I don't want to create a monster, but OICW = Overweight Ineffective Clunker Weapon.
DR, you don't need both marksman rifle and assault rifle to have identical manual-at-arms. in wars previous to Vietnam, it was not uncommon for experienced guys in rifle squads to swap between the Garand, BAR, and Thompson. in fact, the various memoirs I've read recently indicate that the guys at the forward edge of battle often choose their weapon regardless of doctrine, and get better results because they see 1st hand what's needed.
the key is good training and plenty of range time. we keep trying to turn everything military into a computer skills competition, then try to turn rifle squad operations into something do-able by untrained chimps. it is time for new rifles, but instead of making them AK-like (i.e. spray-and-pray weapons) we should make them Garand-like, i.e. a rugged, quality tool for professionals.
as I've said in other threads, DoD keeps trying to develop The Revolutionary Item, despite 1000 years of historical proof that an evolutionary development cycle wins wars (even firearms were evolutionary; they did not see general issue for decades after their development in Europe).
as to specific technology, I'd like to see an assault rifle with the following characteristics;
- medium-power cartridge of 6-6.5mm caliber
- Kalashnikov-style gas system
- enclosed receiver a la FAL with flippable bolt to enable LH ejection
- ambi controls (yes I'm a southpaw!)
- semi-auto and 3-shot modes
- standard 20" and 16" folder versions
- flattop upper w/ flipup A2 sight and QD dotscope
- post front w/ flipup tritium nightsight
marksman rifle;
- 7.62x51 cartridge
- semi-auto
- use M14 or FAL mags
- QD scope
- M1A or FAL designs are probably good enough already, just needs a good optics setup...
[This message has been edited by Ivanhoe (edited February 27, 2000).]