ORIGINAL: JagMagMan
I doubt that the 5.56 M-16 will be going away anytime soon! As someone said, the idea in combat is to throw lots of lead, fast! I would think that in some specialized units, we will see new weapons, but again, in combat the M-16 and 5.56 works! If it ain't broke, don't fix it! Yes, heavier clibers do a better job killing, but with the risk of being un-PC, killing is not always the always best. Wounded soldiers require more man-power and resourses than dead folks do. You also don't need sniper accuracy in field combat, and you can probably carry 3 times the ammo for a 5.56 than you can for an '08 or an Aught-6.
Throughout history, the guys with the fastest weapons are ussually the winners.
Now, for handgun CQC they need to go back to more stopping power of the old .45 ACP.
my father who is a vietnam combat veteran and I were discussing this earlier today. he said though he would personally prefer to have his M-14 he explained asfar as the 5.56mm is concerned it is really the best to keep massive amounts of lead in the air becuase a typical infantryman can carry twice as many rounds then that of 7.62 sand because most of your combat situations really just amount to suppresive fire where pin point accuracy just isnt required. he also said if any of your rounds actually hit a person its actually better to wound the enemy where a dead soldier is just left to lay till the fire fight is over but if someone is wounded then it actually takes the person wounded out of the fight plus whoever it takes to tend to the wounded person. In my fathers opinion as a basic infantry rifle he says the M-16 sucks but there really isnt anything wrong with the 5.56. he says there might be a need for better suited calibers for specific types of combat like in urban situations a shotgun or a pistol caliber firing sub machine gun would be best.