WWII MGs ++

> <rmgill@mindspring.com> said:

out to 1000 yards. Absolutely: "No weapon is obsolete in the hands of someone
who intends to use it." (possibly Falkenburg, but I think it predate's
Pournelle). This may sound odd, but I quite liked older rifles, even preferred
them to somewhat more "modern" rifles [but then I know I'm odd, have never
even
touched the infamous SA80 and actually prefer bows ;-)].

> Phillip.Atcliffe@uwe.ac.uk said:
[brain chugs].... Whilst not quite the same, even 1970's CPU coolant
systems were multi-layer going from a gas to water to air.  Whilst the
Slammers sometimes had cooling/heat probs (DS2 "Firing Systems Failure")

optomising these shouldn't be a problem in today's technology. And given that
power armour is likely to need coolant, as well, the "carrying coolant" issues
are already present and solved. It seems to me the main

issue is "ruggedising" the coolant systems (as always, I guess).

Hmmm...Perhaps a bit off-topic, and this is where my ignorance tells: As
it was so good, was the Vickers ever really upgraded?

Some weapon designs need little "improvement".  IIRC, the M-2 Browning
HMG has
not changed since 1917.  Also, I think the FN MG (US M-240) is the same
basic Browning design from the same era. I guess there are some "optimal"
designs in real life:)

Michael Brown

[quoted original message omitted]