Found in the Anthropology section:
Question: What's the difference in Black Ops and Modern warfare 2?
I'm not talking about the missions! I'm talking about weapons!
Answer:
Regional variation in culture often result in differences in material culture including weapon design. One example of this is the adoption of the Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) in US forces during World War II and the adoption of the Bren Light Machine gun by the British. The BAR was selected because if fit the US tactics of the time was one of small, similar units that swapped roles as maneuver, support, and assault repeatedly. As such, the appropriate weapon design required the ability to provide supporting (automatic) fire and be easily maneuverable under fire. Additionally, the M1 Garand and M1 Carbine--useful for both short range and volume fire compared to the bolt-action rifles of other nations--support this premise.
By contrast, the more hierarchical culture of the British created the organizational solution of specialized teams for maneuver/assault (riflemen) and support (light machine gun/PIAT). This adoption of specialized solutions resulted in the adoption of specialized weapons for both types of teams. As such, the Bren was heavier, less portable, and primarily intended for fire from the bipod with a dedicated person or persons to provide ammunition. This allowed the British riflemen to employ "lighter" in terms of either volume of fire (SMLE rifles) or power (STEN submachine guns) successfully.
The follow-on developments tied to culture and tactics resulted in a number of different, more modern weapon designs including the American M60 machine gun series (intended to replace both the BAR in maneuver and the heavier medium machine guns), the M240/L7 series of GPMG's intended to supplant Bren's in a similar role), as well as the various assault rifle concepts including the bullpup designs and the AR15/M16.
Bullpup designs are a compromise between length of barrel, overall length, and possible length of sight radius. Barrel length can be longer in these designs because the action is shifted into what was previously "unemployed" volume of the stock. This results in a shorter overall design with a typically longer or similar length barrel providing good potential accuracy and power compared to similar length, short-barrel conventional designs. The sacrifice comes primarily in the form of sight radius--which usually necessitates an expensive optical sight system--and the ability in most designs to fire off of the other shoulder to take advantage of tactical cover.
These designs are usually adopted by cultures with a long distinction between riflemen and other types of troops because--with the optical sights--they perform admirably in the rifleman role but less well--even in modified variants--in more general roles for the assault, support fire, and others. The implication is again one of hierarchical, specialized solutions to tactical problems and over one of common, more generalist roles.
The competing paradigm--primarily demonstrated by the adoption of the AR15/M16-series--is one of modular flexibility. These weapons are often selected by groups/military units with a high investment in individual skill and overall egalitarianism. The design follows this trend by being easily modified and/or accessorized to allow the firer to perform most functions well in a variety of situations. In this case, the focus of the weapon/user construct can change quickly and the design supports it.
A third paradigm is one of the simple, primarily seen in the adoption of the AK47 and its descendants. In most of these cases, the investment in training of weapon carriers is minimal and the design reflects this in being only moderately accurate but highly resistant to abuse. Culturally, these groups often see the weapon as a symbol of power and or a means of inducing terror instead of a precision tool.
In many cases, even those countries/cultures that employ a dedicated system at the basic troop level will use a different design where the subcultures exist--such as special operations or paramilitary troops. The weapons employed and their design or adoption in a competitive market is a reflection of cultural ideals mitigated by tactical necessity.
Now that you've read that, how about next time posting in a more appropriate forum, eh?
No comments:
Post a Comment