I’ve seen too many weapons that perform well and poor due different conditions. We lock ourselves in to ONE standard issue primary rifle every time. I would suggest that due a modern level of logistical support that no ONE caliber or type should be considered. Possible to have one caliber such as the 6.5 Grendel for airborne. spec ops or expeditionary forces where resupply may be in doubt etc but multiple platforms such as a M134DT , GPMG, DM / sniper rifle, primary infantry weapon and smaller PDW’s that share common caliber shouldn’t be set in stone.
Consider the really awful situation we'd be in if the AKM had been fielded with a quick-change barrel, as MikTim Kalishnikov had originally intended, but which feature was deleted as an economy measure. Instead of the present situation with a couple of 5.45mm Molot RPK-74s [or 7.62x39mm RPK's in the third-line reserve units] in the Russian Army squad, dandy weapons until they overheat or chip an extractor, Ivan would just issue a few heavy barrels to each squad. Lose an extractor? No problem, pull the barrel and hand it off to the next guy. Need a shorty version for tank or helicopter crews or doorkickers? Easy fix: hit the release catch, remove long barrel- not a big deal with a 16-inch barrel AK anyway- and stick in the 8 or 10-inch suchka version. And in a perimiter-defense or base camp role, EVERY gun on the line could have a long/heavy barrel and bipod, making every gunner a BAR/SAW gunner....
Yeah, they'd burn up more ammo. So add a 2 or 3-shot burst feature, and when the barrels get hot, switch back to the standard *basic* AK-length barrel, all ready for when things get close up and personal.
And they could have had it since 1959....
why do we not field at least one rifle in the enemies common calibre ??? from a logistical standpoint it would seem beneficial to use their supply when available...