“I’ve worked on numerous multi-national weapons systems.”
So have I.
“How about our own adoption of British canonry and German tank guns?”
Yes, I do, frankly.
XM8 was supposed to be “new”. What “newer” designs are we talking about? The 416 and SCAR are not particularly “new” designs either. One of the few “new” designs was the P90 and that is not exactly “new”, either.
“Again, any new rifle is going to be made in America.
Sure, the ATF gets in the way of almost any new American small arms development. I cannot imagine what Magpul went through. But this is the fault of our government, not our manufacturing base.”
This is what keeps new designs out of the market. Companies like H&K and FN have IRAD to through at problems and can do their R&D overseas.
The only time we’re going to see something “new” is if we move to a new form of ammunition. The metallic cartridge is constrained to the designs of the last 100 years. So, anything “new” will be an evolution of existing designs, not a revolution.
However, manufacturing technology does change, and it’s that technology that will allow for advances along the current genus of weapons. Newer, lighter, more durable metals. More use of plastics and polymers. The inclusion of a wider array of optics and accessories. The MagPul ACR (now being developed and produced by Bushmaster) was really the newest thing we’ve seen in quite a while. I hope it makes it to the civvy market, as my three ARs are starting to seem “old”.
I think we can both agree that American designs and manufacturers would benefit if the ATF(E) would get the hell out of the way.