Like the M2 Browning, G3 and Minigun, they have been around for long time and still extremely widely used in modern armies.
In: 0
Performance vs cost. The US made a lot of M2 Browning machine guns. They work pretty well. You can make a better 50cal machine gun. But does the price justify the performance increase. In the US military case. It hasn’t.
The G3 has the same concept. It’s a outdated rifle. But the majority of people who carry one don’t need a better rifle.
They work, they are durable and effective, replacements happen when you have something better or cheaper.
There’s not been a lot of technological development in the field of using propellant to send hot lead at someone over the past 70 years.
Compare a rifle from WWII with a modern rifle, then do the same with a plane. Planes have a whole bunch of new technology to integrate. Firearms are still just firearms. They’ve moved to intermediate calibers, but that’s the main thing.
The most significant development in firearms is the proliferation of optics. Those drastically improve lethality, especially in the stress of combat.
Basically there was so much development and research done in WW2 that we can’t really make new weapons that are significantly better. We can make better but it’s not worth the design or making cost.
We plateaued for a while for a few reasons, one being that weapons got really good really fast and were cheap and easy to produce and easy to use. Like super easy on all fronts. The next steps would be radically different and have hindered us
The next steps would be a lot more complex options, that are difficult to engineer and cost prohibitive right now. Namely, a big one is caseless ammo, which is near a holy grail for weapons that shoot bullets, particularly for battlefield weapons. Lots of people have tried to make it, its just really hard and expensive and not worth it yet on any mass scale. This would be a massive leap. Caseless ammo is lighter and you can hold and carry much more of it than regular bullets. This is a big deal, longer clips and lighter rounds just make everything easier. Soldiers always need more ammo, they want unlimited ammo. All the ammo. Caseless improves this in leaps.
Instead the path chosen for now was more one of add-ons instead of re-makes. Need a bullet to go long and accurate? The weapon already works, just add a new and improved scope. Need more power, just use a more powerful round. Need it smaller, ok just cut the barrel, even cut down the weapon is still good. Need to launch grenades, just stick a launcher on it.
That is, instead of re-doing whole platforms, they just modify and add on to a platform that already works
Its basically like we have an iphone, you don’t need to recreate the phone, just add stuff on and make fixes and changes every so often
Also, their uses evolve over time, and this adds to their longevity. For example, the M2 was originally intended to be used against the tanks of WWI. They were no longer useful for that purpose by WWII, but they proved effective against airplanes. Now they are used as heavy support and anti-materiel weapons. M2-type weapons are also being used to good effect against drones in Ukraine.
Guns basically hit their apex with the AK-47, everything since then is just minor improvements. Then there’s some countries that picked a gun they liked 50 years ago and have been making their own spare parts ever since.
Of the guns you named,
* M2 Browning is near perfection, and they keep being made so that the new guns can use the same parts as the old ones.
* G3 just refuses to die, apparently.
* Minigun is a weird example because it’s a ‘mini’ version of a naval anti-aircraft gun, different countries have their own versions/equivalents.
Latest Answers