrel). More range, bigger punch. The DM rifle will also be 7.62 (18-20 inch barrel) and the one made by LW rifles seems like it will work.

The CAP concept the Marine Corps utilized in Vietnam could also be used. Increasing the size of the squad to 15 men by adding a corpsman, RO, and a TAC-P type (good time to make TAC-P operations a warrant officers MOS in the Marine Corps - speciality if I have ever seen one).

Maybe I am taking too much current firepower away from the squad. I will not even get into drum mags for the AR's - hit and miss.

I am probably way out of my element, but what the heck. Feedback would be nice.