Regardless of who developed it, (I've heard the story a different way) I think it's a good round. The real question is: is it good enough to warrant changing? As it sets, I'd have to say no, but as we have seen with the 5.56, cartridges can be developed quite a bit.
The H&K 416 showed some hope for the future but Colt has tied them up in court. Also, Colt apparently submitted their own version of the 416 for the SCAR program and it was the number two finisher. I'm sure Colt will contest the award to FN (they contest the sun rising, so why not this).
I'm not opposed to the idea of modifying the M16 to a gas system that makes more sense. The direct gas system solved some problems that were high on our list of priorities 40+ years ago, but it created a whole new set of problems.
In today's world, there's no reason you can't have accuracy and reliability. You shouldn't have to choose between the two.
(again, I'm not saying the M16 is unreliable, just that it has much room for improvement in that department).
I'm encouraged that in the US programs, that a premium is placed on reliability. Anything considered should clearly out-perform the M16 or we're just wasting our money...Again, I think the M16 is an awfully hard act to follow.
