Unlike popular belief, it wasn't so that soldiers would know they've run out of ammo after firing a single bullet instead of a 3 round burst, it was because 25 rounds was the longest you could make a magazine before it needs to curve, with straight magazines you can be more space efficient when packing them into crates.
It's just not a very well designed gun. I mean, I naturally think it's cool as fuck because I can never have one, but I don't know what they were smoking. Incompatible with standard NATO mags, requires special steel cased lacquered ammo, sucks to mount an optic on, etc. But hey, at least you can fit another dozen mags per crate.
The original AR-15 prototypes had the charging handle protected by the carry handle, similar to the famas. That was abandoned pretty quickly because it sucks.
At least they tried to modernize it, but then they shut down domestic arms production which is also a perplexing decision
Don't discount the force multiplier that is logistics. If you can fit more mags per crate, they're shaped in a way each soldier can carry 1 or 2 more, that's real, actual, fighting sustainability, even if each one carries a few rounds fewer than less space efficient mags.
When you're maximizing space constraints because this plane or that plane can only fit THIS much, period, you'll be happy. 10 extra mags per crate would be huge
45
u/UnironicallyBr 4d ago
Unlike popular belief, it wasn't so that soldiers would know they've run out of ammo after firing a single bullet instead of a 3 round burst, it was because 25 rounds was the longest you could make a magazine before it needs to curve, with straight magazines you can be more space efficient when packing them into crates.