That position is correct as this move is based upon actual combat experience ....
This line actually got a chuckle out of me.
Literally
everything the military does, or has done is "based on actual combat experience". That line means about as much as a Hollywood movie "based on a real story", though probably a little closer to reality than a movie "inspired by real events".
Studies are fine things (when done right) they provide data and other things that can be useful. However, conclusions drawn from studies can be quite different, and it is those conclusions and actions taken based on those conclusions that create the history for future studies to look at.
History is chock full of instances where something got studied, and what turned out to be the wrong thing was thought (for a time, at least) to be the right thing, and implemented by those in authority.
That's how we got the M16 and the 5.56mm in the first place. Air Force was looking at it for a niche they needed filled. It would fill that niche quite adequately. Othe people (Pentagon/DOD "experts") studied it, and they
concluded it would be the right thing for everyone, and their authority made it so.
And I wonder if the new round and rifle are not just another round of the same kind of mistakes. Different in detail, certainly, but are they going to be the same in overall, or not?
Right now it looks like they are diving in head first, without any idea how deep the water is, or where the rocks are, and spending a ton of money just to get to the water.