Weathervein Tacticool

[weathercool]

For anyone who thinks I made another new blog, you are wrong.

I repurposed a blog that wasn't being used. It's called recycling. We only have one planet.

Anyways, a place for firearms rants I've been meaning to make.

[weathercool]

Bullet Proof

Making something bullet proof is like making it fool proof.

And the moment you make something fool proof, they make a better fool to prove it.

For fools, there is ALWAYS a chance of human error, and if you don't think there is, you will find out the hard way.

For bullets, there's always a bigger bullet. Or a cop killer.

First off for the basics, most armour used in the military is NOT designed for bullets. Flak vests are - oddly - designed for flaks. Steel helmets are - also designed for flak. Basically, fragments. Even if you don't use fragmentation rounds, explosions almost always create fragmentation. Even a mote of dust can blind you if launched by an explosion.

And the reason most armour is designed for flak instead of bullets is that it's easier. We can make armour that can stop bullets in close range, but it weighs 60lbs. There is heavier, theoretical armour. It works, but it's so heavy it has to be balanced with it's own skeleton to transfer the weight to the ground.

When talking about bullet proof, we have to talk about which bullet.

Rifle bullets are typically smaller, with more propellant. They don't hit as hard, but they are accurate. Pistol bullets are typically heavier, with much less propellant. This impart more force, (stopping power), on the target, but don't have the velocity for penetration.

What this means is that you can, indeed, create armour that stops pistol bullets in close range. Flak vest and steel helmets will typically stop rifle bullets at significant range, (200-300m is the standard accurate range for assault rifles), but in close, no.

The problem is that the bullet isn't stopped by a forcefield. It's stopped by the armour. This means that if it doesn't penetrate, all of it's force is applied, directly to the armour, and thence the wearer.

You still take the punch.

And now there are cop killers. Cop killers are the grossly informal term for steel-cored bullets. Most bullets, still, use lead cores. Lead is the heaviest stable element, and it's down enough that it will import most of it's force to the target.

Steel cores don't flex when they hit something, they typically penetrate. As such, they are typically illegal, even if you want something cheap for range practice that won't spread toxic heavy metals about. With them, even pistols can often penetrate pistol rated armour.

And this is why most soldiers do NOT wear armour. Most infantrymen never wear body armour, and only occasionally wear helmets. Because camouflage and entrenchment is much more effect, and weighs a lot less.

But, in civilian usage, you might not have to hike for a dozen kilometres with a 100lbs rucksack. You might be engaged in home defence. You might be part of an armoured car detail. Either way, you don't have to bear the weight of your armour, your chair does. And almost all crime is with far more concealable pistols rather than much more obvious an cumbersome assault rifles. So, what this means is that body armour is much more effective, and if you ever have to shoot, your body armour will likely save your life. in this case, there is really no middle ground. If you get shot, and you are not wearing armour, you could very well die. If you are wearing armour, you could very well survive.

[mermaidenmystic]

jully_artistt

[weathercool]

50 != 50

This is something that always comes up when discussing potential firearms.

.50" BMG hits with around 14-20kJ

.50" AE hits with around 2.4kJ.

And the .50" in Rapture, (circa Bioshock 2), works like an upscaled .45", which was the caliber used by the Tommygun in Bioshock. Everyone sees .50" in Bioshock 2 and laughs at how there is no way it's .50" BMG.

Which is true, it was never designed to be .50" BMG.

The NATO calibers: 9mm, 5.56mm, and 7.62mm are standardized, and so don't need elaboration. Others, like .38" an .357" have the same caliber, (measured from the outside and inside of the rifling), but use different numbers to mark the one with the longer case. Not because it's needed, but so the .357" Magnum rounds won't destroy .38" Special firing chambres. Improvements in the propellant means that most cases nowadays are largely empty. Why do we still use them? Standards. It's easier to keep making the same ammunition than it is retool ever firearm that uses it. This would be extensive and expensive, especially for the NATO calibers.

Every other round needs the caliber and a descriptor.

.500" S&W is not a .50" BMG nor a .50" AE. The extra zero also changes the precision. Higher precision is a lot more difficult to make. .50" BMG and .50" AE were both designed for specific uses, while the .500" S&W was designed for the primary purpose of reclaiming the most powerful handgun title. It worked.

When talking about Space Marines, the .998" Godwyn is 25mm. They are unclear about which is which, but I headcanon .998" as Godwyn, and the other one as the mundane Human caliber. Since this is 25mm, people assume it should have the same power as a 25mm autocannons used by NATO. But in truth, it would probably have double or triple the power of the .50" AE, which is still half of the power of .50" BMG / 12.7mm NATO.

Even if you had a frame that could survive this on automatic, and had soldiers that could carry it, the extended cartridge would take a lot longer to do a full cycle before being able to fire it again. This is because one of the biggest things that affects firerate is the cartridge length.

The .50" AE was designed for handgun anti-material, which means combat ranges usually around 25m.

The .50" BMG was designed for heavy machine gun use, and did so well it completely redefined heavy machine guns. Heavy machine guns, pre-12.7mm, were designed to be fired from deployed positions, usually tripods sited in defilead to fire in enfilead. By itself, the FN MAG 7.62mm machine gun, when used as light machine gun has an effective range of 800-900m. When in a tripod, with pre-set firing points can be 1,800m, and some armies use 7.62mm machine guns for INdirect fire, up to 2.5-3.2km.

The Astartes Godwyn Boltgun is designed for combat ranges of 200-300m, because this is the most common combat range. There's a reason why every assault rifle uses these as guidelines. Even worse, the Boltgun does not deal damage kinetically, it does so explosively. It only needs enough propellant to penetrate by an inch or two. More propellant would be completely wasted for their main usage. Astartes Devastators can also carry Lasguns, which when used in pairs are the main cannons of the tanks used by the Imperial Guard.

This is because we figured out the optimal power and range. If we design a new weapon system, we're not going into this blind. And this is why the AR-15 is one of the most common weapons, as it has had decades of improvements, and is designed to work in the broadest range of combat. Any weapon that replaces it either has to do the same job fantastically better, or due to a paradigm shift, say, if hostiles start using body armour.

For the record, we do have armour that can stop assault rifle round at range, but they are too heavy to be useful for many operations. But, if armour improves, or hostiles start integrating them in some form, then service rifles that can penetrate this armour will become necessary. Which the US is working on.

[weathercool]

Web Gear

So, you've chosen your weapon, bought weather-appropriate clothing and ammunition, and now you need something to carry it.

The past 20 years and more, there has been several serious attempts to replace web gear with tactical vests. I'll cover those after.

The basics of web gear are:

yoke

web belt

pouches

Modern (ish) web gear is designed to be incredibly customizable. The web gear doesn't just have to fit every soldier, and every combination of clothing they have to wear, (which, as you might imagine, can get considerable in the winter), it also has to allow different layouts.

The current generation is MOLLE (pronounced Molly). I've never used it, but it looks a lot more robust than back in my day, during the reign of ALICE.

The ALICE in wonderland system had straps that go from the yoke to your pouches. The yoke bears the weight on the shoulders. A web belt is a MUCH wider belt, and bears the weight on the hips, while also keeping you balanced. Loose kit swings. C9 belt box bandoliers always seem to find a way to fall right in front of your groin when going prone.

The pouches then clipped into the web belt or yoke. The web belt and straps could be adjusted and, (in theory), locked. This allows you to quickly adjust the size when you put a jacket on. You can put what pouches you want, where you want.

The US normally goes into battle with just ammo and water. Canadians tend to carry a few meals, and jackets, and M72s. For a rifleman, frontline is 250 rounds, and we normally carry twice that. 5 mags means 150 charged, with 100 carried in a bandolier holding clips, (NOT MAGAZINES). STANAG mags typically come with mag chargers that dramatically speed up mag charging. Our canteen comes with a small stove and cup, allowing us to heat our Individual Meal Packs with poison pills solid fuel tablets. We celebrate when we get our hands on MRE heaters, but the stove and cup are still useful for saying making tea or boiling suspect water.

You probably also have to carry miscellaneous pyrotechnics, like smoke grenades or para-flares.

Still remember the idiocy when they decided that white smoke was bad for our lungs.

I'll save you the long version, but the short version is coughing up rainbow phlegm.

You also want cam paint, and something to wipe up the ball sweat. Not joking.

If you have a pistol, you'll want a holster and ammo. Military holsters are more designed to stay in place as you move about the wilderness instead of quick draw, and typically come with room for two additional mags. Concealing isn't so much of an issue in the bush, as you hopefully have a rifle to go with it.

Tactical vests have two great sins:

lack of versatility

not strong enough

God, the number of tactical vests that aren't designed to be robust enough to survive... combat.

But, if you are buying your own for your own use, you can pick one that suits you.

A lot of people want to get a vest to get a plate carrier, but:

armour isn't that good

if it is, it's heavy

There is no reason for your plate carrier to be your web gear.

Yes, you can combine them, but if the plate carrier is lacking in any way when it comes to web gear, either number or location of pouches, you'd be better getting a simple plate carrier and a vest or web gear to go over top. You also don't have to wear the plate carrier on the outside, and can, in fact, wear jackets over top of it.

TL;DR: the most important thing when getting web gear and/or tac vests is:

suitability for your needs

robustness

[weathercool]

Warmth

When you are tactical, it's the most important thing for a soldier to have.

A lack of food will kill you in a week or two.

A lack of water will kill you in a day or two.

A lack of warmth can kill you in a few hours or even minutes.

The only thing that can kill you faster than cold is a bullet, and when you get shot, lack of warmth is one of the biggest things that will kill you. You maintain your body heat through movement and circulation. When shot, you stop moving, and when your lose blood, your body reserves it for vital organs.

When you are out in the woods, the only thing that should be touching your skin is either wool or material designed to wick water away.

If you are hot and sweating, the wicking layer helps you cool more easily in your heavy clothing. If you are in cold weather, then the wicking layer will remove the water to help you stay warm.

Wool stays warm when it's wet.

Other than that, your clothing should be loose and layered. This allows you to put on or take off as much as you can, given your current need. Web gear is designed to resize quickly to fit whatever you are wearing. Modern tactical vests are shit, but that's another rant.

You need to carry as much clothing as you need for the circumstances.

What you sleep in should be heavy enough for the current circumstances. If you live in a place with winter, a 3-season sleeping bag is not going to cut it. You will need one that can survive winter. They are expensive, but stop you from dying.

But dying isn't the only thing that cold can do. You can get a chill that will cripple you until you fully warm up again, and the colder you get, the harder it is to warm up again. This also makes your much more vulnerable to infection. When working on your firearm, there are times when you will have to use bare hands. Less than a minute of working with cold metal with bare hands can dramatically reduce your finger dexterity, to the point you can barely operate it.

And one of the worst things you can do when you are tactical is have an open fire. As I said earlier, the only thing that can kill you faster than cold is a bullet. Open fires kill your night vision, drown out your hearing, and the moment you walk away from it, you freeze, as your body is not adapted to the cold. Fires are great for morale if you are next to the fire. They hurt your morale if you are anywhere else.

Open fires at night are also great ways to tell your enemy exactly where you are.

[weathercool]

The Video Game Nerfing of Firearms

How much ammunition does the average soldier carry?

A rifleman probably carries 150 rounds, charged, but Frontline, (minimum considered viable for combat), is 250.

Frontline for a machine gunner is 1,000. They normally carry double frontline.

How many bullets does it take to kill you? One. If you don't get hit in the few areas that are near insta-kills, then the primary cause of death is bleeding.

Armies will give their soldiers a field dressing that patches one wound. Just like video game medkits! No, every - single - soldier is given one. And when you treat a soldier, if you don't have a medkit, you use THEIR field dressing.

The whole point of a 30-round magazine is so that your magazine will last for most combat situations without reloading. This is because reloading takes time. Remember that combat situations means enough time to go into cover, (or covering an ally until they can plant themselves and provide you with suppressive fire).

You are NOT going to just drop your mag on the ground. Mag changing is quick, but mag pouches are not.

On one hand, you don't even need to kill your target. If they get shot, and start bleeding out, they might withdraw. Hell, even is you miss, but the miss was close enough, they still might withdraw.

Because they lack discipline.

Armies typically do not face heavy casualties until one side routs*, and that is why discipline is absolutely important in the military. And that is why suppressive fire works.

*: Artillery can dramatically change this fact.

How about range?

Pistols and shotguns are typically designed to be effective against a human-sized target at 25m. Assault rifles, (on repetition), are typically designed to be effective up to 200-300m. Sniper rifles are accurate over a kilometre.

So, yes, the 5.56mm assault rifle can* neutralize an enemy at at further range than most video game sniper rifles with a single shot.

*: Your results might vary, depending upon range, windage, and enemy discipline.

You could, in video games, either make the protagonist survive because they are super tough and determined. You could give them a force field that will last for a few shots. You can give them luck, or just make enemies have really poor accurate, and take time to line up a shot.

Which, for most people, if you shoot without taking time to aim, your aim is going to be shit. And this is a great way to make an enemy more elite without just giving them more health.

This is why 40k: Space Marine is one of the most accurate with firearms. This is why Titanfall 2 is one of the most accurate with firearms, (and military tactics). This is why Half-Life's AI was so insanely powerful, as even with your powered armour, (hostile environment suit), you are still extremely vulnerable to enemy fire.

Hell, this is why Anime Girls: Son of a Beach is more accurate than 90% of video games. Note:

Because they started with the fire arms, (and anime sexiness), and balanced the girls and monsters based off the performance of the firearms.

TL;DR: Video games use a simple point-and-click interface, and don't actually threaten someone's life. So, they have to add weird walls to make the game challenging. Life is messy, bloody, dirty, and exhausting. Normal breathing can ruin your shot, a lack of mettle can cause you to flee, or freeze in place. It takes a split second to get dirt in your barrel while it might take you a second to line up a shot at range. Too much sweat in your hands can cause your weapon to slip. Putting your cheek on a slightly different spot on your butt can ruin your aim.

[weathercool]

Magnum Opus

A question a lot of people have when getting into firearms is What is a Magnum?

The short answer is anything more powerful than a .45" ACP.

The long answer is that it was created to have a bullet you could use for either a pistol or a rifle. Magnum means big of great, (like Aelfred Magnum, and Pompeii Magnus), and is simply a more powerful .38" Special. Improvements in propellants meant they could have fit the .357" Magnum in a .38 Special Case, but this could lead to people loading a .357" Magnum into a .38" Special Revolver. .357" Magnum has twice the chambre pressure of the .38" Special, and so would blow out any firearms not designed for the higher chambre pressure.

So, they extended the case for the .357" Magnum, so it physically would not fit into a .38" Special. But, .38" Special rounds can be put into .357" Magnum firearms.

The difference in caliber size is because of the inside and outside of the rifling, (lands and grooves).

Since, there have been a number of other Magnum cartridges created.

Also, since, rifle and pistol rounds have completely diverged. Rifle rounds have gotten smaller in diameter, but their power has increased by orders. This is what creates the dichotomy whereby pistols hit harder, but rifles have higher accuracy and penetration.

So, the .357" is the firearm you want to survive the apocalypse, or any time you are carefully counting your rounds, but it also works as a sawed-off rifle. that fits in a holster. And statistically, it's the only defensive pistol round that offers any clear benefit over the others. 9mm is weaker, but you can carry more rounds, and shoot more rounds, so the stopping and fatality rate's even out. The .44" Magnum hits harder, but the heavier weapon is harder to aim in close quarters, so, you trade one benefit for the other.

Now for the elephant in the room, the .50" Action Expression. The Israeli Military Industries Desert Eagle. A lot of people dismiss it as a a range toy, and forget that if IMI is not perfect, then Israel would be wiped off the face of the planet. The point of the Desert Eagle is that soldiers were carrying sawed-off rifles. They designed a pistol to use the heaviest pistol round, to give them anti-material power that can be holstered and carried as a side arm. Just like how the IMI Uzi was the first and only successful Personal Defence Weapon ever created.

This wasn't because other PDW's were not created, (much later), and were not good, but that PDW's fell out of favour. The TL;DR is that Assault Rifles took over the role of SMG's, and tank crews and such could have short-barrelled Assault Rifles.

So, Desert Eagles are designed to take on vehicles or heavily armoured enemies.

[weathercool]

Grower not Show-er

When thinking about tanks, most people can only think in three dimensions. The holy / iron trinity of tank design:

Armour

Firepower

Mobility

The problem with this thinking is that usability, reliability, magazine size, and cost to value are equally important.

The British upgunned the Sherman into the Firefly to deal with the Tiger, and other heavies. This involved turning the 17pdr sideways, and using the entire turret to brace the shot. This also dramatically reduced the number of rounds that could be carried, dramatically slowed down reloading, slowed down turret traverse, and impared the ability to use HE rounds in close quarters, (relative to tanks, that have shot effectiveness rated over 1km). They decided the best ratio was 1 Firefly per troop of Shermans, (4 or 5 tanks).

The exact same thing happened with small arms, with 5.56mm NATO and 9mm NATO being good enough for most combat situations, (200m for rifles, 25m for pistols).

The AR-15 had a long and extremely troubled development cycle, but over the many, many years, and many, many overhauls, it has become the most usable weapons platform in the entire history of Humanity. It can be used by women, children, and disabled people without any problems. It's reliability is off the charts, and there is a huge number of civilian manufacturers, and 3rd party mods.

If you buy a firearm, you need to consider:

Weight

Availability

Part / Mod availability

Ammo availability

Reliability

Usability

How are you going to use it.

The 5.56mm NATO is great for militaries, but if you are going to be a self-kitted militia fighting in home terrain, then range will become more important. Ammo will always be scarce, unless you can acquire ammunition from a standing military *cough*

So, a bolt-action hunting rifle might be more useful.

That said, if you don't own a firearm, buy a 5.56mm rifle. The AR-15/SKS are the standard first rifles, and using them will help you to learn what you want/need in a main firearm.

Pistols are either sidearms, or for close-quarters combat.

Note: Your house counts as close-quarters combat.

When it comes to civilian calibers, there is almost an endless amount of them, and they are often almost all first-party. If you want a rifle that can survive... market disruptions, you will need to find an ammunition supplier as close to home as possible. When the military adopts a caliber, there are normally a number of similar calibers, and they pick the one that comes with the rifle they want. Talk to your local gun shop, as that's where you will likely be buying your ammunition.

The five firearms everyone needs:

AR-15/SKS

Hunting Rifle

Shotgun

Pistol

(free space)

[weathercool]

Gadgets

My previous post would imply I hate gadgets. It's more that most gadgets are not generally useful. They are useful for specific situations, are extra gear that has to be carried, often require batteries, and simply be too fragile.

In the infantry, we used a 3.4x optical sight. The reticle is a black bar coming up from the base, with a triangle a the top. This provides a fantastic sight picture. It has mil dots, which allow for target ranging and fire adjustments.

It also has a tritium sight, (the triangle), which honestly just blinds you in low-light conditions.

Because the front lens is the same size as the back one, the sight reduces the light that comes through. This is great during the daytime, as it cuts down on glare, but at night time, it comes with what are essential rubber iron sights on the top, because at the end of the day, sometimes these are the best.

The 3.4x sight is light enough that with experience you have no delay while aiming. Higher power magnification will always cause a delay while aiming.

And this is the most universally useful gadget you can find. Everything else has more specific usage, at best.

You should definitely have some sort of optical magnification, and an optical sight qualifies. You can also carry binoculars, as there are plenty of models designed to be small enough, light enough, and durable enough for the infantry.

Spotter sights are only really useful if you have another weapon you are directing, like a sniper, machine gun, mortar, bombadiers, etc. If you don't have these, then the spotter sights are too large and cumbersome to be that useful.

Laser sights are for extremely close quarters, not snipers. Putting them on snipers only gives the sniper away. They are external hardware and do require power, but in extremely close quarters they allow you to aim without aiming. That said, LaserMax has guide-rod lasers that use low-power modulated pulses that allow the laser to always be kept on for an extended duration.

Internal Lasers Archives

Take better shots with a laser sight. Get the most out of your gun with a laser sight assembled in the US by LaserMax.

The downside is that they cost $329.

If you are going to add an external laser, an external flashlight does the same job, but also provides light and blinds people in low-light conditions. In the infantry, we used maglights duct-taped to the firearms, and we literally covered them with our palms when we didn't want to shine. It worked exceptionally well. Nevermind if you have a customized flashlight with a pressure switch.

Night Vision is a combination of monochrome light amplification and infrared. Warm bodies produce light in the infrared spectrum. The downside is that milspec uniforms block IR radiation. The downside is that most night vision is monocular, making it extremely difficult to range, completely destroys your night vision, prevents you from seeing in colour, eliminates your peripheral vision, and drains batteries pretty quickly. We decided that one per section was good enough.

The US came to the US conclusion that they should put giant flashing IR beacons on their infantry. This allows the US airforce to know they aren't attacking friendlies. It increases friendly fire against their allies, and only works if the enemy don't have have night vision. Their are also IR light sticks, which again, only work if the enemy does not have night vision.

The Human Mk I Eyeball has good night vision. No where near as good as most mammals, but it takes 30minutes of no light. ANY light ruins it. Any electronics that provide light can ruin your night vision.

Paraflares create a small sphere of daylight at night, but once you start, you have to keep going. They also burn the hairs off of your hand.

Military flashlights have coloured filters. Red light gets absorbed by, while yellow blends into deserts, and blue actually blends into snow. Chemlights are useful because of how weak they are. They are be used to mark things visibly without being extremely obvious. And when I say mark things, I mean rally points, and aiming points for machine guns.

The military entrenching tool is extremely useful for create trenches under enemy fire. They are also small and collapsable, enough that every soldier can carry them. That said, if you have time and space, full-sized tools are more useful.

[weathercool]

Pistols are a Sidearm

In almost every military case, with one VERY notable exception, pistols are a sidearm.

If you want the perfect balance of range, accuracy, firepower, and penetration, for the vast majority of combat situations - you end up with an assault rifle. That is literally why every - single - country in the world ended up with assault rifles.

The pistol is meant to be carried on the hip, (/thigh /chest) and for most soldiers, NEVER be used. This is why police carry a pistol. My father was career RCMP, and when he joined, they gave him revolver, 12 rounds, and the strong impression that he should return all 12 rounds at the end of his service. This is why officers carry pistol. This is why non-combat positions carry pistols.

So, when the discussion about the abilities of pistols come up, it all has to be balanced against carriability, and maybe concealability.

Of course, there is an obvious exception in that bigger men can carry bigger pistols without being encumbered by them. And smaller women have to go with much smaller pistols.

Now, the big exception is that most pistols are designed to be accurate up to 25m. And so this means that battles that happen in close-quarters can be fought with pistols. Pistols don't have the range or accuracy of rifles, but typically have higher stopping power. Stopping power is the physical impact, which is extremely important in close range. It doesn't matter if the shot will eventually be fatal, if it doesn't have the stopping power, they will keep shooting.

The original assault weapons were pistols, which have subsequently been replaced by SMGs. SMGs have largely been replaced by assault rifles, with only dedicated close-quarters combatants using them. Like police, navy, special forces, etc. There was a trend towards Personal Defence Weapons, basically SMG's, but it turned out to be simpler to use short-barreled assault rifles.

But, chances are, if someone breaks into your house, they are not going to have more than 25m LoS. Pistols are a lot more maneuverable, and require a lot less space to hold. And, if you use hollow point, which the military cannot use, you dramatically reduce the chance of overpenetration.

USSOCOM does have an Offensive Pistol Project, with the H&K Mark 23 apparently being that good.

When making PDW's, there were a number of pistols that have stocks that can be turned into a butt for the pistol. If you combine with this an automatic / burst firing mode, and you essentially get an SMG's that can fit in the same amount of space as a pistol. There's also things like the Berreta 93R, TMP/MP9, and several Uzi and MAC-10 variants that are basically pistols with automatic/burst modes and fold-out stocks.

IMI also developed the Desert Eagle, which everyone ignorantly proclaims a Range Toy. The point o the Desert Eagle is that IDF soldiers would often carry around sawed-off rifles for anti-material firepower. So IMI just made them a dedicated pistol.

Studies into the effect of real-world home defence proved that all of the basic defensive calibers had pretty similar outcomes, which I'm assuming is because the 9mm can get more shots off than the .44" Magnum.

[weathercool]

Survivability

When civilians refer to something as "tactical", they typically mean shiny military-like technology.

I say like, as the most important thing in the field is that it works.

Not that it works well, but that it works.

When rifles were first introduced, most officers hated them. While shot-for-shot, rifles were much better than muskets, you couldn't get anywhere near as many shots. When your enemy is standing in a line 10,000 strong, accuracy really isn't that important. Fire rate is incredibly important. And historically, for formations, the most important trait of the soldier is discipline. As long as the formation is intact, you will likely survive.

The answer for rifles was to create separate rifle companies and have them act as light infantry. Light infantry rely more on mobility, cover, and initiative. And a few officers changed history by doing just this.

But, isn't this just an example of how the latest and greatest technology was better and should have been adapted sooner?

No. While there was a shift to guerrilla warfare over massed line infantry, it had not happened yet. Giving the majority of your soldiers rifles would have made you lose.

In WWII, the US was the only military with a semi-automatic rifle. Assault rifles were the future, but everyone except the Soviet Union needed 40 years to get the technology working. The US not only had a semi-automatic rifle, they had a higher magazine capacity, (8 instead of 5), but overall, this only worked for the US because they are the US. US tactics use a LOT more ammunition than you really need, and only works because of how much ammunition they have. Germany had the best machine gun placement, while the US used machine guns for GET SOME!

Germany and the Soviet union took the extra step of making extra-special sniper rifles.

Britain tested their rifles in a toolroom, and used the most accurate for sniper rifles. While Russian and German snipers were typically line soldiers that did extremely well, and were elevated to heroes, British snipers could do more damage with a single shot, and be unnoticed moving in and out.

And this is because the most important thing for a sniper rifle is accuracy, and extremely small defects with gunsmithing can completely change the performance of a sniper rifle. So, instead of using the more elaborate method, they just tested their ordinary rifles, and used the ones that tested the best.

Night Vision goggles are useful, but in a limited way. You lose the majority of your vision, and modern military use clothing that minimizes IR. Of course, the US decided to go even further, and give all of their units giant glowing IR beacons. These can only be seen with night vision, but can be seen by anyone with night vision. Night vision goggles also require power, and are pretty fragile.

Whatever you take into the woods has to survive as long as you do. Bringing soap, water, and a hand towel to wash your balls will do more for you than night vision.