Posts
Reader Technomad asks, "Why would the Navy adopt a different rifle in the first place? Wouldn't that complicate things?"
Yes and no.
Back in the late 19th century, the Navy and Army used completely different and independent supply and procurement systems.
It didn't matter that the Navy adopted a different rifle and cartridge from the Army because there was no interoperability requirement.
Small arms for the Navy was often an afterthought as well.
I would not be surprised that the reason the Navy uses the same rifle as the Army now is because they bought Army rifles when the Lee didn't live up to expectations and discovered how much cheaper they were because of the bulk discount the Army got and that they didn't have to spend any money on the development.
Or they didn't bother developing their own guns for the same costs reasons while the USMC starting growing past a ship-board infantry requirement into an expeditionary force.
It should be noted that the Jarheads have reverted to having their own rifles with their adoption of the M27, phase-out of the M4, and rejection of the M7 and XM8.
No comments:
Post a Comment
You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.
Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.
If you're trying to comment anonymously: You can't. Log into your Google account.
If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.