In article et, "Evan
Williams" wrote:

One question that I have is why did they go with red dot sight?

"The attachment points for the standard multi-function integrated red-dot
sight allow multiple mounting positions and insure 100% zero retention even
after
the sight is removed and remounted. The battery powered XM8 sight includes
the latest technology in a red dot close combat optic, IR laser aimer and
laser illuminator with back-up etched reticle with capability exceeding that
of the current M68-CCO, AN/PEQ-2 and AN/PAQ-4. This sight will be factory
zeroed on the weapon when it is delivered."

This seems like a liability to me. I guess that the designers at HK don't
realize the amount of abuse a rifle goes through during its service life.
Things like battery powered, IR laser aimer, laser illuminator, factory
zeroed, are enough to give me the willies. There is a lot to go wrong with
one of the most important parts of the weapon. Batteries die and their
connections get corroded, lasers if visible work both ways if invisible
require another sensitive piece of gear to use, lenses shatter or crack and
get covered with dust, dirt, film from smoke, water drops, and fog over.
All the while you are looking through a tube that tends to take away your
peripheral vision. Fortunately, I have never been in a fire fight, but it
seems to me that when there is one guy out there shooting at me there are
probably others out there as well. In my opinion this is a perfect example
of fixing something that isn't broken. Good old iron sights with cammed
adjustments are the way to go. The sights are the brain of the weapon. In
an extremely feeble attempt to get this thread on topic, it has been said in
this NG many times a good pilot in an inferior A/C will beat an inferior
pilot in an excellent A/C. I would feel more confident shooting a surplus
Mosin Nagant with a well mounted Leupold 10x Mk-4 than I would shooting a
M-40A1 with a $20 Wal-Mart special slapped on top. This is a perfect
example of engineers going nuts in a lab and being out of touch with what is
really needed in the field.

Please give the engineers the benefit of the doubt. They did not develop this
sight in isolation, they did it with the full cooperation and knowledge
of the US Army. USA has been using red dot sights for over a decade in
very trying conditions, and I think they know what they want and what the
reliability is under the proposed service conditions.

If it wasn't for forward thinking government and private engineers, the
Army would still be using Trapdoor Springfields and .45-70 ammunition.

Arguably, the push for better weapons has never come from the tip
of the spear, it's always come from the labs and their desire to support
those men.

Fire away...

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur