The Roles and Weapons with the Squad

[AlexTX ret]

And I'm playing a highly paid secretary today.

I assume you mean me, and that would be WilF. My wife has called me Wilt, but at that is a long - very long- and sordid story....

Sorry, "Wilf", I won't make the mistake a second time! Though the long and sordid story might be interesting. Then again if you don't tell me yours then I won't have to tell mine!

What I am a "fan" of is limiting the number of weapons and ammunition natures in the fire team and the platoon to fewest and simplest options that will allow you to create and sustain the required effects on the enemy.

That goes to the heart of my questing completely. IMHO, I don't want to limit the effectiveness or adaptability of a unit to acomplish a mission. However, I think that we need to make supplying that unit as simple as possible.

2nd: I think the less the number of different weapons (and cartridges) a squad or a platoon uses in most situations (excepting more complex missions) increases the possibility that all soldiers can be taught to be at least familiar (if not expert) on all the weapons used. This would be a great advantage as a unit takes casualties. It would also help when trying to get replacements settled.

3rd: Nevertheless, I think training to make total use of the weapons that supplied to such a unit may create a certain amount of creativity and problem solving. Again lower level leaders should be allowed a certain amount of anonymity to create solutions to various missions. If all squads do "a" when faced with problem "b" then the enemy knows to do "c" to counter it.

My opinions are based on achieving specific effects at specific ranges, based on a carried weight. Thus I am far more concerned with thinking about the range and the effect, than I am the weapon.

yes, but... The problem is that if you do not describe the weapon then emphasis on specific weigth and ranges get lost in the procurement proccess. Supposedly all attemps at creating a proper assault gun cartridge has ended up with a round near 7mm in size. But for the EM-2 which was very advanced for its time (Possibly too advanced to be accepted) there has never been a weapon to match with the cartridge. I know that "It wasn't designed here" had a lot to do with it but the US decided to create a weapon first. It was a modified M1 with improvements. It was then that they created a cartridge to fit the rifle. The acceptance/ overiding politics of the M16/AR15 and its cartridge had less to do with ranges and mission optimization than some poorly though out criteria. And the military as a whole has the same blind spots. We still have the M16/AR15 as our primary infantry weapon 46 years after the debacle of the M16 in the early years of the 'Nam.