The book is miss titled. It has a good description of the development of the M-16. I would have liked more on the 7.62 vs. 5.25 advantages. I would have liked a better explanation of the Kalashnikov and its advantages. I would have liked a better explanation of the differences between the .308 and the 7.62X51 rounds. It also has an extended discussion of the .45 caliber and 9mm rounds. In general the book focuses on the historical and developmental changes in guns and ammunition. I would have liked more of a focus on the tactical advantages of different weapons than the historical development, although both are useful. The book is not future weapons it is historical weapons.
It offers nothing of the newer weapons. Nothing is said of sniper weapons and their cartridges; no chey tec .416, .50 Cal BMG, or the .338 Lapua. Are there any foreign sniper weapons?!? (Dragunov, 7.62x54) No comment is made about the new robotic weapons for IEDs and urban assault. Nothing is said about the development of body armor. (OK that is not a weapon, but it has changed the battlefield.) There needs to be an entire chapter on optics. (You win scopes do the looking not killing.) My biggest criticism of this book is that it is The History of Weapons not Future Weapons.
It offers nothing of the newer weapons. Nothing is said of sniper weapons and their cartridges; no chey tec .416, .50 Cal BMG, or the .338 Lapua. Are there any foreign sniper weapons?!? (Dragunov, 7.62x54) No comment is made about the new robotic weapons for IEDs and urban assault. Nothing is said about the development of body armor. (OK that is not a weapon, but it has changed the battlefield.) There needs to be an entire chapter on optics. (You win scopes do the looking not killing.) My biggest criticism of this book is that it is The History of Weapons not Future Weapons.
