Thank you for your insights. Appreciate it.
All of that being said, I “get” the thinking behind a H & K MP5 choice. But if the desire is to give support troops a reasonable weapon, do we really need to buy MP5s? Or perhaps an updated M3 or Swedish K gun for lots less money?
I’m just trying to explore the intellectual foundations for a MP5 - class SMG.
We also should note that practically every nation with the machine tools has attempted to locally design/manufacture a SMG.
I would say that the reason is that the Hk MP5 platform has had adoption in just about every Western and Asian nation and has been adopted by US military branches and government agencies. The US Army even issued the more unusual versions of the MP5 to its air wing and ground forces (usually Military Police and helo pilots) so there is no retraining and support problem.
Hk would rather that their modernized MP7 SMG be looked at by potential buyers yet I don’t see this on the list which seems dubious. Hk seems loathe to join yet another goofy US Army program that will cost manufacturers a fortune, request absurd demands, and ultimately be shelved when the project is inevitably cancelled after ten years by the Army like they did with the initial projects in the Joint Service Sidearm fiasco which ended up with a screwy sidearm being selected by generals who based their decision on what looked coolest without going through real world QA testing.
If the Army wants a 9mm subgun, some of the hokey little manufacturers on this list aren’t a serious consideration. Get out of here Zenith. If they want an armor-defeating subgun, there are better options than anything seen in this list. FN P90 and Hk MP7 seem to be the Western leaders.
I cannot understand any effort to redesign the worlds best subgun that’s been around and defect free for 50 years. MP5 was way ahead of its time despite being developed from a 1950s design.