There's a time for evolution, and a time for revolution. After a revolutionary development, things evolve until the point of diminishing returns, at which progress stalls until another quantum leap occurs. I believe autoloading rifles are about 2/3 of the way down the current evolutionary path. We still need some basic refinements (ergonomics, basic optics, advanced materials for strength, weight, durability issues). Maybe caseless ammo and/or electrical ignition will provide a 10% improvement that will be worth the trouble, but neither is a quantum leap.
One idea for an evolutionary step; two-trigger lockwork, where the front trigger has about 6 lb pull and activates the full-auto or burst mode, and the rear trigger is about 3 lb and activates semi-auto mode. Nice, simple low-stress mechanicals, and could allow John Q. Grunt to put more rounds on target without wasting time or ammo, which is what the game is all about.
Another idea (stolen shamelessly from Stoner); have the issue rifle be able to feed from the same disintegrating link belt as the squad LMG, as well as box or drum magazines.
I concur on the "point-n-shoot" interface. Just like in fighter aircraft, the hardware should make it easier on the operator, not harder. However, if electronics are made rugged and reliable, I have no problem with their use as long as iron backups are retained.
Jeff, grenadiers might carry a lightweight subgun (in .45 ACP, or maybe the 5.7mm Wundersnot) along with their 40mm. I believe we could have a little 5 lb subgun that would give the guy 100 meters effectiveness (decent folding/telescoping stock and good sights and trigger, of course). Total loadout weight is an issue, of course, but with our trend towards a 15,000+ man division slice backing about 9 rifle companies, we have to accept that certain MOSes will require having a number of Very Big Dudes.
[This message has been edited by Ivanhoe (edited August 30, 2000).]