I have done a little work in this arena and the problem was usually that no one could ever define the requirement(s). Everyone was a SME and all had baggage from previous assignments. You will never develop a sniper rifle to meet all environments and all missions and until those in position to make the decisions accept that, you are going to get a system that attempts to fit all scenarios somewhat and none of them completely. I had different long rifles for different missions, different calibers for different targets, different signatures for different situations, etc. The decision as to what system we got was made by the shooters and the teams to which I gave the target requirements for interdiction. But then I was only outfitting one unit and did not have all the adult supervision that many now seem unable to get out from under.

Totally agree with you. And as usual- many different users does not an easy requirement definition make. But- I think we could go a long way if we did two things: 1) recruited for positions within USASOC to run our weapons programs- retired SOF with shooting creds for longevity, acquisition folks who know their job, are sharp, and like guns, and SF guys who aren't just homesteading; and 2- incorporate SOTIC and SFARTAETC into the procurement system. We have an in-house group of experts who aren't even underutilized- I don't think they are utilized at all (by the acquisition folks). Just my .02...

I agree as well and some of those are changing. For one thing both SOTIC and SFARTAETC are being brought into the picture sooner and more frequently.

Thanks LR. Still hard to accept that there are people playing games while lives are affected by their decisions. Don't know how y'all do it. Civilian life is bad enough with oxygen thieves like these.

Maybe a nice unguided tour down into the Grand Canyon at night would be beneficial for them. Or better yet, send them into the sandbox for a year to beta test the crap they spec'd.:D