While the fictional “NCIS” character Leroy Jethro Gibbs’ “Rule Number Nine” is stated as “Never go anywhere without a knife,” and this is wise counsel, it’s actually paraphrased from the real “Rule Number One” as taught to young men raised in the pre-1970s era. As a child of the ‘50s and ‘60s, I can attest to the fact that almost every adult male would at some point or other say, “Nothing will ever cut you faster than a dull knife.” This was usually stated after asking to see one’s pocket knife to see if he was keeping a proper edge on it. God help the young man with a dull knife, or worse yet, no knife at all.

Our knives are as American as our guns are. Our lore and legends revolve around them: the Bowie, the Ka-Bar, the Randall, Trench knives, all fighting knives. Then there were our carry/work knives: the Buck 110 Folding Hunter, Camillus Military Utility and of course the Uncle Henry and Old Timer knives. I’m getting all nostalgic just thinking about them; I still have my U.S. Army Ka-Bar and Camillus kept in a drawer (wouldn’t carry today, too sentimental), but unfortunately I lost my Buck 110.
The fact is, in today’s world it’s getting harder to carry a good “Gentleman’s knife.” TSA will take it, and many places you go people will confiscate (steal) it if you put it out where it can be seen. Traveling overseas, well, there is the horror of having a knife in England, a land that was carved out by guys with swords, knives and other sharp cutlery. “Dear Lord, how can you have a knife?” This author’s response is, “How will I open boxes? How will I cut that horrible over-cooked beef you boil?” So, taking a good knife overseas is pretty much out because of the possibility of losing it to theft by blaggards or other government people. I take cheap knives with me, because I know they’ll get stolen.

In the U.S., however, we’re mostly in the free world regarding our knives. This allows for choices of good, reliable knives to keep with us and be there when we need them. These are such important tools, and quality might cost extra, but it seldom disappoints.

Spyderco

Spyderco is one of the leading knife manufacturers in the modern world, having started business in 1976. They have some of the world’s top talent in their leadership, including Michael Janich. This author has gotten to know Michael over the years while at military trade shows and had many conversations regarding knives. He is truly an encyclopedia of knife metallurgy, lore and knife tactics, as well as being a top designer himself.

Today, Spyderco has many utilitarian knives and tools, as well as many of what would be termed combat, or tactical, knives. Their designs are highly respected and carried by active users worldwide. That’s not what this article is about. Approximately 8 months ago, I sat with Michael for quite a while, discussing the history and use of the basic folding knife that a working person needs. We talked about the current designs that would be of interest to the tactical world, and I kept coming back to the fact that I was not satisfied with any of the knives I’d been carrying—there was always something a bit “off” or uncomfortable. While I can make anything work, I’m very picky about my carry guns, ammo and my work knife.

Michael reached into the Spyderco display case and pulled out a knife, handed it to me and said, “Look this one over. It’s the Brouwer design and is probably exactly what you are looking for.” He proceeded to tell me about Jerry Brouwer, a Dutch knife collector and designer. Brouwer designed a knife called the “Flanker” model, and when he met Eric Glesser from Spyderco at a knife meet in the Netherlands, they decided to collaborate on the design; the “Brouwer” was born. Michael told me that Brouwer wanted his knife to be a “seri-ous, every day cutting tool, small enough to carry conveniently and substantial enough for challenging cutting chores.” He was absolutely speaking my language.

I got the knife and decided to test it for a while as my work/carry knife and see if it was everything this author was looking for. I’ve used it for over 8 months now on everything as simple as shaving a broken fingernail to cutting heavy rope. Opening hundreds of boxes of magazines and cutting cardboard didn’t affect the sharpness at all. Pulling splinters, cutting plastic, shaving wood edges, occasional peel-ing of a 12-gauge wire, just everything in the course of a day proved no problem. The blade shape is perfect, and it cuts smooth as silk; there’s a very nice draw path through whatever I’m cutting.

It was easy to open one-handed with Spyderco’s Trademark Round Hole™ (I like to carry tip-up style anyway), and which side the clip is mounted, right or left, can be reversed if that’s your preference. The only problem I had is the same with any clipped pocket mounted knife: the pants wear at the pocket edge—but I’m talking about work pants, not fancy-go-to-meeting pants (I‘ve been carrying the Brouwer then too). If you work, you know what I mean—work pants get worn out. I want my knife where I can get it fast, and that’s just how it is.

Thumbs-Up

The specs are in the article; all the info is available on this knife at spyderco.com. As promised to Michael, I’m giving my opinion, and it’s a thumbs-up. I really used the Brouwer every single day when I was stateside for the last 8 months, and I am impressed. I didn’t even consider sharpening it during that whole time; it kept the edge beautifully. I’ve found my carry work knife, and my comfort level is back up, even better than my first Buck 110.
Jerry Brouwer, wherever you are today, kudos to you and Spyderco!

Keeping It Sharp

Spyderco offers an extensive group of sharpening tools. I have to confess that I use a Wicked Edge Pro-Pack II because I have it for my kitchen knives, and it’s been an outstanding sharpening system. I spoke with Michael about the correct angle for sharpening the Brouwer; it’s a “smooth blade” (plain edge) with right and left angles of 17 degrees (so an included angle of 34 degrees), and if you use the Spyderco Tri-Angle Sharpmaker® at a 40-degree included angle, you’ll contact the apex of the edge. Also remember that the Brouwer is a Full Flat Grind (FFG) blade, and that requires some special attention with the Wicked Edge system. Watch the videos at wickededgeusa.com.

Michael Janich teaches his special Martial Blade Concepts, and you can also get his books online such as Knife Fighting: A Practical Course or watch his videos on YouTube. I strongly suggest going to his website and learning about his practical, well-thought-out program on MBC (martialbladeconcepts.com/about-mbc).
Please pay a visit to spyderco.com where they have a huge list of resources, from what metals are used and why, the treatment of the metal, types of grips, all of their seemingly thousands of products plus a very active forum section where questions and answers are provided.

Spyderco’s Description

The heart of the Brouwer is its Full Flat Grind blade, which is crafted from CPM® S30V® particle metallurgy stainless steel. Its drop-point profile offers outstanding utility, while a paired index-finger choil and textured thumb ramp ensure precise control when used with a “choked-up” grip. Spyderco’s Trademark Round Hole™ is positioned closer to the blade’s centerline to allow a straight spine, while still offering easy one-handed opening.

The Brouwer’s handle features a solid titanium scale and Reeve Integral Lock (R.I.L.) on one side and a textured green G-10 scale and nested, skeletonized stainless steel liner on the other. To ensure a solid lock-up and long service life, the R.I.L. includes a stainless steel interface that also serves as an over-travel stop. A reversible stainless steel hourglass clip mounted to the butt end of the handle keeps the knife ready for instant access and offers a choice of left- or right-side tip-up carry. It is complemented by a lined lanyard hole for easy attachment of fobs and safety lanyards.

BROUWER FOLDER TI/G-10

Overall length 6.82in (173mm)
Blade length 2.82in (72mm)
Steel CPM S30V
Closed length 4in (102mm)
Edge length 2.36in (60mm)
Weight 2.8oz (79g)
Blade thickness 0.118in (3mm)
Handle Titanium/G-10
Clip position Ambidextrous
Tip carry position Tip-up
Lock type R.I.L. (Reeve Integral Lock)
Grind Full Flat
Sheath N/A
Origin Taiwan
MSRP $270 (as I said, quality costs but doesn’t disappoint)

This is just about the only place you’ll learn about the history, plus insights into the technology, testing protocols and where they came from, hearing loss, and the science of firearms sound.

The course is $495- call Phoenix Defence at 702-208-9735 or email at info@phoenixdefence.com

Silencer History, Technology & Testing Course

• Date: September 19-20, 2023
• Location: Boise, ID
• Instructor: Philip H. Dater, MD
• Cost: $495.00
• Course Number: PD-SUP-T

Syllabus:

DAY 1: Classroom

• Part 1: Introduction, Hearing Damage, & Usage (71 slides)
• Part 2: Suppressor Designs (124 slides)
• Part 3: Sound Measuring (78 slides)

On the second day, participants will be provided with a handout (as a DVD) of the slides used in the presentation, results of prior testing, considerable reference material (as PDF files), and a number of fun high-speed videos.

DAY 2: Classroom

• Part 4: Improvised Silencers (51 slides)
• Part 5: Design Process, Testing & Longevity (112 slides)
• Part 6: Mounting, Stability, Damage, and Goofs (71 slides)

BONUS (on Handout DVD, not covered in class): The Early Pioneers

•    Hiram P. Maxim
•    Mitchell WerBell
•    Charles A. (“Mickey”) Finn
•    C. Reed Knight, Jr.
•    Douglas Olson
•    Jonathan Arthur Ciener

When we finished the Vickers Machine Gun book last year (I was co-author with Dolf, Robert, and Richard Fisher from the Vickers MG Collection & Research Association in the UK), as part of the book’s promotion, I was asked to do some 3-day courses on the Vickers Machine Gun, geared towards collectors of all levels. The goal was to get them all to the same learning plane, teach gauging, construction, laying the guns, firing, etc. I ran the course six times, with full attendance in every class. There are still a couple of guys who were in line but couldn’t make it… so now, I’ve talked with them and scheduled it over a weekend.

We’ll start on Saturday morning in the classroom, and the live fire is just function checking the guns at the range, loading and a few bursts each. We’ll schedule the weekend around the weather. Even though these are water-cooled guns, the gunners aren’t so, we’ll choose the best morning for the range.

I have literally hundreds of rare accessories, mounts, parts, pieces, and all the lore, as well as gauges. If you have a registered Vickers and want to bring it so it gets the once-over in the classroom, that’s all good, too. 

This class is for novices, MG-curious people, up to expert collectors – I’ll strive to give everyone a great time, and a learning experience about the history and technology of these historic firearms.

Here’s the rough syllabus. There’s a lot more to it, but this is the basics:

Saturday

• History
• Technology
• Construction
• Gauging

Sunday

• Tripods
• Water Technology
• Sighting Systems
• Accessories

Monday

• Range Time
• Set up and fire
• Cleaning and Care

Join us for the class on the weekend of November 18-19-20 2023 at Phoenix Defence in Henderson, NV. The class tuition is $895. Please contact us at 702-208-9735 or info@phoenixdefence.com to register.

Handbook of Machine Gun Support Equipment and Accessories 1895-1945 

• By Robert G. Segel 
• Foreword by Dolf L. Goldsmith 
• ISBN: 978-1-5136-4013-6 
• Full Color, 415 pages, 1035 pictures 
• Price: $125 (Shipping free in the U.S.) 
• Order from: emmageeman.com 

The machine gun collector community, as well as museums and forensic analysis institutes, have a serious lack of information on the accessories for historic machine guns. There are many individuals with knowledge, and some online sharing, but a comprehensive reference guide to these has been missing from the knowledge pool. We each have our manuals and photos; however, nothing solid to help with general knowledge. 

Robert Segel, long-time Senior Editor of Small Arms Review, who wrote over 400 articles on historical machine guns as well as being published on this subject around the world, decided to take on this task. His lifetime fascination and collecting of machine guns stretches back over 50 years, and it shows in this book. 

The book covers 77 different weapons; no index is needed because the Table of Contents clearly presents the weapons—simply select a firearm, go to the start page, and you’ll be presented with a summary/history of the model firearm with variant notes, then a photo of the firearm to further help in identifying it. After that, there are clear photos (in most cases, some photos had to come from manuals) where the author lays out the gunners’ kits, spare parts and tool boxes with their contents and also number lists what each piece is. Frequently, the belt, link or strip loader for the machine gun is covered with photos, and many times other accessories are covered as well. The Vickers and Maxim sections are amazing. 

When I received the book, we happened to have a 50-year collection of MG parts kits and accessories that came from an estate and were in mixed boxes. Various Vickers and Hotchkiss tools and accessories were quickly identified by some of the newer employees; it made fast work out of the two truckloads. I went into my stash of tools that I didn’t remember what they were and identified a Lahti-Saloranta M/26 Combination tool with brass hammer and some Lewis tools. Now they are labeled and in their proper places. 

We’ve been in the business for well over 40 years, and I have to say that this book has been extremely helpful. There are aircraft sights, spare lock pouches, drum hangers and many accessories identified in clear, precise properly labeled photos. Interestingly, Segel covers many of the machine gun carts used to transport the guns and kits—this information is worth the cost of the book alone. 

It’s not possible to cover every single accessory ever made for every single machine gun ever made; that would be many thousands of pages. Robert Segel has done a tremendous job of presenting the accessories and kits that go with 77 machine guns, as well as preserving some of the lore surrounding how these items were used and imported. While this is a U.S.- based book, it is global in coverage and should be a great addition to any collection or museum library, not to mention to those of us who deal in surplus firearms and kits, where this book is also very helpful. 

Some of the firearms covered in this book include: 

• Alfa 44 
• AA-52 
• Berthier M1917 
• BESA 
• Breda Model 30 
• Breda Model 37 
• Bren 
• M1918 and M1918A2 BAR 
• KG m/37 Swedish BAR 

A whole list of Brownings, Maxims, Lewis, Hotchkiss and Japanese MG variants are discussed in-depth. 

On a personal note, I’ve traveled around the world with Robert Segel, in all kinds of museums and military collections, and his knowledge is exemplary, his research and photography are in-depth; he has used more than half a century of studying and collecting to present to you, the collector, this amazing book. Buy one and start looking through it; you will not regret it. You’ll also be on the internet searching for the parts/accessories for your cherished MG— things you didn’t know you needed but now will simply have to have, or be sitting there, knowing you don’t have a proper clinometer and case for your 1917A1. 

SAR: When you say the cocking handle is wrong, what do you mean?

Visser: In the end we made it underneath, so that the left or right handed person could use it easily. Anyway, Gene got interested in other things, and I hired Hans Sturtz, a German who worked for Gene Stoner. He was fantastic at making things….he worked for us in Holland, and we changed the Stoner rifle in various ways, small things, but important, like a good folding stock – one that locks. We made a good bipod too, a sturdy bipod, one that locks on the gun. I kept all of the documentation about what we did. We made a barrel with flutes, a thicker barrel, and we arranged for the sling swivels on the right place.

SAR: This is the Stoner 63 we are discussing? Let me go get some examples from the vault. (Dan gets some Stoner 63 and 63As to put on the table for Henk to point out things.)

Visser: Actually the 63A but improved. We did several things for the 63A. This was now the 63A1 when we were done with it. As I said, we improved the bipod and made it mount on the rifle, which was my idea. In the beginning, Gene Stoner didn’t have a flash hider with the right dimensions for the international rifle grenade launching requirements. The original CETME was even missing that by design. They just had a barrel sticking out making a hell of a flash, and noise. I designed the flashhider for the CETME (G3). We changed the Stoner 63A to be able to fire Rifle Launched Grenades (RLG), a very important feature even today in many armies. We changed location of the charging handle, the bipod, the stock, and many other minor changes.

SAR (Dolf): Henk, I thought that originally you were involved with the AR-10, with the 7.62 Stoner rifle?

Visser: No, Dolf, I have heard this before but I had nothing to do with that. The AR-10 was our competitor, the government plant Artillerie Inrichtingen (AI) at Hembrug, in Holland. They got so upset that we had the Stoner 63A license – first we had the CETME rifle then the Stoner – that when the Director of AI read in TIME Magazine about this lightweight rifle from ArmaLite, he and his secretary got on a plane and flew to Costa Mesa to make a deal on the AR-10. He was not liked by the Dutch generals because of the way he treated them. In reality, the AR-10 was a fantastic rifle for 7.62 NATO. Director Jungeling invited all the top generals to his plant and they were getting coffee and cake, and while they were eating he reached next to his chair and holds up an AR-10 and announces, “Gentlemen, this is your new rifle! This will be the future!” Those generals decided at that moment in their minds that nobody was going to adopt the AR-10. They didn’t want to be told by a civilian what would be the new Army rifle. He killed it with that. It’s a very sad story because it was a good rifle. They wanted to do their own testing and make their own decision and like most generals, they do not like anyone telling them what they will have for weapons.

SAR: You had the rights to the Stoner 63 outside of the United States?

Visser: Outside of United States and Canada. We had a very optimistic view of our opportunities because we and Cadillac Gage thought that the US Marines would adopt the system. We took the Stoner Rifle to Ecuador, Chile, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany and, Israel. I went everywhere. We spent millions, and I told the top people in my company, “This is it. This is what the soldiers want.” I never told the customers that – I simply showed them the quality and let them test the rifle. Standardization, a cheap machine gun…the main parts are all the same. Maybe I overdid it a little bit at times. We had the Inspector General of all of the forces in Holland and his Royal Highness Prince Bernard; he had seen it and liked it, and he tried to push it in NATO. Again, I think maybe there was too much support in this way, these guys all wanted to do it themselves and make their own decisions. I was instrumental in the standardization of the rifle grenades as well. Because of me, all of the rifles have the flash hider with the 22mm diameter. I was close with MECAR in Belgium, and we developed a whole series of rifle grenades, including a new small hollow charge which would puncture a 5cm hole in a steel plate at 160 meters.

SAR: So this was a shaped charge system. What was the launching platform – bullet trap, bullet through or launching blank?

Visser: It was a special blank cartridge at the beginning. We had, even for the Stoner, a short magazine that was colored green that could be loaded with this gas cartridge, so that there would be no mistake of putting a live cartridge in the gun.

SAR: Did you get any sales of the Stoner 63A1 in the countries you just mentioned?

Visser: The biggest thing was that the United States Marines were going to adopt it. I was at Quantico almost weekly, and they wanted these, so after the first lots of prototypes they ordered 3,000 or so from Cadillac Gage and shipped the Stoners to Vietnam. They wanted a live combat environment to test them. The Stoner was very successful and the Marines liked it. Then the U.S. Army stepped in and said, “No. We will all have the same weapons. You take the M16.” The Marines got mad, and talked about bent barrels and this and that, and the cocking handle they did not like and the rifles needed a heavier barrel, etc. We were offering this gun that we demonstrated as the future U.S. Marine weapon. We really pushed that, you know? Because who was this tiny little company in Holland, and Cadillac Gage was not known either: they made a few armored cars. Nothing to show manufacturing ability with small arms, but the Marines with Stoners, that was another story and it was our sales pitch to our customers.

Gene Stoner was very bitter about many of the issues that occurred then. In the Stoner 63 rifle he had tried to fix what he saw as the problems in the M16, which was also his design originally.

The big blow was when the decision came that the U.S. Marines were not going to take the Stoner system. This made it difficult for us, because the people we were trying to sell it to thought something must be defective with the guns since the U.S. was not adopting it. I had sold 12 to Singapore after a demonstration and sold some to Thailand, Japan and South Korea. We were a nice company, we didn’t bribe anybody. The same in the Philippines. I still remember the offer for the Philippines. We had trained them so that they could work on the guns themselves. It was a $35 million deal. Then Colt got in and they got the order instead for $58 million. Their agent had better “contacts” – almost $20 million extra above what our program was. I was with the top man there, the commissioner, and if I had said that we could raise it to $55 million or whatever, we would have had that deal. But that would have never occurred to me. The same thing happened on the deal in South Korea.

The Stoner is an excellent weapon, and the only complaint I ever had was that if the soldiers have the rifle, and then they give the company armorer some cigarettes or something, they’ll quickly have a belt-fed and a heavier barrel, and before you know it everyone in the whole group has a machine gun. (Visser laughs.)

SAR: That’s a complaint? If they trained a platoon with all belt fed Stoners, it would have been pretty formidable.

Visser: Yes, but these armies aren’t trained that way. Riflemen should be riflemen, and the machine gun is restricted to certain personnel with specific machine gun jobs. It would have been very simple to make things so that you couldn’t make a machine gun out of a rifle, but that would get rid of one of the beautiful things about the Stoner – the adaptability. The only complaint I ever received was that it was too easy to make a machine gun out of it.

SAR: Henk, you were involved in many of the post World War II arms deals. What about the surplus deals?

Visser: I got some surplus 20mm ammo from our Air Force and I sold it to Israel. I worked with Tom Nelson’s company and went on some trips with him, but we were not very successful in obtaining surplus guns.

SAR: Was there any surplus in your time in Vietnam?

Visser: Only the RPGs and other items we discussed earlier. Of course there were much more US military leftovers from Vietnam that were surplused out, but not through our company. I should tell you that I was given the rank of Colonel in the US Army so that I had an ID card. If you got captured by the North Vietnamese, the US Army figured that an officer would be treated better. I still have the ID today. (Henk shows us a Vietnam era US Military ID card with his picture and the rank of Colonel.) We wanted to know how the testing went with the 3,000 guns for Vietnam, but secondly we had to be involved in the MECAR rifle grenades. The Marines were very interested in these rifle grenades, the shaped charges that punched 5cm holes. There was one demonstration where the armored plate was at 160 meters, and as I was a good shot, I could stand there and whop it, and they could see the hole was there. I came upon the idea of mini hand grenades then. In Vietnam, I saw the soldiers go out with only two hand grenades, and if the grenades got wet then they had to be destroyed. With the help of MECAR, we made very small hand grenades and the inside was ribbed in little squares. We used RDX instead of the normal high-explosive. I designed a special short ring that you couldn’t pull, you had to twist it, and then you could get it out. This prevented a lot of accidents. I had a special detonator made by Dynamit Nobel and we sealed the grenades in plastic so you’d have a bandolier with ten mini hand grenades. This weighed as much as two standard hand grenades giving the soldiers a lot of waterproof hand grenades for their missions. I also had them make an aluminum tail with an old-type beer bottle closer; you could stick the hand grenade on there and close that. There was a thin wire, so when you fired it from the rifle, the wire would break and the lever would jump off and at 200 meters you had an explosion.

Then MECAR said, “Nice, but let’s make a rifle grenade that’s just the same in arming, but the standard size.” We also had parachute flares. Then there was a request from the Americans and they said, “Listen, we have had cases where we bombed our own people in the deep jungle cover. We want a flare that goes through the canopy and explodes at 100 meters with a big flash and a brown cloud.” They wanted a test quantity of 200 or so, and three weeks later they were on a plane from Germany to Vietnam for testing. It was really successful; there was a big flash and a bang after it exited the jungle canopy. We were working to design a bullet trap in the grenade tail so you could fire with live rounds. Around that time the owners of MECAR decided to sell the whole shebang to an American company. I had a contract with them that said I received a commission on everything that was sold, regarding the rifle grenades and such. They tried to talk me out of it, and I said, “Gentlemen. You’ve just told me that I am going to make millions from these mini-grenades, but give me one hundred thousand dollars and it’s yours.” I wanted out of the company and the new owners. A lot of yak-yak and I got my hundred thousand dollars.

SAR: But not the millions in the future…

Visser: No, I would get none of that. The Marines bought a lot of those rifle grenades, and they tested them and decided to adopt them. Again the same thing happened. The U.S. Army was working on the 40mm launchers and they didn’t want the Marines to have something else. The Marines adopted the 40mm, not our multi-purpose hand and rifle grenades.

SAR: That sounds like the end of the Stoner 63 and MECAR projects. Where did you go from there?

Visser: We were into developing a “breakup” training round. It was an idea that I had in Germany after seeing how they had to have tremendous ranges when they were shooting at air targets. We had a plastic bullet with compressed iron powder parts in it that gave the same recoil – everything the same as a ball round, but it caught the rifling and because of the plastic jacket, after 50 meters or so, it would burst and there was just a cloud of powder. What they also wanted to test was putting a round that wouldn’t function in the magazines; something which would cause a stoppage. It was for the soldiers learning to fix the stoppage. We sold millions to the Germans. Really, many millions in numerous calibers as it turned out. This ammo functioned perfectly in the German 20mm gun and the twin 20mm AA guns.

They had thousands of these twin-barreled 20mm guns used for AA defense and the troops had to train with them. For training purposes, a plane came flying past with the target sack. They had to aim and they fired like mad and it was really something exciting to see: a whole row of twenty twin 20mm guns. From there we went to the 40mm Bofors round 40 l 60 and 70, also with the break up projectile.

One problem occurred when the Dutch Navy wanted the 40mm Bofors too. They went out and shot it at sea, but there was so much wind out there that the powder would blow back and immediately started rusting the ship. “Oh my God, our beautiful ship! You are ruining our beautiful ships” they cried. (Laughter.) For land based use, though, we sold a lot of these.

Around that time the Swiss company Oerlikon asked me to come and work for them. Singapore asked me to get them 120 20mm cannons for the armored cars they bought from Cadillac Gage. I just walked in to Oerlikon and said, “They want an order from you for 120 cannons.” Oerlikon couldn’t believe it. They had never done much business in the Far East, only Japan. I got the offer and flew out to Singapore. They looked at the prices and thought it was ok, and they went up to the boss, who had a Dutch name, and he signed the contract. I was amazed. I came back and walked into Oerlikon and said, “Here’s your contract.” They almost fell over. After the war they hadn’t had any big contracts like that, 120 20mm guns. The big boss said to me, “What do you want as a commission?” I hadn’t even thought about it. I thought, “Maybe one percent? Do I have the guts to ask for two percent?” Then the boss says, “Is six percent enough?” I got a million Swiss francs commission, and that was the first time I’d ever done anything like that. I started working for them and became the boss for the whole Far East. I sold the South Koreans all of their 35mm AA guns, and also sold to Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand. That made me a rich man, you know, because besides the big salary they paid me a two percent commission as well. When you get a $900 million order, that’s really something. (Laughter). I was with Oerlikon for about fifteen years, from 1975 until around 1990.

SAR: Not bad for a little Dutch kid who started his cannon ammunition career making 20mm detonators while a slave laborer in a German prison.

Visser: Yes, a very, very, long way from that.

SAR: What are you working on today?

Visser: I spend most of my time working on restoration of historical firearms, major projects to save many of these works of art. There was a big restoration project in Russia. I came to Russian in 1988 with Dr. Arne Hoff, the director of the Tojhuseet museum in Copenhagen. Even before the war, it was known there were many historical Dutch guns in the Kremlin Armory. We went there, and we were received well but they didn’t even want to give us their last names. It was forbidden to give your last name to a foreigner. I liked them, and they liked me, and we got off on good footing. Each time I came there, I brought them suitcases full of Dutch specialties of coffee, “cup-a-soup” packets, an electric water heater, and 200w light bulbs. They had 40w light bulbs in the depot and you couldn’t see anything. I brought them nice mugs to drink from, and we had a very good relationship.

I knew all the guns they had, and they had about 350 beautiful guns, of which 120 needed serious care. Pieces were broken off, pieces to be repaired, and I asked, “Why don’t you restore them? You have a lot of wonderful pieces here.” They said, “We have no money to do this, Russian things must come first.” I said I would do it and would pay for it. It took two years of negotiation, and I became friends with the Minister of Culture, who must have studied at an American university because he spoke fluent English. They eventually let 120 guns go to Holland where I could have them restored. We had the best restorer in the world for antique arms, Herman Prummel, he can do anything. I thought it would be half-year project, but it took two and a half years to finish. In the meantime, a good friend of mine, Helena Yablonskaya, wrote up all the Dutch guns in Russia; about 120 at the Kremlin Armory, some at the Historical Museum, some at St. Petersburg’s Hermitage, 350 in all. In the series of my books, there is one book about all of those.

SAR: It sounds like you are very dedicated now to restoring these historical Dutch firearms.

Visser: Yes, very much so. I am full of crazy stories on this. When I was younger, before the war, our high school made day trips to different places. One of the trips was to Emden in North Germany and there was an armory in the Rathouse with lots of suits of armor and guns and pistols. The first battle with the Spaniards in our Eighty Years War was in 1568 in ‘t Heiligerlee, a village near Groningen. There was a wooden case closed with mesh steel wire, and inside it were musket balls from the first battle to get rid of the Spaniards. We had a Nazi guard with us in a black uniform, and when he wasn’t looking I took my pocketknife and lifted up the steel wire and stole one musket ball. I still have it today. (Laughter.)

Emden was flattened during the war and I always wanted to go back. I went to the Meppen Army testing grounds nearby, but I never got to go back to Emden. Finally, about a year and a half ago I go with Herman Prummel who told me that a lot of pistols were rotting away in the depot. I went over there….and it was horrible. There were the most beautiful Dutch wheellock pistols full of wormholes, half the stock gone, and the metal cleaned with emery paper. My big mistake was not to take the whole pile for an offer of 50,000 euros because they’re never going to show this stuff, but I said, “Why don’t you restore them?” They said they had no money, so I said I’d do it. They said, “Why don’t you take them? We’ll talk to the director, and come back in two weeks.” So I came back in two weeks and instead of having 10 ready, they had 50. We took all 50, and it took more than a year for Herman Prummel to restore them. They are in fantastic condition now. Fortunately, they had saved all the metal parts that had fallen off. If the buttstock had been eaten, they still had the metal ring. Those Dutch wheellock pistols were very light and elegant. These are at my house right now, waiting for the museum to open. We are now working on a catalogue with pictures of them.

I guess that my passion today is the works of art that are in these old firearms. I have spent a lot of time making them whole again.

SAR: Henk, I want to thank you for sharing these stories with SAR’s readers.

Visser: Yes, I have enjoyed this, and I hope to come to the SHOT show and see old friends.

We discussed many more stories of the old days and the arms trade, as well as current restoration projects that Henk Visser is involved in, but those must wait for another day. – Dan

Hinderikus (Henk) Lucas Visser was born in the City of Groningen, the capital of Groningen Province in the northeast of the Netherlands, on 5 August 1923. Henk was very involved in the CETME rifle project, the original HK G3, Stoner’s projects (most notably the Stoner 63A1), Oerlikon, Mauser, and many other historical events that impact on the small arms community today. Smallarmsreview.com is pleased to bring this lengthy and comprehensive interview to our readers from our 2006 issue and will be presented in two parts. – Dan Shea, SAR Editor-in-Chief

SAR: Thanks for joining us, Henk. I guess the readers would like to know what got you started with firearms – what was your first gun?

Visser: My first gun was an old pinfire revolver, which you could buy for about two bucks in those days. I was maybe fifteen years old. Pinfire ammunition was very rare so I just collected these and enjoyed looking at them and I would hide them from my mother who did not approve. My father had died when I was ten years old. Later in life my mother would complain about my gun collecting habits, but I would say, “Mother, it’s your own fault. You never bought me an air rifle.”

SAR: And your interest in military firearms?

Visser: I had wanted to be in the military, so as soon as I could ride my bicycle, I was always around the barracks in Groningen and the nearby airfield. After the German occupation of Holland, May 10, 1940, there wasn’t much hope for me to join the Dutch army. I was still in high school, and was definitely not a Nazi sympathizer. With friends, we harassed the occupying military units, and I was arrested by the Germans but managed to talk my way out of it several times. I was eighteen years old when the SD (German Sicherheitsdienst) finally arrested me.

SAR: What were the charges? And, I suppose, were you actually guilty?

Visser: Guilty as charged. Sabotage, gun possession, those were the main charges. It was May 5th, 1942 when the German SD arrested me. It was in the classroom, in front of all the other kids. (Laughs) It was quite something! On one occasion I had broken into the German barracks and put a match to a wooden building that the Germans were setting up for storing radio transmitters. It was at the airfield next to our town that the Germans had expanded and made into a bigger airfield. They held me, because the last thing I did was to break into the Navy officers’ mess, and I stole a K98, a machine pistol, a pistol, ammo and some of their papers. We had a small group of people that had gotten together to do this, and there was one man who was a traitor, he tried to blackmail me. Anyway, the Dutch police got involved, and I got arrested. Then in July I had a Navy court-martial in the town of Utrecht.

SAR: So, your first machine gun involved getting a Navy court-martial from the Germans while you were in high school?

Visser: (Laughs) Yes, and they condemned me to death and also three years for another break-in in a Dutch Nazi gunsmith shop in town.

SAR: An additional three years?

Visser: With the Germans, you were condemned separately for each crime and punished that way as well. I had a friend in jail, a cadet from the Dutch military academy, who was condemned separately to death three times, plus ten years, and four months. His father was very rich, and he started paying people off, so the Germans took off two of the death sentences and shot him for the third. My uncle, who was a director of the Dutch Philips electronic company, knew one of the German supervisors of the factory and tried to get me off. He told the supervisor, “You have to go and see if you can get the boy pardoned since his mother is a widow and only has one other younger son.” The supervisor went to see Seis Inquart, the German ruler of Holland, who said that this was a job only for the military. He suggested that my uncle should talk to General Christiansen, who was the military commander in Holland…but he also said no, and he said that Dutch high school boys who think that they can make a joke out of the German Army will be shot. So my mother was quite desperate, and she went with our lawyer to see the German Navy commander herself. Just to let you know how these Germans were; he lived in a big villa…my mother and our lawyer passed the guards at the gate, rang the bell, and a Navy sailor opened the door. He took the letter that my mother had brought asking for a pardon, and left my mother and the lawyer standing outside in the rain for half an hour. Then the door opened again and the same sailor gave the letter back to my mother, torn in half.

My mother was very desperate at this point. Her father had a butcher shop in town, and next to that was a vegetable shop…our two families were good friends. One of the children of the vegetable shop owner, Kees Veening, had gone to live in Berlin to be a speech therapist, teaching them how to breathe, etc. Kees Veening had a neighbor, and they became good friends. The neighbor was a historian, a reservist in the German army and was called up for duty in 1938. He had become a general and was responsible for the daily historical facts in Hitler’s headquarters, the “Wolfschanze.” This man had an idea: if he could get a hold of my file from the Dutch prison and keep it, the Germans in Holland would not be able to shoot me. So I sat for three months in the section of the prison where they kept the prisoners who were condemned to die, and oftentimes at 5 in the morning you would hear the Germans with the steel-toed boots coming up to take one or two of us out to be shot. So the question was always, “Who’s next?” I was there for three months.

SAR: On a German death row cellblock for three months, waiting to be shot every day?

Visser: Yes. You had to take all of your clothes off at night, so that if you escaped during the night you’d be naked. One night, there was a tremendous row and shouting and a group of drunken German guards came knocking on my door. I was sleeping on a straw bale, so I got up and ran to the window, stood at attention, reported myself and my punishment. The Germans shouted “Visser, who was condemned to death…You swine, our Führer has pardoned you!” After repeating this several times they threw my door closed, and I thought, “Oh, this is wonderful,” and went back to sleep on my straw bale. The next morning I realized that I had made it, and had gotten 15 years in a German prison instead. Later I learned that the German historian had waited until the Germans were throwing a party for their successes in Russia. They had taken over a million prisoners at that occasion and were celebrating. They were extremely pleased and were drinking champagne in Hitler’s headquarters. As Hitler was sitting at the table, the historian, General Scherff, approached with the letter from my mother and explained the story. Hitler looked up and said, “A friend of yours, eh?” and Hitler himself crossed out “Death Penalty” and wrote “15 years Zuchthaus” instead. When the people at my prison got the telex message from the Wolfschanze, they got drunk and came to my door at 2 or 3 in the morning to tell me that I had made it.

SAR: Well, there’s a project for some of our better connected readers. Somewhere, there is a piece of paper with Adolf Hitler’s handwriting on it that freed Henk Visser from a death sentence.

Visser: Yes, yes, I would pay $10,000 for that piece of paper! I was then transported to prison in Germany, a prison with small factories inside. There I had to work very hard, we had to make little aluminum cylinders. After the war, while taking apart a 20mm shell, I found one of those little cylinders. It was an aluminum detonator. We had to fashion them and drill a hole through them and of course thread them. We would make 5,000 of these per day and if you didn’t make 5,000 then you only got a liter of cabbage soup instead of 1.5 liters. Cabbage soup may not sound very special, but in the prison, an extra 0.5 liter of soup was important! So we made 5,000 per day.

We were in a very old prison called Zuchthaus Reinbach, near Bonn. Then I was moved to another prison called Zuchthaus Siegburg, on the other side of Bonn, and there I also worked for my dinner. I repaired military uniforms, and worked in a tool making shop. We worked about twelve hours a day in shifts, sometimes during the day and sometimes during the night. I must say I was lucky; in a concentration camp I would have died. In these prisons you had a roof over your head. It was a big building with thick walls, and if it was 20 degrees below zero outside it was only just freezing inside, which was cold but you didn’t freeze to death. We had guards who had been guards for all of their lives, they were professionals and so there were not many beatings or much abuse. We had some new guards who came in from the Eastern front missing an arm or something, and since they really couldn’t do a good job they would sometimes beat us to take revenge.

Anyway, I got very ill. I had tuberculosis in my lungs, intestines, on my vocal cords, and on a heart valve. I was dying and my weight was 100 pounds. Still, I was always treated a little differently from the other prisoners.

SAR: You must have had some pull from somewhere.

Visser: They knew I had received a pardon from Hitler himself, and the General Scherff sometimes inquired about how I was doing, so yes, they were careful with me. I was taken to the prison hospital. It was unbelievable, there were 3,000 prisoners with half of them sick and there were only 14 beds in the hospital. I got one of those beds, and I was dying. My uncle, who’s company Philips also owned a lot of factories in Germany, started inquiring about how I was doing. He was told that I was ill, but treated very well, and that I was cared for by nuns and that every day I would get an egg, but my uncle didn’t trust them. He sent someone who talked to the director of the Zuchthaus who reported that I couldn’t talk anymore and that I was dying. So he had his lawyers look over the German law regarding prisoners, and they found an old law that said if you were incarcerated and dying, you could go home to die. All of the judges that condemned me would have to sign off for my release, so my uncle went to see all five of the judges, at that time they were dispersed all over Germany because of fear for an invasion in Holland. When all of them signed I was sent home, but because of my contagious disease, I wasn’t allowed to go back by train. They didn’t want me infecting anybody else. The Phillips people had an ambulance that ran on propane, but since the gas stations were so far apart in Germany, they put the ambulance on top of a truck and trailer which ran on a wood burning gas generator. They came with a nurse to the prison, and through my uncle managed to rescue my hospital cellmate as well, another Dutch student from Groningen. We drove back through Germany and I was very happy to see buildings still on fire from Allied bombings. We got back to Holland and they hid me in a Roman Catholic sanatorium in Bilthoven. I was there for two and a half years, recovering.

SAR: Was that the end of the war?

Visser: On the 18th of May, 1944 I got out of Germany. The liberation of Europe happened while I was convalescing, and at the end of 1946 I went home.

SAR: It must have taken a long time to build your strength back.

Visser: I felt ok, I did what I had to do, and I could even bicycle a little bit. My mother made me go back to high school; she said I needed a high school diploma. (laughs) Of course the military was out of the question for me, because of my weak lungs. I wanted to go to the police academy, but was offered a job as a sales inspector in Java, in the East Indies – formerly the Dutch East Indies – and I accepted. The company had me tested to make sure that my health was alright, it was, and I was approved to go and work in the tropics.

SAR: Was this a firearms related job you were looking for in the tropics?

Visser: No, it was in the tobacco industry. I was in Java for five years where I worked and hunted; wild boar, mostly. I had a German 7mm rifle with a 12 gauge shotgun barrel. My job was inspecting the cigarettes sold by our company in Java. We manufactured the cigarettes, and wanted to make sure that the cigarettes weren’t being sold or bought on the black market. There were many Chinese sales outlets all over Indonesia and the islands that needed to be inspected. I traveled a lot, all over Java, and for a while I lived in Jakarta, Malang and Semarang. There were about five Europeans running the factory, and for a year and a half I was the chief purchasing agent. This was from 1950 until 1955. (Dolf mentions that he was there at the same time, too bad they hadn’t met at that point.) It was a fantastic time; the company was really well run. The Dutch people who were running it were no-nonsense and everything was always ok. Holland had given up Indonesia in December of 1949, and the bad thing was (and I’m very pro-American) that under American pressure, they pushed the Dutch out and threatened to stop the Marshall Plan for Holland. There were millions of dollars going into rebuilding the Netherlands. So you can understand that our government gave in.

SAR: (Dolf) The Americans pushed the Dutch into giving up the country. My father was very bitter about that, too.

Visser: Yes, yes, the Americans had the idea of instituting liberty and democracy and everything Western, but we were not ready for it! Our Queen Wilhelmina had already said in 1942 that Indonesia would be a free country in the future; the process would have only taken about 15 years to complete.

SAR (Dan): In America we tend to think that there’s a magic wand for those who’ve been under colonial control or subjugation or despotic control, that they can suddenly handle freedom. I don’t want to get too far off the subject, but I’ve seen it too many times in too many places. Often we think we can touch a country and suddenly it’s free. It’s certainly not that simple. Henk, you lived right through the middle of the Jakarta incidents? Is this the point where you started to develop more of an interest in machine guns?

Visser: No, Dan, I have always been crazy about weapons. But going through the war years changed my perception of the world. When the Germans first “arrived,” they acted nice and very friendly. Holland was very wealthy and a rich booty. When it came to food I saw German soldiers go into Dutch shops to buy and eat an entire stick of butter, they hadn’t seen real butter in so long. Other things too, pastries, breads, all sorts of foods, they took them back home to their families. So in the beginning there wasn’t any ill treatment, but as every good Dutchman, I hated them from the very first moment. It wasn’t until later that the Germans showed their real character. They cleaned out the whole country. I actually started my collecting interest with military weapons when I got home from prison and the sanatorium. There was a gun in almost every home, taken from the Germans when they fled. I had friends at the police department, so if they had a really nice machine gun I was able to shoot it or buy it if they didn’t require it.

SAR: This was before your journey to Indonesia? Were you able to pick up many rare guns?

Visser: Yes, this was from 1947 to 1949. My interest in collecting military firearms was very intense, starting then. In those days it was all the common guns, also French guns that the Germans used. For instance, the first French machine gun that I got was a Hotchkiss 1914. It was a great big machine gun with cooling fins and a huge tripod. I was very interested in German sniper rifles at the time. When I went to Indonesia, I had to hide my collection in my mother’s house, since I had no license for these guns.

SAR: Are we seeing a pattern of youthful disregard for gun laws here?

Visser: (laughs) Yes, yes, and they were all cleaned very well before I left, so that when I returned there wasn’t a spot of rust on any of them.

SAR: When did you get involved in arms trading?

Visser: On my way to an appointment I stopped at a gun shop in a small street in Groningen. The guy that owned the shop had also spent some time in a German prison, as well as a concentration camp. In the shop I met a gentleman who was on the board of an ammunition factory in the south of Holland, he invited me to come and see the operation. I went there; it was a small factory that had just received an order for .30 carbine ammo from the Americans. The factory itself was a mess. I was told that the chairman of the board from the factory would like to talk to me; he offered me a job as director. He told me that the founder of the factory had died and that his younger brother wasn’t doing a good job running things. I said no, I didn’t want that job; I wanted to go back to Indonesia.

My boss back in Indonesia was a colonialist. He worked us to death, we never got enough salary, but we still led a wonderful life. He would always say, “Do this and I’ll give you a raise and a promotion.” I learned that even if I got a promotion, there would be no raise for me. He told me to go to Jakarta for a year and if I did a good job there, I would get a raise and a promotion, but when my review came up, I got a good promotion but no raise, as usual. He always had another task for me but I never got a raise. After five years, I got 8 months furlough. Usually when people went on furlough they would go straight home to Holland, but I asked if I could go to America. My boss agreed to pay for it, saying that I wasn’t such a bad guy. I flew to the Cocos Islands, Australia, lots of other small islands, Samoa, and then on to Hawaii, Los Angeles, Denver, Chicago, Boston to visit a friend, and down to Washington D.C.

SAR: That doesn’t explain your start in the arms trade…

Visser: I am getting to it, Dan, patience. Before I went on vacation my boss in Indonesia began to worry about the link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer, which was getting more and more attention in America. He asked me to see how the American tobacco companies were dealing with it. I went to Philip Morris, and they told me that more and more people were buying mentholated and filtered cigarettes because the public thought that they were not as bad. I wrote back to my boss what the Americans had told me, and he quickly started ordering the machinery to manufacture filtered cigarettes. These of course are more dangerous than unfiltered cigarettes because it allows you to smoke the cigarette all the way to the filter. You end up inhaling far more tar, etc. than you would get from smoking a cigarette without filter.

My boss had told me that upon my return from furlough I would become the Inspector for the Island of Sumatra. And so again I asked him if I would get my raise, he said that we would discuss it when I returned. He was in Holland at the same time, so I traveled to Eindhoven where he was with his family and had dinner with him. I asked him during dinner if I would finally get the position I wanted, with a higher salary and the ability to sign for the company as a representative. (Editor’s note: In Europe, the right to sign documents in the name of the company puts you in a much higher level socially. You generally get a much better salary.) He said that if I did a good job working in Sumatra that I would get the position I wanted. At that moment I realized he was lying, and the next morning I started talking to the people from the ammunition factory again. I asked for what was at that time a fantastic salary, not at all contingent on how the company did at the end of the year. They accepted!

SAR: So your international weapons career started in the ammunition factory in Hertogenbosch in Holland.

Visser: You might say it started when I was making those fuzes in a German prison (Laughs). But, I’ll tell you, my first day as director there, I almost cried. There were two secretaries, and neither one could write or type a letter without mistakes. Everything looked horrible and unprofessional from that office on down to the factory. I had to fight to straighten out that company. When I arrived, there were 63 people working there, and when I left there were over a 1,000.

SAR: Did this job lead to you becoming a member of the 7.62 NATO council?

Visser: After the cigarette factory in Indonesia, I think this was a really big start for me. I got a call one day from an American friend at the Pentagon who said, “Henk, we know you’re working on blanks with a lengthened case so that they feed automatically. We don’t have that, and this morning during a mock battle in Panama the American side had to shout “Poof! Poof!” because they had no blanks that would function automatically in their weapons. The general who was responsible for Panama got mad and demanded immediate delivery of the special blanks.”

I said to my friend that I could get some of my guys and some of our new blanks, cases, powder, tools and the necessary weapons, and fly over to see what we could do. We flew to Washington and went from there to Frankfurt Arsenal, where testing began on our ammo. Whether fired from a gun that had been in a freezer or not, our blanks worked perfectly! The guys from Frankfurt Arsenal wanted to inspect our blanks and see how they could copy them, but they didn’t have the time. The Pentagon wanted 45 million blank rounds in cal. 7.62 NATO, and we would get one-third of the order, which for us was a very, very big order. We were very excited until one day I got a call from them with sad news. They said that Congress refused to release the money needed for that big order and instead specified that only 30 million rounds would be purchased, with the order going to Frankfurt Arsenal, so we lost out. This was a big blow to our company, but there was also good news. They told me that they understood that we wanted to make 20mm aircraft ammo. They offered me a 20mm ammunition factory for free, with new machinery and everything, in St. Louis, that had been used to manufacture .60 caliber ammo and later 20mm aircraft ammo. It had been “mothballed” for use in an emergency.

SAR: The early M39 revolver cannon series, the T161s, were T130E3 .60 caliber machine guns before they were moved into the 20mm range.

Visser: Yes, it was the plant for that ammunition. We went to St. Louis to look at it, and we were flabbergasted. Everything, the machines, the tools, etc. was brand new, and just for us. I went back to Holland to arrange for transport. I came back to the Pentagon (which was very easy to just walk into in those days) to talk to Colonel Moor and a couple of other officials, but they had sad news again. “We cannot give you the plant,” they said. They saw my reaction…and after a long pause continued, “But we can sell you the plant for a $1,000.” We paid the thousand dollars and brought all of the machinery back to Holland. The end result was that once we got operational we supplied every NATO Air Force with the 20mm rounds: the Brits, the Norwegians, the Germans, the Dutch, everybody. Later, when the Vietnam War began, the US Air Force realized that they did not have enough 20mm rounds. They requested an order for 10 million 20mm rounds. Our Holland plant could fill that order so a meeting took place at the pentagon. One of the officials said, “This is crazy! Lake City is not the only ammunition plant we have. Don’t we have one in the South?” Colonel Moor pointed at me and said, “Yes, and HE has that plant.” (Visser laughs) So we used the plant from St. Louis to fill a 23 million dollar order for 10 million rounds.

SAR: Like all good arms dealers, I love a story where you get a plant for surplus and then get to sell the product back to your source (laughter). Henk, that probably would have been 1967 or 1968 and jumps us too far ahead in this story. When did you first get involved with Armalite?

Visser: Ah, patience, Dan, patience. First we must address the CETME (Centro de Estudios Technicales de Materiales Especiales) program. When I started to work in Holland for NWM in 1955, they had an advisor that was a retired Dutch rear admiral who became a very good friend of mine. He had been in Spain recently (he spoke fluent Spanish), where some Spanish and Germans had been working on a new gun made from sheet steel. I knew of some of the developments that had been done in Germany with the Sturmgewehr, and I flew to Madrid. The operations there were very isolated from the outside world. The main operation was on the CETME rifle. They showed me the whole factory, and pointed out some of the small tools and things that they were missing which I could supply, so I told them I’d help out. I became very friendly with them, and pretty soon I had my own CETME rifle to take back with me to Holland. That rifle…that’s a whole other story.

It was made for special ammunition, an aluminum bullet with a copper jacket…a very long bullet with a short case. The man who designed this ammunition was Dr. Voss, and he was the German Air Force ballistician, and he was also the ballistician for the CETME group. He was very knowledgeable about recoil and automatic fire and the physics of holding a gun. During that time, the first German armed forces were the Bundesgrenzschutz who were supposed to guard the German boarders. There were 20,000 soldiers armed with German K98’s and the MG42’s, as well as 100 new 20mm Hispano guns and of course the P38 pistol, and nothing else. The boss was Colonel Naujokat, and he had been in charge of the two flat cars before and behind Hitler’s quarters on his train (during WWII). These open cars had 4-barreled 20mm automatic cannons on them.

The Spanish went to the Colonel and demonstrated for him in Bonn. The Colonel liked the new Sturmgewehr and the ammo very much, but told them they had the wrong caliber. The standard caliber was cal. 7.62, but this new Spanish ammunition was cal. 7.92. So they went back to Spain and changed the gun, the magazine, and, of course, they had to make new ammunition. They also made new firing tables, it took a year. After which they had their new CETME ammunition in cal. 7.62.

SAR: This was not yet 7.62 NATO ammunition, correct?

Visser: Correct. After the Spanish finished their new ammo, they brought it and the guns back to the German Colonel, who turned white and said, “Oh my God. I should have told you that 7.62 also requires a new case: the T65 case.” The Spanish group was beside itself, returned to Madrid and decided that it was all over. The gun was mathematically designed for a low powered cartridge and the 7.62 NATO had much more power, so it needed a totally new gun. But one of the bosses at the Madrid factory pointed out that the factory had good relations with the American military attaché, since they had just received an order to develop caseless rifle ammunition and caseless 20mm. The boss said, “Go and get a barrel and 1,000 7.62 NATO rounds.” Which they got from the U.S. The CETME with that barrel fired 600 7.62 rounds before the gun fell apart. The cartridge was far too powerful, since the gun was designed for a lighter round. The German engineers rebuilt and strengthened the housing as the German army wanted to arm their soldiers with them.

They had contact with the Heckler & Koch people, who were all old Mauser people working in two wooden barracks, making tools for pressings and so forth, and that’s how I came into contact with Heckler & Koch. The Germans at the Weapons Department in Bonn were always making changes in the gun, and it was Heckler & Koch who made the changes on the CETME. I told the CETME people, “You guys have no sales organization….let NWM have the rights to act for you all over the world.” They told me I had to pay for the right, which was no problem for NWM. They gave me the world rights for the CETME rifle, excluding Spain, Portugal and Germany. The rest of the world was ours. They also said that if I wanted to set up production elsewhere, they would help us get started.

In the meantime they were still working on the guns…making a new grip and so on…they had spent millions making the guns and making the changes. I went to the Dutch army, who agreed to test out the gun with all kinds of different ammo, including French steelcased ammo. They fired the steel ammo. When the trigger was pulled, there was a BIG noise, the rate of fire was 1,800 rounds per minute, and about half of the empty steelcases got stuck in the wooden wall. I told the Colonel to stop the test…it was a hopeless case. As it turned out, they never actually manufactured the steel ammo, but it was a hopeless case nonetheless.

To make the gun work, they had added grooves in the chamber, so that some of the gas would press on the exterior of the case to release it. The main fault of the CETME rifle is that as soon as the climate gets moist, firing the gun without immediately cleaning it results in sticky cases. This design of the roller locking system is only good for lightly-powered ammunition. We had a very fortunate thing happen; the Germans had improved the gun enough so that it functioned, but later on I learned that Heckler & Koch had a trick up their sleeves. All of the guns were tested, and they had seven different-sized sets of rollers, so that if there was a problem they would put other rollers on the locking mechanism. They would change the rollers until everything worked properly!

SAR: Very pragmatic from the point of view of a demonstrator. What year was that?

Visser: 1958 as I remember. Because the Germans had changed the rollers and had gotten the first order for 400,000 rifles, the whole world wanted the CETME rifle in the form of the G3. They had to say no to worldwide orders, because they didn’t have the rights to sell outside of Spain, Portugal and Germany, I did! We did have plans to make the rifle outside of Spain, but I stopped those plans because I felt the design was not good. I got a call from Bonn, it was my good friend from the Ministry who said, “Henk, we cannot have this. Here we are, a great nation, and we cannot sell our own rifle. I’ll offer you a deal: I know you want to make 20mm ammo for those thousand Starfighters we have bought.” They were so far back, they bought 1,000 Starfighters and they didn’t know what gun was in it! He said, “You’ll get 33% of all orders for 20mm ammo if you relinquish the rights to sell the CETME rifle.” I said, “OK.” He immediately went and got his secretary to type up a document saying that I would forever get 33% of all the 20mm orders for the Germans. ANY 20mm ammo. It saved our neck. It was one of the best days of my life…I didn’t realize it at the time, but that was the end of our CETME involvement.

SAR: You were the link between CETME and Heckler & Koch?

Visser: Partly, yes. Heckler & Koch were not big shots. Their company wasn’t large enough at that time to make the big deals. They grew because of all these orders that came in from everywhere. Later they designed many important weapon systems. It was really something to see.

SAR: Henk, I would like to come back to the rifle design programs in more depth, later. If you share your experience as a collector with our readers, I am sure they would be interested. This may seem somewhat insensitive, but to obtain your collection must have cost a fortune; far above the income of a young Dutch boy who was on the Nazi death row.

Visser: Yeah, that’s about right. I have been very fortunate in my business decisions and made some very nice commissions. We can come back to that business later.

SAR: So, what was your passion?

Visser: Collecting guns. Well…really the military guns. That was the start, anything military I could get. Later it was the Dutch firearms and I sold my military collection to Bonn, it was the beginning of the museum they have now in Koblenz. 849 of my guns are still there – even my Gatling gun – the beautiful brand-new Gatling gun with the carriage and the ammunition car.

SAR: What was the Gatling, a British one?

Visser: No, an American one. The Colt 1883 model with the jacket around the barrel, and the tripod. One day in a military base, somewhere in America, near Picatinny I believe, a sergeant was cleaning up the attic, and he found this Gatling gun. It was brand new but completely taken apart, no one had ever looked at it. He went to his Colonel who said to get rid of it. And there, magically, was Val! (laughs) And who do you think bought it on the spot?

SAR:(Dolf) Yes, Val would certainly have been there! (We are discussing the late Val Forgette of Navy Arms, another international arms dealer of the good old days.)

Visser: I knew Val very well and he sold the gun to me. Very cheap, I might add. It was really a big affair, and when I left NWM they wanted to take it, but instead I sold it to Bonn, and the Gatling is in their museum today. Two of the magazines disappeared, it is sad that there are always people in museums stealing things. There were many rare guns in the military collection. One that I thought was very rare was a 7.62 NATO Gatling gun from GE. I was the only private guy in the world who had a brand-new one.

SAR: Gatling Gun, you mean an M134 Minigun?

Visser: Yes, I got it out of Vietnam…I had so much stuff there….I was working for Dutch intelligence at the time, so they arranged for a Shell tanker to haul all the stuff I had gotten to Singapore. I had 10 RPG-7 anti-tank launchers, with 200 rounds of HE grenades. The Dutch and the Germans wanted to test them.

SAR: And how about the testing?

Visser: Well, we finally got the shipment and it had to go on the deck of a Dutch destroyer in Singapore. They loaded it from the tanker onto the warship. I had managed to get a lot of interesting items for the collection during my time in Vietnam. With the RPG-7, we had to do some testing for the government. They decided that this test they wanted to run was too big for them and they made a deal with the Germans, who did a tremendously detailed testing. They even tested the glue on the wooden cases, they checked the labels to see where they were made, in Russia or East Germany. I still have one RPG-7 and an inert rocket at home. I was very interested in the American M72 LAW. I once owned six LAWS.

SAR: When did you get into the antique guns?

Visser: Slowly I got more and more interested in the antique guns…I had always hated them, so crazy and ugly they seemed to me…but then, because of my historical interests, I decided to get rid of anything that was non-Dutch. I had the best automatic pistol collection in the world, all the early Mausers, Bittners, Schonbergers, Borschards, Gabbit Fairfaxes, etc, etc. I sold them all in one lot to Dr. Sturgess, a good friend of mine. He came to my place the first time and I opened drawers for him, and he started sweating, he was going crazy. He was…really, I’ve never seen anybody so excited by my collection.

SAR: (Dolf) Even the Maxim automatic pistols came from you? I have them in my latest book.

Visser: Yes, Dolf, the Maxims as well! I was collecting automatic pistols when nobody was interested. I went to every gun shop in Switzerland where they hadn’t had the German occupiers to take everything, and there were a hell of a lot of people saying, “That old gun there, 150 francs and you can take it, with ammo too.” Those days are gone, you know. There was a gunsmith who I was talking about Lugers with, about how the prices of the Lugers had started going up, and he said, “You know, I have Luger serial number 0001, which was presented to my neighbor, an officer, in front of the troops.” It was the first Luger that the Swiss Army officially adopted. I said “That’s interesting, can I see it?” and he brought it to me in the holster. He said, “The normal price for this is 225 francs, but if you give me 275 then it’s yours.” Those were better days, you know? You would go into a gunshop and there would be a Mondragon rifle with special bayonet. It just doesn’t happen like that anymore.

SAR: Basically Henk, all the money you made you put into collecting guns?

Visser: Everything. I had no capital, no shares; I only had substantial commissions from sales. Eventually I sold my pistols and all my special ammo to Geoff Sturgess…but…it’s like a sickness, you know? I was at the Las Vegas Antique Show and there was a very rare Dutch gun there. It looks like a single-shot pistol, but it’s a three-shot pistol with a little channel where the powder goes for the first, second and third shot, and there is a Maastricht mark under the barrel. It was from the Funderburg Collection, a very famous collection. It’s in a catalog. I bought it for a lot of money! It’s crazy!

SAR: You’re preaching to the choir when you talk to Class 3 owners in the United States. You did a series of books on your collection of Dutch guns….

Visser: Yes, they are available commercially, but are out of print at the moment. The set weighs 22 kilos. Now I’m writing more books, one with the names of all of the Dutch gun makers, about 1,400 of them. Another book project that I was working on with two technicians, both specialists with Master’s degrees in History Drs. Martens en Drs. de Vries, was to write the story of Dutch weapons starting at the Napoleonic era. As these books were written in Dutch they will be translated into English and the 3 volumes will be condensed into one. There is another book in English, almost finished, about a very special German – who later became an American – Otto von Lossnitzer, the father of the modern aircraft revolving guns.

Look for a link to the second half of our smallarmsreview.com interview with Henk Visser in an upcoming SAR newsletter when we look at Vietnam, Oerlikon, the changes to the Stoner 63 system and the innovative Mecar rifle grenade programs, as well as Visser’s work to restore Dutch firearms in Russian museums. – Dan Shea

At the end of the World War I, that “War to End All Wars,” there were many lessons learned about the weapons and threats that would be encountered. This was a new kind of war; machine guns, armored vehicles, aircraft, Zeppelins, and underwater craft were among the evolving threats. The U.S. military called once again on the great John Moses Browning, weapon designer extraordinaire, to produce a new heavy machine gun round to counter the new threats. There are different theories on how Browning arrived at the .50 BMG cartridge; one camp believes he simply upsized the U.S. 30.06 cartridge; another that he scaled up the German 1918 13.2x92mm anti-tank cartridge. In truth, it was a combination of both. By 1921, Browning had developed the .50 BMG cartridge as well as the M2 machine gun and its link system; these are still in use today, a century later. There are improvements, of course. The guns went from water-cooled to air cooled, and refinements were made to the cocking system and mounts, but this long-lived system is still on the front lines around the world today.

As an aside, gunners are taught to reach up under the retracting charging handle and pull it to the rear, as opposed to reaching over the top, wrist behind the handle. It’s widely believed this method gives better leverage, but that’s not the real reason. Browning’s first designs had a “bottle” charging handle that was directly in the bolt and traveled with the bolt, and if the operator reached over the top to charge and the cartridge fired, it could break the operator’s wrist in recoil. The retracting charging handle was designed to separate the functions. There is a stud that is in the bolt, and the new charging system pulls that to the rear. If there is an accidental firing while the operator holds the handle, the bolt goes to the rear, but the handle is disconnected. No broken wrist. In the ensuing century, there have been many modifications such as this, but the core system, the M2 Heavy Barrel machine gun, “Ma Deuce,” is still with us.

The major issue with the system, the biggest operator malfunction, and an issue since day one, is that the barrel is removed and installed by the operators in the field and need to be properly gauged before firing. This requires a set of headspace and timing gauges, as well as proper training. It also takes a significant amount of time to do this properly, especially under pressure in combat. Threading the barrel in and out, and headspacing and timing as needed, is an operator distraction. Most machine gunners know their guns, and develop little tricks to shortcut the system. But unless they’ve been taught to “read the brass” and properly headspace and time the gun, those shortcuts don’t equal proper field performance.

Enter the quick-change barrel (QCB) concept. There have been many attempts at this, a few successful. All share two things; first, interrupted threads where the barrel locks to the extension, and second, a method of guiding the barrel in correctly and rotating into position, which is done with a pin.

What style of QCB system is in our inventory?

This is a very important question for those in procurement who already have some M2 QCB machine guns in their inventory.

Essentially, whether the pin is on the barrel or on the barrel support designates what basic style of QCB you have. The U.S. DoD-adopted system is the M2A1, and the pin is on the barrel with a guiding slot in the barrel support. The other systems where the pin is part of the barrel support and the guiding slot is in the barrel are variants of the M2A2. Look to the photos to further identify which system you have if you are matching new orders or adding support parts.

The strength of the pins used in all systems are an issue, and how to repair them if damaged. The basic M2A1 pin diameter is .376 inches, and it is installed into the barrel as shown in the M2A1 photos. The M2A2 pin diameter is .446 and it is a replaceable part in the barrel support. So, if damaged, this is easily repaired at the depot level. For the M2A1, they use a TIG system to install the guidance pin in the barrel well. Because of the apparent issue with M2A1, barrel pins being damaged by exuberant and perhaps not so observant operators, U.S. Ordnance can repair existing barrels by installing a new stud, but they’ve also come up with a solution for government consideration. A pin of the same diameter and height is used, but it has a wider base and a not so radical 90-degree angle at its base. It has a much more supportive radius, and is more robust and should limit the damage done by improper assembly of the M2A1 systems. The M2A2 and M2A2-N do not suffer from an issue here, as stated, the guidance pin is replaceable in the barrel support.

As another aside, if the barrel guidance pin is removed from the barrel support of the M2A2 system, regular M2HB barrels can be used in the system for in an emergency or training scenario.

Manroy Engineering, FN Herstal, General Dynamics, Ohio Ordnance Works, and U.S. Ordnance have all been manufacturers of variants of QCB. I’ve had the pleasure of working with all of the above over the years, testing the firearms, and there are many fine products. That said, on my recent visit to U.S. Ordnance in the Reno, Nevada area, I confirmed that US Ordnance is in production and support of all of the QCB variants, and is the U.S. DoD contractor supplying the U.S. M2A1 to the U.S. military and allies with foreign military sales or private purchase contract ability. They can fill orders for new guns, provide rebuilds, and repair/support parts with almost any .50 BMG variant. Thus, this report has focused on information gained at the U.S. Ordnance facility.

During the tour of its manufacturing facility, U.S. Ordnance employee Beaux Armand explained the full testing procedure. Most impressive is the requirement to build ten guns, run them through all gauging, testing and cleaning, then completely disassemble all ten, mix the parts and then gauge and test again. All ten guns must pass this rigorous acceptance testing. More about the gauging is in the accompanying photos and captions. 

We at SADJ hope this look into the QCB world of .50 caliber machine guns helps you to understand what’s on the market, properly identify what may be in your inventory, and answer the questions you might have. I’m available regarding serious enquiries on technical issues, as always, at info@chipotlepublishing.com. U.S. Ordnance can be contacted for further information at sales@usord.com.

The SAW; the “Squad Automatic Weapon.” Looking at the photo above, astute observers will note, “Dan, that’s not the SAW, it’s an M240.”

Actually, the M240 is a squad automatic weapon… from the old school definition. In the 10- to 12-man infantry squad, there were mostly riflemen, variously one or two automatic riflemen (the 1918 BAR guys who later were the guys with the full auto switch on their M14), grenadiers, and each rifleman usually had secondary responsibilities. Historically, there’s no squad automatic weapon (machine gun) in the military table of organization and equipment (TOE) at the squad level. The weapons platoon provided the machine gun and lighter mortar support to the squads, as directed. This meant the M1917A1, M1919A4 and A6, M2HB, and later the M60 general purpose machine gun, then the M240G and B variants were all part of the weapons platoon, not the infantry squad.

So, why did we call them Squad Automatic Weapons? Basically, these were support weapons for specially trained machine gunners to deploy in support of the squad, at order from the platoon or company, and had to perform suppressive fire missions and other machine gunner jobs at 1000 meters plus, as well as in closer fighting. 7.62mm was considered the minimum caliber for that. During the Vietnam War, the M60 drifted into more squad level usage, and by the 1970s when the Squad Automatic Weapon program began, a smaller caliber firearm had been decided on with 5.56x45mm round, the same as used by the M16A1 being the final choice. By 1980, the FN Minimi was chosen in the (X)M249 configuration and after various Product Improvement Programs, in 1986 the M249 began integration to the infantry squad. This allowed a belt fed machine gun in every squad, albeit in a smaller caliber with diminished range and capability compared to the 7.62mm machine guns. My personal opinion was that it was more of a belt-fed rifle than a SAW, but the 5.56x45mm M249 has proven itself on the battlefield many times.

In a 1980s parallel development, the U.S. military wanted to replace the M60 GPMG. Saco Defense had the M60E3 then the lighter M60E4, which failed in competition with the M240G, which was the dismounted version of the M240 tank guns. The 240G was, basically, the Belgian MAG-58 that was in use by many nation’s militaries. Don’t confuse the M60E4 of those 1980s trials, with the actual M60E4-issue gun made by U.S. Ordnance today, which is a much more evolved and proven system.

The M240 series guns are large machine guns, larger than the M60 GPMG, but considerably more reliable, and with a longer life. The M60 was designed in the 1950s as a 100,000 round maximum gun. We spoke with the designers back in the 1980s and had a lesson on that issue. They never intended it to be more than a 100,000-round gun. In Vietnam, a door gunner might do more than that in a month of hammering treelines around hot LZs. Thus, the unique receiver stretch gauge… and the advent of the M240G & B series machine guns.

U.S. Ordnance is well known around the world as the manufacturer of the U.S. M2HB and M2A1 machine guns, MK19 Mod 3 grenade machine guns, the M240 series, and the M60E4 and M60E6. So why would they add the M249 “SAW” to their pallet of machine guns?

There is definitely a supply void for the M249 system. There are at least a dozen countries that count on the Minimi/M249 system, and many others that have smaller user populations but larger needs. There are many requirements in the defense industry for M249 as well as support for existing guns.

U.S. Ordnance is an agile company, they are able to focus quickly on a problem, and move into reliable production. We’ve been involved in many machine gun programs, several involving M249 production, and our confidence level in the expertise at U.S. Ordnance is very high. The welding of sheet metal requires very experienced fixture designers, as warpage is always a big issue. I recently toured the facility again, and went through the production lines for the M249 with their production manager.

U.S. Ordnance is bringing their full engineering capability to the table. Their ability to quickly produce machine guns in volume, with high quality and very reliable function, is legendary in today’s market. I reviewed the production line, examined the end products, and as in the past, when I’ve tested their M240 and M60E6 with military spec live firing, we plan to do a 25,000 round live fire program very soon. SADJ will report on this as soon as we have finished. It would seem that adding the M249 machine gun, the Para variant, and support/parts capability to U.S. Ordnance’s production would be a very good fit. We’ll follow up with the full mil-spec test report as soon as it’s done.    

M249 MACHINE GUN SPECS

Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO
Weight: 17.06lb (7.73kg) w/bipod & tools
Length: 32.875- 35.25 inches (835-895mm) Complete M249
Barrel Length: 21in or 18in (533mm or 457mm)
Rifling Twist Rate: 1:7in RH
Cyclic Rate of Fire: 700-900 RPM

We at SADJ wanted to cover the history of U.S. grenade machine guns, and with a recent visit to US Ordnance, the prime manufacturer of the MK19 Mod 3, it seemed like a perfect time. Later in this article, we’ll cover the modern MK19 system and improvements in depth. But first, a look at where we’ve come from...

Throwing grenades is nothing new. Reports of tossing explosives at enemies go back to the dark ages and certainly many armies had “grenadiers” in the 1700s and 1800s; light the fuse, toss the grenade. It wasn’t until mechanical fuses and primer firing were evolved that the idea of launching grenades automatically occurred. There are many early patents for weapons designed to launch explosive devices, but until the 1950s, the U.S. didn’t take the idea too seriously. With the advent of the 40x46mm grenade and its legendary M79 launcher, wheels started turning in the minds of designers and soldiers alike. Evolution of the single shot launchers has been covered in-depth by SADJ in the past; it is the idea of the U.S. designed, belt-fed, quickly repeating launchers that is our subject.

A proper timeline would be in two lines; the 40x46mm low velocity rounds, and the 40x53mm high velocity rounds. LV rounds have a range of 350-400 meters and can be shoulder fired or fired in a vehicle-mounted full-auto launcher, the HV rounds can go out to 2200 meters and are not for shoulder fired launchers.

Approximate Milestones for 40×46 Low Velocity Development:

1950s: Development of the 40x46mm low velocity grenade, and M79 launcher.
1965: Development and deployment of the MK18 Mod 0 crank fired launcher.
1968-71: Development and deployment of the MK20 Mod 0 automatic launcher.
1968: Development and deployment of various XM174E2 launchers.
1968: Development and deployment of the dual caliber M129 helicopter gun.

Approximate Milestones for 40×53 High Velocity Development:

1964: Final evolution of the 40x53mm high velocity grenade.
1966: MK19 Mod 0 design at Naval Ordnance Station, Louisville.
1969-74: Development of the Hughes XM175 series of launchers.
1968: Deployment of the first MK19 Mod 0 to Vietnam.
1971: Deployment of the first MK19 Mod 1 to Vietnam.
1974: Development of the MK19 Mod 2, not fielded.
1970s (Approximate): 600 MK19 Mod 2 Aluminum receiver guns- Israel.
1984-1989: Final development and manufacture of the MK19 Mod 3 by Saco Defense, then 1990s General Dynamics, and currently US Ordnance.

“The Honeywell Gun,” variously called the XM172, or the MK18 Mod 0, this was a crank fired belt fed, with 40x46mm ammunition; the same ammunition used in the M203/M79/M320 system. The ammunition is pre-loaded into a tape that holds the case in line with the barrel. Two rounds were fired per full revolution of the belt, allowing for slow, ranging fire, or firing up to about 250 rounds per minute. Belts were 24- or 48-round lengths. This was into action in about 1965 and survived in various places for U.S. forces (Navy) in Vietnam, primarily on “PBRs” (patrol boat, river) although some use on Chinook helicopters working over landing zone perimeters was seen.

MK18 Mod 0 with the cover open, showing the lower rotor with a round in position, and the upper rotor inside the cover. The two rotors are keyed together so that when the top cover is down, each rotor makes half of the chamber. Since it is Hi-Low pressure, low velocity, the round can be fired like this, and much like a revolver, the projectile must enter a separate barrel. The rounds were initially held in a metallic tape, since they didn’t need to be extracted, the tape simply came through with empty cartridge cases in it. This was later changed to a reloadable Mylar backed fabric which, for many, doubled as a grenadier’s belt for the M79 shooters.

Around 1966, the Navy wanted a better system than hand-cranking. Colonel George M. Chinn, author of the famous five-volume series of books “The Machine Gun” was involved. His team at Naval Ordnance Station in Louisville, Kentucky was simultaneously involved in designing an automatic grenade launcher to replace the crank-fired MK18 and, by 1967, the team had the boxlike MK20 Mod 0 in 40x46mm, and was preparing for the new MK19 system in 40x53mm.

The MK20 is an unusual design, the cocking handle is pushed forward, and the barrel moves forward and stays “cocked.” On pushing the trigger, the barrel springs to the rear, over the grenade, pushing it onto the firing pin and the barrel moves forward with the projectile moving forward in its bore. The cycle repeats as long as the trigger is depressed. Production was ended in 1971, when Chinn’s group was advancing the MK19 system.

The MK19 Mod 0 was fielded, at first, in 1968 in small numbers in Vietnam, and was an unreliable system. It utilized the newly designed 40x53mm round, and fired from an “open bolt” but using ‘advance primer ignition’. This means the firing pin struck the primer before the cartridge was fully seated and in battery. The Mod 1 debuted as in this example in 1971 and, by 1974, it was evident that there were reliability issues and a “Mod 2” was designed but not implemented. These were all done by Colonel Chinn’s team at the Naval Ordnance Station in Louisville, Kentucky.

There was, in fact, a production of the Mod 2. The MK19 Mod 2 Israeli contract gun in 40x53mm with an aluminum receiver. Approximately 600 were made. There’s no clear historical evidence pointing to the location of actual manufacture; at Naval Ordnance, or as a technical data package exported to Israel, perhaps with parts for assembly abroad.

In any event, these functioned but were not advanced into larger production and the MK19 Mod 3 replaced them in service. The Israeli Mod 2s were sold on the surplus market, and the parts were initially offered as “MK19 Mod 3” replacement parts in the mid-2000s, but of course none of the parts interchanged with the Mod 3 guns. Some steel receivers were made and project guns tested in the U.S. by a variety of smaller manufacturers, but there was a clear size and parts difference with the issue MK19 Mod 3. Today, it appears these parts are offered as “MK19 Mod 2.5” complete guns in a modern production, new receiver program. Not to discourage potential end users, but these are not compatible with the MK19 Mod 3 system, which is physically larger and does not interchange parts. It would be inadvisable to mix the systems and support, so if the Mod 2.5 is chosen, it should be supported on its own and verification of spare parts supply should be done.

M129: This is a unique electrically operated system that had a cam path in the receiver housing, but instead of the bolt traveling in that path like a Gatling or an M134, the barrel reciprocated. The barrel would start in the forward position, and when fired would cam back over the round, fire it, then move forward for extraction. These were mounted in chin pods on the front of many Huey gunships in Vietnam as well as other rotary winged aircraft. It replaced the very similar M75 system which had accuracy issues, among other problems. The M129 could fire either 40x46mm or 40x53mm grenades, depending on how the feed was set up.

The XM174E2 was a drum fed 40x46mm automatic gun on tripod that was made in very small quantity in the late 1960s by Aerojet Ordnance & Manufacturing Company. These made a shadowy appearance in Vietnam: Colonel David Lutz, USMC ret’d, told this author once of how he’d found two of these XM174E2s with drum feeds at a base armory and took them to his area of operations in the A Shau valley. He and his men were quite impressed with the accuracy and firepower in fighting the Vietcong and NVA, and wanted more of them. As Colonel Lutz (Lt. Lutz at the time) stated it “Then, adult supervision showed up, demanded to know where we had gotten these, and took them away in that time-honored military tradition of if it works well, you can’t have it.”

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, there were two versions of the M175 40x53mm grenade machine gun; first was the XM175AL (above, left) which had a milled, rounded receiver, and the second version XM175ST (above, right) had a boxlike sheet metal receiver. Hughes Gun Systems in Culver City, California was the design group and manufacturer. Both were open bolt firing, link-belt fed, could be converted to be right- or left-feed, and did not require external power like the M129. The M175 was designed initially for ground vehicle use, and then the vision changed for it to become a manually operated helicopter door gun.

More on the MK19 in the Modern Day….

In the 1980s, FNMI in South Carolina was awarded the contracts for the M16A2, the M249 SAW, the M240G, and the MK19 Mod 3, all at the same time. Chief Engineer George Kontis described the situation, “We knew we could not properly perform all four of the contracts simultaneously, and the contracting officer did as well, and offered our choice of three—leave one behind. After a full review, I determined that the MK19 Mod 3 TDP and learning curve would be the hardest, so FNMI withdrew from the MK19.”

Saco Defense was awarded the contract for MK19 Mod 3, and it took almost six years to develop the TDP and production process on the especially difficult receiver and bolt production. We visited the Saco facility numerous times during this period and tested the weapon in many of the phases of production along with the M6E4 program run by Marc Desrochers. Kevin Sullivan of today’s Nostromo company was project manager in the mid to later MK19 program success. Saco was bought out by General Dynamics, and the GD MK19 Mod 3 production was in full delivery for many years. Several other companies have tried to go into production, but the advantage goes to larger companies, and indeed the U.S. DoD wanted a secondary manufacturer capability during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars; ATK was awarded this, with FN Manufacturing as a subcontractor on the receivers and bolt bodies.

In the 1990s, I was involved in importation of special tripods and mounts from Vinghog of Norway for my USG customers. At that time, the accepted first burst hit probability at 1000 meters for the MK19 Mod 3 on M3 tripod with fixed cradle was approximately 53%. In our testing for U.S. government agencies, we ascertained that the HK GMG had a much higher first burst hit probability, and much of that advantage was in the tripod and soft mount as well as a good sighting system. (GMG testing for this author started in 1993 and continued through the Yuma Proving Ground tests in 1996-97. It’s a fine GMG but not the subject of this article).  

The customers wanted to retrofit their MK19s to gain similar accuracy. With the addition of the special Norwegian soft mount, the Adjustable Sight Mounting Bracket and some rudimentary head’s up sights with 40mm gradients, we brought the MK19 Mod 3 reliability to about 85% for first burst at 1000m. My point? The MK19 Mod 3 is an excellent grenade machine gun that needs mount stability and proper sighting. The advancements since that time have been by leaps and bounds, with the ability to land short bursts at long ranges increasing exponentially.

The MWO

There is a program that came out of the accuracy testing that was done. In June of 2002, a five-year plan was adopted for the MK19 Mod 3s in the U.S. Army system. MWO 9-1010-230-50-1 was implemented with an expected completion date of June 2007. However, that was only in the U.S. Army and later USMC/USN inventories; there are still tens of thousands of MK19 Mod 3 around the world that need this upgrade.

The purpose of this particular modification work order (MWO) is to convert the MK19 Mod 3 Grenade Machine Gun, to the MK19 Mod 3 with Adjustable Sight Mounting Bracket. Maintenance time is reduced and there is now a structural mounting point for fire control devices. The previous “sight mount” was a half-step, providing a not very secure rail base to the existing rear sight body. With this new purpose-designed mounting base, a variety of enhanced sighting devices can finally be used. The modification kit has the trapezoidal mounting base & screws, along with directions, and, for the armory, a fixture for drilling. This MWO was used as a vehicle to provide some upgrading of other parts, in particular the firing pin, firing pin sear, cam cocking, cocking lever and an adjustable secondary drive lever. 

US Ordnance has the contracts for the M60E4 (the Navy SEALs’ MK43), the US M2A1 .50 caliber, as well as M240 series and other M2 guns. After several years of research and prototyping, then going into production, US Ordnance perfected their MK19 Mod 3 manufacturing procedures. They had also inherited one of the original technical data packages (TDPs) that came from Colonel Chinn, and benefitted from employees who worked the original Saco and General Dynamics programs. In their arrangements with General Dynamics and the U.S. government, US Ordnance contracted to be the manufacturer of the MK19 Mod 3 grenade machine gun. They are the official U.S. government contractor for this system, as well as for foreign military sales (FMS) and sales to allied buyers. SADJ toured the manufacturing facility recently, and with the new U.S. government contract to supply all MK19 Mod 3 and repair parts, US Ordnance is preparing for a full mil-spec live-fire test, which we will participate in and bring the report to our readers. There is a complete upgrade program that should be available to most longtime users of the MK19 Mod 3 system. Rather, it is available, but many end users are not aware of it. I have participated in several over the years, but US Ordnance is the primary on this type of project. They can gauge your existing guns, recommend the upgrades, perform them in the factory or set up on site programs. This will not work on the MK19 Mod 1, Mod 2, or the “Mod 2.5” as can be seen in the history of the development, they are different guns from the most prolific and reliable Mod 3. Contrary to some advertising and “internet wizards,” the parts of those other models do not interchange with the MK19 Mod 3 40mm Grenade Machine Gun, and it is our sincere hope that this guide will help identify what systems are in place, and how to upgrade, repair, and maintain them.

Meanwhile, in the USSR…

While the U.S. was developing the 40x46mm and 40x53mm grenade machine guns, the Soviets were designing, as well. In 1965 the AGS concept was born and by 1971, production had begun. The AGS-17 30x29mm Grenade Machine Gun is a lightweight, tripod or vehicle mounted open bolt grenade launcher. It’s quite effective, and the smaller diameter, longer grenades have an almost spear-like travel to target. However, at 1700 meters range the time to target is very long, due to the high trajectory arc. Typically, the AGS is drum fed with 29 linked rounds per drum. SADJ has covered these extensively in the past and the analysis can be found at our websites.

Grenade Launcher Ammunition

40x46mm HE Fragmentation Hi-Low pressure, low velocity cutaway round for the M203/M79/M320 type launchers. The multiple fuses are in the front, the fragmentation ball is in the center (without energetics), and the base shows how the Hi-Low pressure system works. The primer is fired, igniting propellant in the central chamber which expands. When it reaches X pressure, it blows out through the vent holes into the sides into a much larger expansion chamber, creating a lower pressure that “pushes” the grenade into the barrel and downrange. Range is 350-400 meters.

At center is the 40x53mm Hi-Low pressure, high velocity cutaway round for the MK19/GMG and other Grenade Machine Gun systems, it is evident from the thick walls of the spherical chamber that there is much more pressure involved here. The cartridge case is 9mm longer than the 40×46 low velocity (M203) round, and the 40x53mm round cannot be chambered in the shoulder fired launchers. Range is out to 2200 meters, depending on firing platform.

Right is the VOG-25 40mm grenade, a “caseless” round that is front loaded into the barrel of the GP-25/30/34 underbarrel launchers. When the primer is struck, it ignites the propellant in the chamber at the very bottom, the expanding propellant gasses vent out into the base of the launcher forming the secondary low-pressure chamber and drive the grenade down the bore and downrange. There is no cartridge case left, it has all left the launcher downrange. Range is 350-400 meters.

Eugene Morrison Stoner is the designer of what became the M16 system, but he was far more than that. He was a weapons designer for sure, but his interests included rotary winged aircraft, boats, and many other things. He was a genius on many levels.

Stoner was born on 22 November 1922, in Gasport, Indiana, an irony not lost on many AR-15 family collectors. He was a WWII veteran of the USMC, serving as an aviation ordnance technician in El Toro, the South Pacific, the Philippines, Okinawa, and in North China. He died 24 April 1997 in Palm City Florida. As a veteran, he had a solid understanding of what traits an infantryman wanted from a fighting rifle; it should be simple, reliable, robust, and accurate.

Most people today understand the effect Stoner had on modern weaponry; this article is not really about that. What we’re here to discuss is the birthday event that Stoner’s close friend and business partner C. Reed Knight, Jr, put on to celebrate Stoner’s 100^th birthday.

In all their years of friendship, Mr. Knight had managed to hunt down and collect almost all the Stoner designs. Hundreds of firearms were found, and in the process, one of the most amazing small arms collections in the world grew to fantastic size; first in Vero Beach, then in Titusville, Florida. The collection is referenced as either the Knight Collection, or more properly, the Institute of Military Technology. Reed Knight had a lot of dreams. He pursued, adjusted, and excelled at many, but a fervent one was to create a university, more or less, for mechanical engineers to learn firearms design. The institute provided the road map and the collection… well, it’s a working reference collection, one of the finest in the world. The collection goes far beyond just the designs of Stoner and Knight, it covers the development of small arms in almost every country in the world and provides an amazing glimpse into the weapons of our enemies and allies.

When it became close to Mr. Stoner’s 100^th birthday it appeared the date would coincide with the 60^th anniversary of the M16 and 40^th anniversary of Knight’s Armament Company, Mr. Knight and his staff sprang into action with a very ambitious plan; a party for 1200-1400 people. Many members of Knight’s Armament and the Institute’s employee groups devoted a lot of time to make impressive presentations. Attendees were treated to a band, local barbecue, and facility tours. The list of attendees was impressive, many manufacturers and government people were there, as well as members of the general public who had signed up for the tours. All in all, it was an excellent day. Good barbecue, good company, and one of the world’s most