If commonality existed in the Army inventory, it's been a secret. And since nobody writing contract specifications has made it an issue, it would explain why it only seems to come up when it's at the convenience of the manufacturer. No sense reinventing the wheel when one machine gun part can be used for another.
In rifles, the AR15 shares some parts with the AR10, sure. Not the barrel, bolt, upper, lower, bolt carrier, charging handle, etc. Mostly the fire control parts. Like I said, you can't design a part to do both jobs - it's either weak or overbuilt. That's why the AR15 weighs as little as 6 pounds, and the AR10 can rarely get under 8. It also points out that engineers make more of these decisions than spec writers. What the Army wants is results, not a few NSN's that happen to just work for more than one system.
As was said, you go to war with what you have. If the M14 refit points out something, it's that in a few years, we'll have 5,000 refitted M14's. We are still using 50 year old + .50 cal MG's, the Army is ok with that. Refurbing some more M14's won't even dent someone's training fuel budget. Integrating them into the existing logistics train is a matter of another crate of ammo. The Army gets more stuff fielded yearly than weapons, it's part of the workload.
The view from one pair of boots is often restricted. After 22 years of working with Infantry, OSUT, BN and GP logistics, MP's, and a tour on a tropical island, I've learned it's not about my favorite rifle or being John Wayne.
In rifles, the AR15 shares some parts with the AR10, sure. Not the barrel, bolt, upper, lower, bolt carrier, charging handle, etc. Mostly the fire control parts. Like I said, you can't design a part to do both jobs - it's either weak or overbuilt. That's why the AR15 weighs as little as 6 pounds, and the AR10 can rarely get under 8. It also points out that engineers make more of these decisions than spec writers. What the Army wants is results, not a few NSN's that happen to just work for more than one system.
As was said, you go to war with what you have. If the M14 refit points out something, it's that in a few years, we'll have 5,000 refitted M14's. We are still using 50 year old + .50 cal MG's, the Army is ok with that. Refurbing some more M14's won't even dent someone's training fuel budget. Integrating them into the existing logistics train is a matter of another crate of ammo. The Army gets more stuff fielded yearly than weapons, it's part of the workload.
The view from one pair of boots is often restricted. After 22 years of working with Infantry, OSUT, BN and GP logistics, MP's, and a tour on a tropical island, I've learned it's not about my favorite rifle or being John Wayne.
