Hiram Percy Maxim (1869-1936) was the offspring of the inventor of the world’s first modern machine gun, Hiram Stevens Maxim. H. P. Maxim started developing one of the world’s first modern metallic firearm silencers, shortly after the dawn of the 20th century.

The nature of supersonic (beyond the speed of sound) gas flow from a firearm’s discharge was not totally understood by scientists in the early 1900s. They did not have ultra high-speed photography available back then, and they did not understand how a flow of supersonic propellant gas would create a loud gunshot noise. Regardless of this, Maxim did understand that the sudden and violent exit of high velocity propellant gas from the muzzle of a firearm was directly responsible for the loud noise associated with gunshot discharges.

We in a more contemporary world now realize that most physical objects moving through our atmosphere at a rate of speed beyond 1,100 feet per second (fps) will create the phenomenon known to the world as sonic crack. The tip of a leather whip, when snapped rapidly, moves at a rate of speed beyond 1,100 fps, creating its own sonic crack. A bullet moving beyond 1,100 fps creates two similar sounds, one from the front and one from the rear. Surprisingly, human ears can hear both sounds and discern them, one from the other, if the mind concentrates hard enough.

In today’s world, a common U.S. military M16 rifle discharges a 62-grain bullet at a velocity close to 3,000 fps. The mass of propellant gas, being much lighter and extremely elastic, leaves the muzzle of that same firearm at roughly 16,000 fps – many times beyond the speed of sound. It is not widely known, but the energy of exiting propellant gas from a high-powered rifle constitutes roughly 90% of the force available, while the bullet represents but 10%.

A mass of exiting propellant gas forms or gathers into a hardened front resembling a curiously rounded, elongated disc – known to ballistic scientists as a Mach disc. With a .308 rifle, that Mach disc is close to 5 inches in diameter, and it actually turns into a solid state for a fleeting moment. The supersonic disc projects a very loud noise in all directions, like an extremely loud speaker. That violent impulse of sound is so loud and so powerful that it can and will cause permanent hearing damage to any unprotected individual in close proximity.

Most firearm discharges form Mach discs. With a .22 LR rimfire pistol the exiting gas (only about a grain in weight) forms a smaller, elongated Mach disc well under an inch in diameter. Even though the smaller Mach disc is very temporary (less than 6/1,000 of a second in many cases), it causes an impulse sound that is so loud that it too will also cause permanent hearing damage to those unprotected ears in close proximity.

It is extremely unlikely that Maxim knew what a Mach disc was in the early 1900s, but he soon figured out that he had to first capture and then slow exiting propellant gas from a firearm in order to silence its report. Maxim used soft, malleable iron to form gas shearing baffles of various shapes, using stamping procedures and stepped metal forming technology. A brilliant engineering graduate of The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (at age 16) Maxim experimented with different techniques and baffle designs for capturing the violent blast of gas discharge – thus confining the (still unknown) Mach disc and slowing the velocity of the remaining gases below the speed of sound in air before they exited. His vision and hard work were eventually rewarded. At the age of 40, Maxim was awarded U.S. Patent No. 916,885 for his Silent Firearm, on March 30, 1909.

Maxim’s patent and deceptively simple baffle design resulted in a silencer about 1.35 inches in diameter by a touch under 5 inches long. Because all firearms of the day used relatively low, open sights, he developed his silencer with an unusual eccentric design that didn’t occlude the view of iron sights on rifles and pistols.

The Maxim Model 1909 silencer worked extremely well on .22 rimfire rifles, since they achieved a fair (but subsonic) bullet velocity with relatively low terminal gas pressure. The .22 caliber lead bullets of the day were covered with beeswax mixed with animal fat, which tended to protect a rifle’s bore. Highly corrosive materials in the priming and propellant gas required that a Maxim silencer be removed and boiled in soapy water after each and every use. It then had to be drained, dried and re-oiled to prevent destructive corrosion. Most of the early Maxim silencers have been ruined over the years because they lacked this high level of care. Almost all ammunition in the 21st century is now loaded with non-corrosive priming compounds and propellants, which currently negates the need for extreme care. Crud will continue to build up in .22 caliber silencers, but it will at least be non-corrosive crud.

The use of the 1.35 x 4.5-inch Model 1909 Maxim silencer on .22 rimfire rifles was very successful, but there must have been problems with rotation (clocking) of the narrow part of the can so that it could be nearest the top side of the weapon to which it was fitted. A silencer gets most of its axial alignment from mating with a shoulder at the base of threads on a barrel, with rotational alignment being almost an afterthought, initially. Rotational alignment is a real problem with an eccentric silencer, however, and thread wear (or QD coupling wear) eventually causes more and more rotation to occur. Thus a can that was properly affixed when new would eventually have the thicker side of its body intruding into the sight plane as threads and seat wore with use. Maxim provided an adaptor of hardened steel, with interrupted threads. This allowed the silencer to be easily attached and removed.

A perceived need for a thinner silencer design soon led to the adoption of the 1910 Model, which was about an inch longer in the body, smaller in diameter and considerably less effective. The longer, thinner 1910 Model silencer worked fairly well on both pistols and rifles, but it is not considered as desirable as the earlier 1909 model by suppressor cognoscenti. Again, the longer 1910 Model is much louder than the shorter, fatter, eccentric 1909 Model. An open space (containing no baffles) at the rear of the 1909 Model makes it more effective on a .22-rimfire rifle, but it still performs very well on a pistol.

Both models of silencers were sold by mail order, for about $5, a considerable sum back then. They shipped directly in a sturdy cardboard mailing tube with a metal screw cap, and with a U.S. postage stamp pasted directly on said cardboard tube. While the silencers were easily obtained, they required careful threading on a gunsmith’s lathe to prevent destructive baffle strikes by bullets. Major firearm manufacturers of the day sold weapons with factory-threaded barrels to accommodate Maxim silencers. Maxim also made hardened, interrupted thread couplings with shims that could be driven onto the ends of non-threaded barrels with a mallet. These fittings sometimes lacked accuracy because most barrels were not of standard and true dimension, but they did help with the difficult problem of rotational alignment. In truth, the fitting and installation of threads or a coupling by a gunsmith probably took a lot more time than it took the Maxim factory to actually manufacture the silencer itself. Few gun barrels are truly straight and concentric, especially those built in the early 1900s.

As the silencer industry progressed, quiet shooting became widely accepted. One was considered rude if he did not silence his firearm to avoid annoying family and neighbors during target practice. Finely crafted, stained and varnished Maxim boxes were filled with sand and used as indoor target backstops, so that target practice could be held indoors on special occasions and during festivities. The two-chambered boxes contained sand in the rear chamber to stop bullets. Densely packed rags in the front chamber kept the sand from leaking out. A replaceable wood panel in front kept the rags in place, and also provided a surface for mounting a target face.

Maxim and his silencers had a pretty good run for about 25 years. In the early 1930s, during the depths of the Great Depression, the U.S. Congress suddenly took it upon itself to ban all pistols in the country. This gun-grabbing act led to citizen anger and a massive public outcry. It resulted in a widespread and massive political correction during following congressional elections. The pistol ban was struck down in federal court, and quickly reversed a couple of years later. Unfortunately, some of the guilty legislators had another few years to run before their terms were up, and in 1934 they passed the National Firearms Act, which placed a restrictive tax on machine guns, shortened long firearms and a few related items.

This sudden legislative move in 1934 proved to be a devastating blow to the Maxim Silent Firearm Company. Fortunately for the survival of the company, it had already moved into the area of silencing internal combustion engines for motor-driven vehicles. Hiram Percy Maxim died a little more than a year later, from a very sudden illness.

Very few of the original, fragile, 1909 Maxim silencers exist today, most having been destroyed through loss, mishap, ATF confiscation or corrosion. Even though the Maxim silencer technology is over 100 years old today, it is still very good technology, and surprisingly effective in our contemporary world. It is interesting to occasionally use the historic Maxim 1909 silencers and compare them with what we have available today, since they are still quite competitive when used with subsonic rimfire ammunition and moderately long barrels.

The Maxim 1909 Model Silencer and Related Notes:

According to respected silencer expert Al Paulson, all of the original Maxim papers, patent drawings and original inked drawings remained in the hands of Maxim’s New York City attorney, who died many years ago. These were put into sealed storage in cardboard boxes in an attic of a law office in NYC, and only came to light about 10 years ago. At that time they were offered for sale for a handsome sum. I have not followed up on what became of them. I believe that they still exist, somewhere, and that the collection was not broken up. There is another collection of Maxim papers residing in a State Museum in Hartford, CT.

The original Maxim 1909 .22 LR silencer was said to have been the most effective of all of those built by the Maxim Company. It is easily the equal of many of those built during the 20th and 21st centuries. According to Al Paulson, the 1909 measured 4.88 inches in overall length by 1.35 inches in diameter. The main tube is a scant 4.55 inches in length. There is a 3.77-inch long groove pressed into the bottom of the dead soft tube, as a sort of key used to hold the baffles upright. The rear thread size is typically 1/2-20, RH. It weighs 6.8 ounces. In the past I have been able to examine an original Model 1909 that was attached to what apparently was at one time a Quackenbush .22 LR rifle, turned into a pistol and used for many years in a slaughterhouse. According to Al Paulson, the unit turned in a respectable 118 dB sound level when tested with 40-grain subsonic .22 LR ammunition on a pistol. The Model 1910 tested at 126 dB.

The Maxim 1909 used flat baffles with a deceptively simple, tiny scoop stamped into the rear face of each baffle with a punch. When used in combination with the eccentric design, the tiny scoops forced incoming propellant gas into the lower section of the eccentric can between each baffle. The 1909 Model was and still is remarkably effective. The two proximal (rearmost) baffles are of a thicker material and are about 3/8-inch apart. The rest of the baffles are about 1/4-inch apart, quite thin, and they go all the way up to the front end cap.

While brilliant in design, authentic Maxim construction is fragile. Maxim silencer construction was crimped, and it was definitely not solid. The dead soft metal in the main tube or body has very low tensile strength and little resiliency. Dropping the can on a hard surface could definitely injure alignment.

I am indebted to Al Paulson for clarification of a number of conflicting issues and information relating to the Maxim Silent Firearm Company. Because of the 100-year elapsed period of time there have been more than a few facts and events that took knowledge and research to reconfirm.

Located about half-way between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, is the community of Latrun. This hilltop town has a unique position in the history of the country of Israel. When we arrived at the site, it was immediately clear that this was the “high ground” tactically sought after in traditional battle, and further discussion disclosed how important this site has been from the 13th century BC to modern times. Here was the site of the Biblical battles of Joshua Bin-Nun against the Amorite kings (Joshua 10:12). This area was also a battlefield in the time of the Maccabis, the site of Judah the Maccabee’s battle against the army of Antiochus and his commander Gorgias, in which he defeated them and drove them to the sea (Proverbs 24:6).

More relevant to modern times, this is where the Israeli 7th Division – the second armored division set up during the War of Independence – fought to open the way through to besieged Jerusalem. These battles decided the fate of the War of Independence by freeing the capital city. The “Burma Road” was made to bypass the Latrun hill under Jordanian control, and the area was recaptured from the Jordanian Army during the Six Day War in 1967.

The museum site is called Yad La’Shiryon Latrun. This is the Memorial Site and Armored Corps Museum in Latrun, Israel but it is much more than that. Please see the sidebar for further information on what is on-site. Like most museums, it is imbued with a strong sense of patriotism and tells the story of the country from the perspective of its own politics. That said, this was an extraordinary presentation of tanks and armored vehicles, as well as a tribute to the sacrifices of the brave men and women who fought in their cause. When we entered what is called “The Tower of Tears” the memorial reached out so strongly that it was an emotional tribute impossible to mistake. We had just passed the sculpture of IDF soldiers leaping off of their Merkava tank, 5.56mm Galil rifles in hand, and walked into a tower where the walls were made of tank armor – pierced from shaped charges in battle – with water dripping down the walls into a pool underneath our feet, and circulating once again. The memorials are quite moving, and any soldier or person who has lost a loved one to battle will intuitively understand.

It’s Not Just a Museum or Memorial:
(From museum description)

First and foremost there is a Memorial complex, with the Wall of Names on which are inscribed the names of all 4,965 fallen soldiers of the Armored Corps in all of Israel’s wars; the Gate of Courage on which photographs of the fallen are projected twenty-four hours a day throughout the year; the Armor’s Tower of Tears (created by artist Danny Karavan); the Daily Memorial stand where a memorial service is held for all those who fell on each particular day, according to the Hebrew date; the Statue of Biography giving information about each fallen soldier; and “The Bind of Life” Synagogue where memorial prayers are held.

• Merkava Auditorium – an impressive hall where a presentation of the Armored Corps is projected simultaneously on nine screens.
• The AFV’s (Armored Fighting Vehicles) Museum with a spectacular display of over 150 armored vehicles.
• HERITAGE – Education Campus for Ethical Values and Nature. The Campus provides 250 students with full residential conditions, and those who study here include soldiers, students and Jewish youth from abroad. Even now, extensive educational activities are conducted there for soldiers and school-age pupils, inculcating them with a knowledge and love of Israel and teaching them about Israel’s military heritage, commemorating fallen armored soldiers, field studies, studies of bird migration, and more.
• The Armored Brigades Park – with brigade level monuments honoring and relating the story of the soldiers.
• The Trail of Time Museum – under construction. The museum will present the role of the Armored Corps in Israel’s battles and will conclude with a tank crew under war experience.
• The Allied Forces Monument – a salute by the Israeli Armored Corps to the Allied armored forces who defeated the Nazi war machine in World War II. This is the only monument of this kind in the world. The memorial is comprised of three World War II vintage tanks (American, Russian, and British), resting on a mound of gigantic stones, and alongside is a series of flags from all the countries that fought the Nazi enemy.
• The Museum of the Jewish Soldier in World War II – to be set up in the shadow of the Allied Forces Monument and enveloping it, preserving the legacy and telling the heroic story of the Jewish soldiers in the Allied Forces during World War II. In the meantime there is an Exhibition of the Jewish Soldier in World War II (400 sq. m.).
• The Hall of Valor, in honor of The Armor Corps soldiers who were decorated with the Valor Medal during the Israeli wars, along with the stories of these soldiers.
• The Hall of Commanders, telling the stories of all the commanders of the Israeli Armored Corps since the establishment of Israel in 1948.
• The out-door Exhibition of the Yom-Kippur war in 1973.
• Observation balcony, enabling an all-around view of the Latrun surroundings and including metal signs telling the history of Latrun area battles since Joshua Ben-Nun (the mid 13th century BC) up to The Six Day War in 1967.
• Data Center, including big library and multi-media documents regarding the Israeli Armor Corps and armor in the world.
• Amphitheater for up to 10,000 seats used for conferences, assemblies, ceremonies and so forth.

Historical Battles in the Latrun Area
(From the Museum literature)

• The Mid 13th century BC. One of the most famous battles led by Joshua Ben-Nun. The five Kings of Amorite laid siege on the city of Giv’on. Joshua Ben-Nun arrived from his encampment at Gilgal, and launched an attack on the five kings of the Amorite. The kings fled down the slopes of Bet-Horon
• 165 BC The Battle of Emmaus. Judah the Maccabee defeated Gorgias and his Greek Army.
• May 24-25, 1948 Operation Bin-Nun “A”. On the night between May 24-25, 1948 the 7th Brigade, which had been formed a mere 10 days earlier, attacked the Latrun complex in order to break the siege on Jerusalem and transport military forces, weapons and food to the city. The 32nd Battalion of Alexandroni Brigade, which was comprised mostly of new immigrants – many of them Holocaust survivors – was attached to provide reinforcement. According to the Brigade’s intelligence information several hundred local fighters were holding Latrun. But in fact, the Latrun complex was being held by two Jordanian battalions assisted by an artillery battalion under the command of the 3rd Brigade and reinforced by local irregulars. The 32nd Battalion under the command of Zvi German was ordered to capture the Latrun complex and the police fortress. The 72nd Battalion, commanded by Zvi Horvitz, had to capture the village of Dir-Ayub and to join forces in Sha’ar Hagai (Bab-el-Wad). After brutal fighting, the 7th Brigade had to retire from the fight.
• May 30-31, 1948 Operation Ben-Nun “B”. The decision to open the road to Jerusalem – at any cost – was made by the IDF General Staff shortly after the abortive operation Bin-Nun A. This came in response to the Israeli assessment that a massive combined attack by the armies of Egypt, Iraq and Jordan is imminent and would lead to the fall of Jerusalem. The task was again given to the 7th Brigade which was reinforced by the 52nd infantry Battalion of the Givati Brigade. The IDF’s first armored Battalion, the 73rd Battalion (later renamed 79th), was ordered to take the police station, the monastery and Latrun village. After a brutal battle, the Israeli forces had to withdraw again.
• June 9-11, 1948 The Burma Road. After two bitter failures at the Latrun bulge the 7th Brigade turned its efforts to lift the siege of Jerusalem by looking for an alternative road that would by-pass Latrun. The brigade paved a new path south of the Jordanian strongpoint which became the main supply route to the besieged Jerusalem. The siege of Jerusalem was finally lifted, enabling the city to continue fighting, ensuring the existence of its large population, keeping Jerusalem an integral part of the state of Israel and eventually becoming the nation’s capital. This hard to attack bypass road was dubbed the “Burma Road” (after the Burma Road from India to China, paved by the U.S during WWII).
• June 5-6, 1967 The Latrun Conquest. 19 years passed from the War of Independence, when the 7th Brigade punched a primitive by-pass road (the “Burma Road”) to besieged Jerusalem through the hills near the Jordanian-held positions around Latrun, until the reopening of the highway to Jerusalem – (today’s Road No. 1), this was accomplished with Israel’s dominance of the area during the Six Day War.

Getting there:

The Latrun location is about 46km from Tel Aviv, or a little over half-way from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. There are public buses that run between the two cities that have stops in Latrun, and private tours stop there as well. A taxi from Tel Aviv will be approximately 200 shekels ($60 USD) each way. If you have a rental car, take Road 1 towards Jerusalem, and there are road signs for the museum.

To contact the “Yad Lashiryon” Association:

Tel.: +972-8-9255268
Fax: +972-8-9255186
E-mail: yadlashiryon@gmail.com
Website: www.yadlashiryon.com
Mailing address:
Yad LaShiryon in Latrun
M.P. Shimshon 99762 Israel

During the Second World War, over 30 million 250-round fabric belts were procured for the U.S. Army to feed their different .30 cal. Browning machine guns used by the infantry.

The objective of this series of three articles is to describe the evolution and the many variants observed as a function of manufacturer, starter tang design, fabrics weave and color. Part 1 will be dedicated to design development and the different manufacturers; Part 2 will be dedicated to the numerous production variants and Part 3 will be dedicated to the various packings.

A first attempt to address this vast subject was provided by the author’s contribution in Dolf Goldsmith’s book The Browning Machine Gun – Volume III – Supporting the Rifle Caliber Brownings. Since that publication, much new information based on further surviving specimens and a key official U.S. report dated October 1945 shed further light on this subject. This latter report issued by the Chief of Ordnance/Industrial Service Office/Small Arms Division and entitled Machine Guns – Development and production of metallic belt link and fabric ammunition belt contains a wealth of extremely detailed data on production figures and historical background on development process. When applicable, some parts are literally excerpted from this report in the following article.

After the First World War, much of the development work on fabric machine gun belts was done by Russell Manufacturing Co. of Middletown, CT in cooperation with the Springfield Armory. The original M1917 machine gun belt was based on the U.S. Patent No. 1,168,876 by F. Frissell, assignor to the Russell Manufacturing Co., issued on January 18, 1916. This called for two distinct layers of fabric, each including a set of warp strands interwoven with a set of weft, or filling strands. Each set of warp strands was to be crossed at regular intervals from one face of the composite fabric to the other and back again to form pockets for the cartridges. However, it was found that only about one-half the warp strands could be crossed, for more would be so crowded as to make the edge objectionably wavy. Therefore, it was found necessary to cross only about half the warp strands and stitch the others in place at the point of crossing. This weaving feature is clearly illustrated in the patent drawings. As a result, the pockets were not as strong or rugged as desired and the cartridges were not firmly gripped.

These original M1917 belts are fitted with two tapered 4.5 inch long brass starter tangs riveted at each end of the belt to facilitate the insertion into the feed block. Cartridge pockets are numbered with ink markings every 25 rounds to indicate to the gunner the number of rounds that have been expelled from the belt. The fabric also bears an ink stamp referring to the Frissell Patent date which actually is January 18 1916. However, for an unknown reason, all belts observed are consistently wrongly inked “Pat. Jan. 18 ‘15” therefore showing 1915 instead of 1916. These original 250-round M1917 belts were still standard issue for the infantry until 1941.

Really intensive sampling and development work on fabric belts by Russell Manufacturing Co. was resumed in 1928. A new and more rugged belt was developed and accepted by 1933 and patented in November 17, 1936 by J. Hendley, assignor to the Russell Manufacturing Co., under number 2,061,072. It is a modification of the 1,168,876 patent in that it allows substantially all the warp strands to be crossed from one side to the other between pockets without undesirable distortion and without making the belt unduly wide at point of crossing. This is accomplished by a change in the weave which also permits the formation of a hollow pocket between the small ends of the cartridge pockets. This affords greater flexibility than is possible when this area is woven solid and achieves better alignment of the cartridges. The new design permits herringbone weave, twill weave or almost any manner of weave desirable. This new design of belt became standard for production of new belts by Russell from the late 1930s on.

It can be noted that the features of the 2,061,072 patent were not only incorporated in .30 cal belts but also in both .22 and .50 cal. Browning belts according to the patent number also inked on the latter two types of belts.

Since the stock of the early 250-round M1917 .30 belts on hand for the infantry was sufficient, the first contracts of .30 cal. belts produced following the 2,061,072 Patent were mostly intended for the Armored Force which required 100- and 150-round belts.

In October of 1941, it became apparent that the supply on hand of .30 cal. web belts for use by ground troops amounted to only about 25% of the total needed to meet requirements for M-Day (Mobilization Day). Furthermore, the need for belts loaded prior to packing and shipment, would generate a major increase in the number of 100- and 250-round belts needed, which in turn would necessitate a dramatic increase in manufacturing facilities.

In January 1942, Russell granted the government a non-exclusive, irrevocable, non-transferable royalty free license to manufacture, or to have manufactured, machine gun belts under their Patent No. 2,061,072 – this license to continue until one year after the cessation of the national emergency.

The very first war-time productions of 250-round belts were provided by the Russell Co. and the Schlegel Manufacturing Co. of Rochester, NY. For the first productions, Russell used the marking R.M.C. and then switched to THE RUSSELL MFG CO.

By June 1942, in addition to Russell and Schlegel, five more facilities had initiated production of the 250-round .30 caliber belt. In the next few months the remaining facilities who had received contracts initiated production. By end 1942, a total of 13 different U.S. manufacturers were involved in the production of 250-round cal. 30 fabric belts.

The first productions of George C. Moore Co. of Westerly, NY, were marked G.C.M. Co and then switched to GEO. C. MOORE CO.

To these must also be added the import by the Ordnance Department of a total of 489,700 belts from the British company Thomas French & Sons of Manchester from June through December 1942.

It can also be noted the existence of belts exhibiting standard features of U.S. belts but bearing the Canadian property mark “Arrow in C” with the manufacturer’s marking S.C.C. LTD. So far, such belts dated 1942 and 1943 have only been reported to the author bearing the Canadian Property Mark.

It remains unknown whether these are specific production by a U.S. manufacturer for export to Canada or Canadian domestic production. Some Canadian collectors suspect that SCC might stand for Syracuse Cordage Company of Syracuse, NY, but no real evidence to confirm that identification has come to light so far. Another educated guess is that SCC might stand for Samson Cordage Co corresponding to the Samson Cordage Works described in the U.S. Ordnance report of 1946. Here again, no real evidence to confirm this supposition is available. Pending reliable evidence, SCC remains as “unidentified.”

The following table summarizes the 14 different manufacturers as well as their production figures as provided in the 1945 report. Details on location of these companies were found in the Official American Textile Directory of 1923. So far, specimens manufactured by the Samson Cordage Works have not been definitively identified.

It can be noted that these production figures are different from those presented in Dolf Goldsmith’s book where only production figures between June 1942 and March 1943 are displayed.

From January 1942 until May 1944 a total of 28,283,433 belts were produced with monthly production rates rising and falling as a reflection of variation of demand for the material. The production output reached its peak monthly production in July 1942 when it reached 2,368,500 units. Then the output was diminished steadily to a low mark of 264,323 in July 1943 from whence it rose to 1,324,584 in December 1943. After this, production again fell off until it was terminated in May 1944.

The manufacture of these belts was begun again in 1945 when it was indicated that stocks were reaching a low level. In January 1945 a requirement of 3,000,000 belts was received. This was increased to 7,100,000 in February and to 11,200,000 in May. Steps were taken to secure production from six facilities. In June 1945, the requirement was reduced to only 4,250,000 belts. Production orders originally set up for the International Braid Co., Murdock Webbing Co., and the Oehrle Bros. Co. were cancelled and no production was realized from these companies in 1945. The Russell Manufacturing Co. realized first production in May, followed the next month by the George C. Moore Co. The Warren Featherbone Co. manufactured only 7,451 belts by V-J Day when all production was terminated, thus making Featherbone belts dated 1945 the scarcest WW2 U.S. cal. 30 Browning belt for collectors.

For 1945, the George C. Moore Co. produced 320,832 belts and the Russell Manufacturing Co had produced 1,703,372 belts when terminated.

All together, over thirty million 250-round .30 cal. ammunition fabric belts were manufactured during the war. The Link, Metallic Belt, Caliber .30, M1 was adopted by Ordnance Committee action in August 1945 for the belting all caliber .30 ammunition. This action reclassified the fabric belt as Limited Standard. (The author is deeply indebted to Frank Hackley, Anaheim, CA for the sharing of his knowledge on U.S. Small Arms Ammunition management system and to H.E. Wanting, Bedburg-Hau, Germany for his constant help in improving the manuscript and pinpointing the smallest inaccurate detail.)

By late 1941, Japan was rolling to take over the Pacific, preparing to bite down hard on Australia, New Zealand and nibble on other choice morsels of the oceanic lands. Due to Hitler’s stranglehold on the U.K.’s home islands, the lands down under were pretty much on their own for defense.

Like every nation defending against Germany and Japan, New Zealand had a severe shortage of small arms of every kind, but especially semiautomatic rifles and machine guns. In 1941, one interesting theoretical military weapon that stood between the Empire of the Rising Sun land invasion and the Kiwis was Philip Charlton’s theoretical machine gun, theoretically produced from an antique, bolt action rifle.

The Charlton rifle was his conversion of the Lee Enfield rifle of Boer War fame and was intended as a substitute for the Browning, Lewis and Bren machine guns of which Australia and New Zealand had very few, and which England could not supply, according to firearms historian Errol Albert Christ.

Christ notes, “The British had all they could deal with fighting Hitler’s ‘Blizkrieg,’ so that ordnance was not available to supply Australia and New Zealand. Even if the weaponry were available, the supply logistics would have been impossible. Those good folks had to improvise.”

The original Charlton automatic rifles were converted in 1941 from obsolete, bolt action Lee-Metford and Lee Enfield rifles from the Boer War era. Charlton himself referred to the guns as museum pieces in his written proposal to the government. It was to be used as a self-loading infantry rifle with the full-automatic capability available for tactical use. The planned issuance was to the Home Guard. The Charlton fired the .303 British service round, weighed 16 pounds unloaded, was 44.5 inches long, 13.3 inches high and 8.2 inches wide. It was gas operated and could fire approximately 600 rounds per minute.

“I should like to bring to your notice a semiautomatic attachment for service rifle, which I have perfected,” Charlton said when he appeared before the NZ Parliament and the Army to formally present his design in June of 1941. “…The almost complete absence of recoil enables the rifle to be fired from the side through a loop hole. It can be fired at arms length across the body. The attachment is very suitable for anti-aircraft work…” He went on to explain the fully automatic capability, as well

Immediate reaction from the political suits was nervous laughter. How was it possible to make a machine gun from an antique bolt action rifle? He was laughed out of the room, literally, by New Zealand’s prime minister and other parliament members.

However, Charlton was a design genius, had a working prototype, and knew if re-fitted rifles could keep back the horror of the Japanese, the Army was willing to listen and observe. They did so during Charlton’s second demonstration that fall.

According to John C. Osborne, a weapons adviser and researcher at the Queen Elizabeth II Army Memorial Museum in Waiouru, New Zealand, this second application, with a live demonstration, to army officials was conducted successfully in November 1941, with production to begin immediately.

Charlton had an Army contract for converting 1,500 of the Home Guard’s long magazine Lee Metford and long magazine Lee Enfield rifles, which were originally manufactured between 1889 and 1903.

Philip Charlton, who Osborne depicts as “having a very receptive mind and described by fellow engineers as very clever, especially to improving existing mechanical devices,” had actually begun designing weapon conversions before World War II began. He had seen drawings of G.T. Buckham and A.T. Dawson’s work with the Lee-Enfield-type rifle conversion to semiautomatic, but he saw that he could improve on their designs. His resultant selective-fire option worked very well. They looked chaotic and awkward, though, with the conversion kit installed externally. But, the rifle functioned perfectly and safely, according to all accounts.

In the New Zealand version, according to Windsor Jones, curator at the Waiouru National Army Museum, the stock was given a pistol grip and a foregrip, the buttstock was lowered in order to clear the modified action and the rear of the barrel had cooling fins. Charlton modified the sights, and changed the magazine-well to take a modified, larger capacity Lee-Enfield magazine, or a modified Bren magazine. He shortened the fore end so that the barrel could cool more efficiently, and so that the gas operation would fit with the foregrip attached to the gas tube shroud. He tipped the barrel with a muzzle brake and modified the barrel length. Also, unlike small arms of that era, this patchwork weapon was adapted to use a clip-on bipod for full auto fire stability.

Of course, all this had not come together to work on his first try. But, Charlton never let failure get in the way of his dream. One malfunction after another didn’t stop him from creating his gun that would do the job. According to Osborne, “Philip always discussed these problems with as many people as possible. He was determined to make the conversion work and, asking as many other knowledgeable engineers and gun aficionados for ideas as he could, proved to be successful. His final, patented design worked perfectly.”

Born in 1901, in Grimsby, Lincolnshire, England, Philip Charlton, an engineer by education and training, was destined to become a firearms design expert, according to period newspaper stories plus family member stories about him. He got his first .22 rifle, a B.S.A., for his 14th birthday. His love of firearms, along with countless hours of target practice with other gun buffs, plus his keen engineering mind prepared him for the work needed to develop his emergency rifle that would keep the Japanese at bay if they ever attacked New Zealand.

Charlton’s nephew, John P. Charlton, remembered that his uncle was passionate about intricate mechanical workings of all kinds. “When I knew him, he owned a Mk2 Jaguar, which he thought was one of the best cars in the world. He took me to the Auckland War Memorial Museum to see a Rolls Royce Merlin engine there – he said it was the finest internal combustion engine ever made.”

It was only natural for Charlton to speak with equal exuberance about car engines as he did about the machinations of guns, because he became a qualified automotive and general engineer before he arrived in New Zealand from England in 1923. His granddaughter, Liz Whiting, says he traveled from England to New Zealand as the ship’s engineer and radio operator on the Grimsby Steam Trawler. She said he was “quite relieved to reach NZ safely as the only training he had as a ship’s engineer and radio operator were what he had read in the local library several days before departure.”

Once in New Zealand, he set up his own business in Hastings as an automotive motor body engineer, according to his nephew. It was in Hastings that Charlton’s intense interest in all aspects of rifles grew, and he first suggested his idea to convert a self-loading rifle to a fully automatic gun to his friend and fellow gun fancier, Maurice Field. That idea grew into the prototype of The Charlton Automatic Rifle.

Two versions of the Charlton existed: the New Zealand version produced locally by Charlton Motor Workshops in Hastings, and a version made in Australia by Electrolux, using the SMLE Mk III for conversion. The two designs differed greatly in external appearance, as the New Zealand Charlton had a forward pistol grip and a bipod and the Australian version didn’t. However, they used the same operating mechanism.

John Osborne reported that Charlton negotiated with the Australian government in 1942, to provide 10,000 Charlton automatic rifles similar to those being produced in New Zealand, to be made in Australia. Osborne wrote, “Phil Charlton entered the factory (one morning) very excited, waving a telegram requesting that he go to Australia the next morning.” Charlton received a small royalty for each completed rifle, which was somewhat less than the royalties he was to receive from the New Zealand government.

In anticipation of the Japanese invasion of New Zealand in 1942, about 1,500 rifles were manufactured in New Zealand, while only a few prototypes were turned out in Australia, according to firearms researcher Ian Skennerton.

The Charlton Gun was not his only contribution to wartime armament. He continued scheming ways to fight against the Japanese threat, with some personal risks.

“Uncle Phil went on in the war to develop a ship-mounted anti-aircraft gun, which, unfortunately, jammed during testing,” John Charlton said. “By bypassing some of the electrical interlocks he managed to get it to fire. But unfortunately, those interlocks had disabled the gun because of a fault and it exploded, badly damaging one of his hands. The doctors wanted to amputate two fingers, but he wouldn’t let them. He regained most of the movement in them eventually, which didn’t surprise me at all.”

Happily, even through all of Philip Charlton’s innovation, sacrifice and toil, the dreaded Japanese invasion never came. Thanks to superior air and sea power, plus resupply capability, the Allies stopped the Japanese advance, and slowly turned the war from one of defense to a highly potent offense. Thus, WWII ended with none of the Charlton rifles ever seeing combat.

His granddaughter says that after the war, Philip Charlton ran an automobile parts distributorship, plus designing a hydrogas system to supply automobile power, and a system to micro-open pistons. He and his wife, Eileen, raised two children, Robert and Faye. Philip Charlton died in Auckland Hospital in 1978.

Sadly, most all of the Charlton inventory was destroyed in an accidental fire at the Palmerston North Armory storage facility shortly after World War II. According to Osborn, less than 200 survived the fire, and were used for training and demonstration purposes. These deteriorated through time and were scrapped, a tragedy for historians and collectors. Today, only a handful of the converted rifles survive as Philips Charlton’s legacy.

Where are those remaining rare legacies of Philip Charlton’s true small arms innovation and national significance? There are only five which exist officially, and they are housed in museums: The Waiouru Army Museum in New Zealand; The Museum of New Zealand (Te Papa); The Auckland Museum; The Army Museum (Bandiana) in Australia; and The Imperial War Museum in London. A few others are thought to be in private collections, unofficially or otherwise. Or, as a youngster, John Charlton remembers that years ago, his Uncle Phil used to keep “a couple or so in his back shed.”

(Many thanks to the following who provided valuable research and assistance about this little known man and his unique machine gun design: Ralph Behrends, Curator of the Army Museum, Bandiana, Australia; John Charlton, Philip Charlton’s nephew; Errol Albert Christ, firearms historian; Albert R. Christ; Marian Fiscus; Michael Fitzgerald, Director of the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa; Windsor Jones, Curator of the National Army Museum of New Zealand; Kari Randall; Dan Shea; Elizabeth Whiting, Philip Charlton’s granddaughter; and Paul Wraight, photography and Jim Crombie.)

It is not uncommon to be contacted by a company asking if we would be interested in looking at their wares for testing and evaluation. When this writer was contacted by MLR Distributing the first question was the same as always: “What is it that you make?” It was the answer received that was apart from the norm. “We make lots of things. We’ll send you a box so you can see for yourself.” The day the box arrived it was obvious why they chose that method.

Upon unpacking the contents the writer was reminded of the earlier days during his real initial interest in military style firearms. Everything was interesting and everything was kind of cool. That was the same impression in looking at the contents of the box.

MLR Distributing manufactures and sells a wide variety of items for several firearm models. All the popular buzz-guns are covered from MACs, Uzis, AR-15s, AK47s, TECs, 10/22s and more. They have all the parts and accessories you may expect to find and several of those you may not expect. Their inventory ranges from grips, stocks and mounts to all the regular thread-on accessories. It also includes a few of the not so common accessories like soda-can and tennis ball launchers, fake suppressors and barrel extensions.

It was one particular line that really caught this writer’s interest though: the 26.5mm and 37mm reloading products. Over the years, 37mm flares and launchers have grown in popularity. Recent foreign imports of inexpensive, high quality 26.5mm launchers are starting to catch up. MLR Distributing offers a rugged line of 37mm launchers as well as a full supply of reloading supplies for both the 37mm and the 26.5mm launchers. The reloadable rounds they make are very durable and high quality and should outlive the owner if treated properly. They also make and sell fused tubes to make reloading easier. They are not a pyro shop and do not carry any chemicals, just the hard to find (especially for the 26.5mm) reloadable shells and components.

My experience with everything tested has been well above initial expectations. Their products are well made and everything works as instructed.

MLR also has an informative, easy to navigate website with all their products listed and accompanied with photos and prices. You can find them at: www.MLRDistributing.com

MLR Distributing, LLC
PO Box 772751
Orlando, FL 32877
(407) 854-1704

Mitchell Livingston WerBell III was born on March 8, 1918, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to an ethnically Scottish mother and a father who claimed White Russian Cossack roots. He graduated from Staunton Military Academy in Virginia, entering the U.S. Army as a second lieutenant. A short time later the United States entered World War II after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. After a brief stint in the Signal Corps, WerBell volunteered to serve in General William “Wild Bill” Donovan’s newly formed Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the modern CIA. WerBell was assigned to carry out covert missions behind Japanese lines in Manchuria.

After the end of the war, U.S. Army Captain WerBell returned to the states and was assigned the command of an infantry company in Missouri. Before long, the routine began to bore him, and he resigned from the Army. After the Army, WerBell went into the advertising business, first in New York City, and later with a department store in Atlanta. He did well enough to purchase a large split level ranch house on a sixty-acre rural estate about thirty miles north of Atlanta, near Powder Springs Georgia. The property would become known as “The Farm.”

Sometime during the 1950s, Mitch WerBell decided to get into the clandestine weapons business. His specialty was sound suppressors and he called his company Sionics; an organization that specialized in counterinsurgency equipment. The acronym Sionics stood for Studies in Operational Negation of Insurgency and Counter Subversion.” Sionics was originally established on the Mitchell L. WerBell, III estate located near Powder Springs, Georgia in 1966. Ben Kohler, Eunice Creel and Betty Chatam incorporated Sionics in Georgia during 1967. The corporate address was; Sionics, 1655 Peachtree Street NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30309. Mr. Fred N. Brown was the president of Sionics and Mitch WerBell served as Vice President, Director of Research and Development.

Sionics Sound Suppressors

When originally established, Sionics was a company that supplied suppressors and similar items for covert operations by military and CIA type organizations. The suppressors that Sionics designed and sold consisted of a series of baffles and replaceable wipes to suppress muzzle blast. The life expectancy was six-months or 200 rounds before the unit’s efficiency deteriorated and the internals required replacement. A wipe replacement kit was available as a separate item. Mitch WerBell’s achievements in suppressor design are often regarded as the most significant advancements since Hiram Maxim’s silencers were introduced at the turn of the century. WerBell was granted three patents covering his suppressor designs. Suppressors were produced for the U.S. M14 and M16 rifles, and other weapons, with the U.S. Government being one of Sionics’ best customers. Sionics also manufactured a number of pistol suppressors in a variety of calibers and applications.

Suppressed Weapons

During the Vietnam War, an entire new class of weapons were fielded, primarily to support the widespread use of unconventional warfare tactics by U.S. Special Forces. These elite troops seldom fielded standard weapons issued to the conventional Army and Marine infantrymen. Prominently featured among the wide variety of foreign and domestic small arms used by Special Forces were silenced weapons.

To generate sales of their suppressed sniper rifles, live fire demonstrations were performed, primarily at the Marine Base at Quantico, Virginia and the Army’s Fort Benning, Georgia. Other times a rifle would be shipped gratis to an influential officer at a military installation for his evaluation. As the Vietnam War began winding down, military sales of suppressors and sniper rifles fell off to almost nothing. At this time, Sionics turned their marketing efforts toward the law enforcement community.

Rifle Suppressors

Sionics sound suppressors were first procured for use in Vietnam during 1969. The Army’s interest in Sionics came from a relationship between personnel from the U.S. Army’s Marksmanship Training Unit, and Sionics engineers, while working to develop an effective and stealthy sniper rifle. The 7.62 NATO, M14 (XM21) rifle fitted with a Sionics suppressor and Starlight night vision scope was a very effective tool for dispatching enemy soldiers at night. A number of Sionics suppressors were purchased by the Army but were never officially adopted.

The M14SS-1 Sionics Suppressor

The Vietnam era Sionics suppressor designed for the 7.62 NATO M14 rifle was the M14SS-1. The outer tube was manufactured from .090-inch thick 6061-T6 aluminum alloy that was anodized a flat black color. The rear retaining collar and many of the internal parts were made of 4130 steel that was phosphated to resist corrosion. A unique feature of Sionics’ rifle suppressors was the implementation of a gas valve. Designed to reduce blowback pressure; it was mounted on the outer case at the rear chamber. A valve was used on early production, but the springs in the valves failed during full-automatic fire. A new spring was made from a heat-resistant super-alloy called Inconel, but these also failed. The valves simply could not hold up to the gas pressure generated by firing and would fail after a short period. To solve the problem, the relief valve was eventually replaced by a simple relief port. The port was designed to reduce blowback pressure and was mounted on the outer case at the rear chamber. To thread the suppressor onto the barrel of the M14 rifle, the flash-hider and front sight assembly had to be removed, necessitating the use of a telescopic sight. A Teflon bushing was placed between the retaining collar and base of the unit that sealed and aligned the suppressor on the rifle. The tube was 12.75-inches long with an outside of diameter of 1.665 inches. The bore was .375-inches in diameter and the assembled unit weighed 1 pound, 15 ounces. The M14SS-1 suppressor was designed for semiautomatic fire only. Nearly all of the M14 suppressor production went to the U.S. Army, Fort Benning, Georgia, the U.S. Army Rock Island Arsenal and the U.S. Navy, San Diego, California. A small number of the suppressors went to the FBI and Aberdeen Proving Center, Maryland.

The Sionics M16 MAW-A1 Suppressor

During the Vietnam War, the small caliber 5.56x45mm M16 rifles were not fielded as part of any known sniper program. However, suppressor equipped M16 rifles were regularly employed by Special Forces for covert operations, long-range reconnaissance missions and ambushes during the war. There were several early experimental M16 suppressor designs made by Sionics. Ongoing testing and research resulted in numerous improvements that were implemented in the production MAW-A1 model (Moderator Automatic Weapon – Alteration 1).

On one early prototype M16 suppressor, a threaded stud was added to the front to attach the M16 flash hider. The attachment of the flash hider made the suppressor equipped M16 excessively long and cumbersome. The production version did not include a provision for a flash hider. The Sionics MAW-A1 suppressor was 12.63 inches long with an outside diameter of 1.235 inches, the bore was .302 inches and the unit weighed 1 pound, 12 ounces. Like the M14SS-1 suppressor, a gas valve was used on early production, but was replaced by a more durable relief port system to reduce blowback pressure; it was also mounted on the outer case at the rear chamber. Most of the suppressor’s internal components were made of stainless steel and less critical components were made of 4130 steel. The Sionics MAW-A1 suppressor was designed to withstand full-automatic fire.

In order to be effective, the internal components of suppressors needed to be manufactured to very close tolerances. On one experimental M16 rifle suppressor design, Sionics engineers attempted to use a powerful coil spring inside the unit to keep all of the internal components in alignment. The spring eliminated the need for the precision machining on those parts. Early testing found the implementation of the spring a viable concept. However, after being exposed to the high temperatures inside the suppressor tube for an extended period, the spring began to lose tension and eventually failed. This allowed the internal components to come out of alignment, creating a dangerous situation as did occur on the firing line at Fort Benning, during a semi-official suppressor testing and evaluation session. After continued full-automatic firing of a suppressor equipped M16 rifle, the spring failed, and a bullet struck one of the baffles. This resulted in the bullet exiting the side of the steel suppressor tube at approximately a 90-degree angle, striking an adjacent shooter in the neck. Fortunately, the bullet had lost most of its energy causing only minor injuries. After disassembling the suppressor, Sionics personnel discovered that the spring had caused the suppressor failure. And it was the last time such a spring was included in any Sionics suppressor designs.

The Subsonic Ammunition Program

During the 1960s, Sionics launched an ambitious program to develop subsonic ammunition for their line of sound suppressors. Sionics relied on the expertise of local ammunition reloaders from the Atlanta area for the project. A few pistol caliber cartridges, such as .45 ACP and .380 ACP, are inherently subsonic, while most others are not. When most ammunition is fired through a sound suppressor, the velocity of the bullet breaks the sound barrier, resulting in a readily distinguishable supersonic “crack.”

The speed of sound at 68 degrees Fahrenheit is approximately 1,127 feet per second; this speed is reduced with cooler ambient air temperature. The program began by experimenting with the 9mm Parabellum cartridge, which has an average speed of 1,150 feet per second when loaded with a 115 grain bullet. The bullet’s velocity is increased with barrel length. No insurmountable problems were encountered developing subsonic 9mm ammunition and the task was accomplished by using a heavier bullet and lighter powder charge. Developing subsonic rifle cartridges from high-velocity 5.56x45mm and the 7.62x51mm NATO military rounds was an entirely different matter.

During the Vietnam War, the largest potential market for sound suppressors was for the U.S. 5.56x45mm M16 rifle, with a secondary market for the 7.62mm M14 rifle. The velocity of the two cartridges was far greater than that of the 9mm pistol round, creating quite a challenge. Development was first focused on the M16’s 5.56x45mm round. When the 5.56x45mm cartridge was downloaded to the point of being subsonic, there was a very small amount of gunpowder, and a lot of empty space in the case. If the rifle was pointed at a downward angle, the powder would shift to the front of the cartridge case, away from the primer. This resulted in very unreliable and inconsistent ignition of the powder charge. If the powder charge was directly over the primer satisfactory ignition resulted. The obvious solution was to add an inert filler in front of the gunpowder to keep it in the base of the cartridge case directly above the primer. Numerous fillers were tried including oatmeal, Cream of Wheat cereal and cotton. While the fillers solved the problem of inconsistent ignition, a new problem arose.

After firing just a few rounds the filler material plugged the weapon’s gas port and the suppressor’s internal components. The next step was to find a filler that would burn and not leave any residue. Nitrate paper and nitrated cotton was tried, but they did not burn completely before reaching the weapon’s gas port or suppressor, resulting in only marginal results. The next experiment was to partially fill the cartridge cases with epoxy, leaving a small centrally located cavity to load the powder in, and allow gas pressure from the burning powder to pass out. Although this method was relatively successful, the method was labor intensive, and the subsonic cartridges made by this method very expensive. The first prototype rounds were fabricated from once-fired military cases. After fully developed and marketed the bullet tips were painted green and the cartridges were packed in special “subsonic” marked 20-round boxes. While the bullets of the downloaded rounds were subsonic, they were so underpowered that they would not cycle the action of the rifles and had very limited range. Both 5.56x45mm M16 and 7.62 NATO M14 subsonic cartridges were manufactured and marketed; however, due to cartridge’s cost (.32 cents each) and poor performance, sales were limited.

The Military Armament Corporation

Soon after Gordon Ingram joined Sionics, Mitch WerBell decided that the company’s current name Sionics was not the best possible name for an organization that would be manufacturing the new Ingram weapon. The company name was then changed from Sionics to “Environmental Industries.” WerBell was not completely satisfied with the new name. A friend and Sionics’ employee, Don Thomas, had his own Class Three business called Military Armament. WerBell liked the name and convinced Mr. Thomas to allow him to use it. On December 21, 1970, the Military Armament Corporation name became official.

Perhaps the best known Sionics suppressors were the two-stage type designed and produced for the Ingram submachine guns. Mitch WerBell III considered the Ingram submachine gun, when fitted with one of his sound suppressors, the ideal covert weapon.

Leupold, the oldest U.S. based rifle scope manufacturer, recently invited Small Arms Review to tour its facility and test fire several new optics. Based in Beaverton, Oregon, the company rose from humble immigrant beginnings to become a classic American company. In 1907, Fred Leupold set up a one-man shop at 5th and Oak streets in Portland to repair surveying equipment. He was later joined by his brother-in-law, Adam Voelpel, and by inventor John Cyprian Stevens. Together, the three men set the foundation for more than a century of success. Readers may not be aware that many of the industry’s standards – nitrogen waterproofing, the Duplex reticle, and other common features were Leupold innovations. .

A family-owned fifth-generation company, Leupold has been designing, machining, and assembling precision optical instruments and other products since 1907. Of course, the needs of law enforcement and military community have changed significantly since 1907, and Leupold continues to improve and innovate its product line. Two new optics have recently been released, and opportunities arose to test and evaluate both.

The Close Quarters Battle Scout Scope

The Close Quarters Battle Scout Scope (CQB-SS) is an extremely versatile 1.1-8x24mm optic specifically designed for the needs of the U.S. military. With an illuminated front focal plane, a shooter is able to utilize the optic with both precision and a wide field of view. According to Leupold, the field of view at 100 meters in the 1.1 power setting is 31 meters, while the field of view at 100 meters in the 8 power setting is 4.9 meters. Clearly, the optic allows for a wide variety of situations and circumstances that may arise.

Featuring a 34mm main tube, the optic is very robust, and seemingly able to take typical soldier induced abuse. Windage and elevation dials are large, and can easily be grasped with or without gloves. The dials automatically lock, yet can be quickly adjusted by pinching and turning the dials. Each click of the dial adjusts the optic by 1/10th of a mil. Incorporating a bullet drop compensator (graduated for use with 77 grain, 5.56mm ammunition) the ability to use the CQB-SS optic for longer range shooting at distances at and above 300 meters is entirely possible. The option of changing the bullet drop compensator to alternate loads is easily accomplished via a quick change system.

Unlike other optics with small power adjustment rings, adjusting the optical power on the CQB-SS is easily accomplished by a large knurled bezel at the rear of the optic. In a stressful combat situation, locating the power adjustment is beyond easy – the shooter would merely grab the rear of the optic and turn as needed to the desired power. Suitable for weapons from assault rifles to light machine guns and squad automatic weapons, the CQBSS also features an illuminated reticle. The illumination dial is on the side of the scope, which makes it more accessible for prone shooters. With 8 illumination settings, the brightest position was easily visible in strong sunlight. The optic is reportedly night vision capable at the lowest illumination settings. “In the small arms sphere, our new CQBSS with its advanced lens technology gives the warfighter battle space dominance over current and future threats,” said Kevin Trepa, Leupold’s vice president of tactical sales and marketing.

As tested, the CQB-SS featured the new M-TMR reticle, requested by the U.S. Marine Corps. The staircase reticle design allows shooters to rely upon instinctive fire capabilities on low magnification, while allowing precise range estimation at any power setting. The M-TMR reticle is comprised of 0.5 mil graduations with a 0.1 mil line thickness in the center for absolute precision on higher magnification settings, but increases to 0.5 mil line thickness and 2.0 mil line thickness to ensure fast reticle acquisition on low magnification. The lower portion of the field contains rapid acquisition ranging brackets allowing the user to quickly estimate the distance to objects of known size. When the target fits within the brackets, the corresponding bracket number immediately relays the distance in hundreds of meters. With brackets that allow ranging out to 1,200 meters, the shooter may not be able to reach out to those distances with a 5.56 rifle, yet still allows for accurate observation for designated marksmen or snipers with larger caliber rifles and higher powered optics.

Shooting the CQB-SS

Putting the CQB-SS through its paces required close up shooting combined with shooting at long range targets. Unfortunately, the range was limited to 100 meters, and it was impossible to utilize the full 8-power capability of the optic. Nevertheless, the ability to engage a target at 2 meters at 1.1 power while maintaining situational awareness and peripheral vision with both eyes open was very effective and attractive for the optic’s intended purpose. If used as a CQB optic, the 1.1 power optic setting would be ideal for close range engagements out to 15 to 20 meters. A quick transition with increased optical power for precision shots at 100 meters proved equally effective. The Leupold CQB-SS optic will not serve well as a long range optic, as the maximum eight power setting lacks the ability to truly reach out at long ranges. As a general optic to allow shooting from close range out to 300 meters or more, the CQB-SS is an ideal optic that is easy to use in its intended role.

The Mark 4 6.5-20x50mm Extended Range/Tactical (ER/T)

Content with shooting close range targets, the opportunity arose to shoot Remington’s new MSR (Modular Sniper Rifle) chambered in .338 Lapua, with a Leupold Mark 4 ER/T optic. With the rifle specifically designed and developed to compete for the U.S. Special Operations Command Precision Sniper Rifle (PSR) contract, an optic was needed to allow the rifle to achieve maximum capability. Specially designed, engineered, and built with the military sniper in mind, the ER/T optic is available in either a 6.5-20x50mm or 8.5-25x50mm platform.

Utilizing a 34mm main tube, the optic allows for maximum elevation and windage travel, with 1/10 milliradian adjustments for fast and intuitive shot correction. Similar to the CQB-SS, the ER/T also features a front focal plane reticle design to provide accurate measurements regardless of the magnification setting. The optic is filled with an Argon/Krypton gas blend – Leupold’s exclusive internal gas blend – as a means of providing thermal shock resistance, while also keeping the riflescope fog proof and waterproof.

An elevation zero-stop was engineered into the design to prevent under-rotation in stressful situations, with a tactile revolution indicator, a feature proprietary to Leupold. The revolution counter helps snipers and other shooters in dark conditions know they have turned the dial past one full revolution, so that they can then return to zero much easier, and eliminate any guess work. “This new scope incorporates all of the features our warfighters have been asking for,” said Kevin Trepa, Leupold’s vice president of tactical sales and marketing. “We are working hard to design, manufacture and deliver the tools they need to get the job done.”

Shooting the Mark 4 Extended Range/Tactical

Shooting long range targets is not easy; it typically take thousands of rounds of practice in varying conditions to achieve expertise in the field. Nevertheless, shooting long range targets was made easy with the Mark 4 ER/T optic. Intended as familiarization rather than formal training, there was scant time to put the rifle or the optic to its full capabilities. Shooting conditions were nearly ideal, with temperatures in the high 60s F, with bright sunlight, and little wind. Under the circumstances, it was nearly impossible to miss. Adjustments in power were easily accomplished via the large adjustment ring. The image was clear and bright, as would be expected.

While at the Leupold factory, the staff was quick to point out that Leupold is the only U.S. based optics company that designs, manufactures, and assembles all of their optics within the United States. In addition, the total number of optics manufactured and sold by Leupold on an annual basis exceeds the total sales of the next 5 largest optics companies in the world, to include Swarovski and Schmidt and Bender. While the last claim could not be independently verified, the number of units being produced within the factory was staggering.

Look for Leupold to enter its second century of manufacturing high quality optics with precision, innovation and original designs. Leupold’s success has been built on their commitment to their customer’s absolute satisfaction, and their commitment to building the best optics for the hunting, military and law enforcement markets.

“Utterly useless!” So wrote a frustrated U.S. Army Captain in a letter to the Chief of Ordnance of the United States Army in late 1916, requesting to exchange his Automatic Machine Rifle, Model of 1909 light machine guns for the new Lewis gun. “We have been using these guns for four years and have never been able to get more than two shots out of any of the guns without a jam.”

The Hotchkiss Model 1909 as made in France by the Hotchkiss Company was known on the European Continent as the Hotchkiss Mle 1909. Copied and made in the United States, it was designated as the Automatic Machine Rifle, Caliber .30, Model of 1909, or colloquially as the Benet-Mercié after the two men at Hotchkiss responsible for its development. The gun had a cyclic rate of fire of about 400 rounds per minute with an actual deliverable rate of fire of about 150 rounds per minute.

Laurence Benet was an American engineer who worked for the Hotchkiss Company in Paris, France. He, along with another Hotchkiss engineer name Henri Mercié, collaborated to develop an air cooled, gas operated, light weight machine rifle based on the Hotchkiss Mle 1900 and Mle 1907 heavy machine gun design. The Mle 1909 differed from these heavy machine guns in that it weighed just 30 pounds and was fitted with a wooden stock with elevation gear and a bipod. The main modifications mechanically were the means by which the breech closed and changing the feedway from the left to right side of the gun and redesigning the feed mechanism to accept the horizontal 30-shot feed strip with the cartridges held on the underside of the feed strip rather than resting on top of the feed strip. Being a simply designed gun reduced the number of parts of the gun to just twenty five. Located in the forward part of the receiver directly behind the breech is a cylindrical device known as the fermature nut. The function of the fermature nut is to lock the breech closed before firing and unlocking when the gas pressure has dropped to a safe level. A unique aspect of this gun is that it is capable of changing barrels quickly. When the gun was used in sustained fire the barrel would get very hot. The barrel can be removed and a cool barrel replaced in a very short period of time.

In 1909, the French Army adopted the Hotchkiss Mle 1909 gun chambered in their 8mm Lebel cartridge. It was also manufactured in Great Britain by Hotchkiss and was adopted by the British and designated as the Hotchkiss Mk I and Mk II Portable chambered in .303 caliber. (The Mk I had a wooden stock and was strip fed, while the Mk II was the tank or cavalry version with a removable L-shaped metal stock and could use a strip or a special articulated metal belt.) Also in 1909, the United States adopted it as the standard U.S. machine gun chambered for the .30-06 cartridge and, after a lengthy set of trials, an order was placed by the U.S. Army with the Hotchkiss Company for 29 guns. Funding was so tight in those days that that was all the Army could afford to buy. However, the rights to manufacture the gun in the United States were secured and the Colt’s Patent Fire Arms Manufacturing Company and the Springfield Armory were contracted to produce the Hotchkiss as the Automatic Machine Rifle Model of 1909. A discernable difference between the two manufacturers is that the Colt has a smooth barrel in front of the cooling fins whereas the Springfield Armory has sharp-point checkering around the barrel in front of the cooling fins – presumably to assist in better gripping during barrel changes. It has been reported in the past by many sources (possibly merely repeating the same information) that both manufacturers combined produced a grand total of 670 guns. However, higher serial numbers have been encountered (i.e., a Colt in the 900 range with Navy markings) so more were clearly made and it is possible the 670 number applies to those purchased by the U.S. Army rather than the number produced; as one source notes that another 400 were made for the U.S. Navy and Marines. Unfortunately, production records have not been encountered to determine if the serial numbers from each manufacturer were mixed, or if each manufacturer started with 001.

The stock of the U.S. Model of 1909 is made of well-seasoned black walnut, cut down in front so as not to interfere with the sighting and a pistol grip. On the upper end of the butt plate is a long tang for supporting the weight of the weapon on the shoulder when firing without the elevating mechanism.

The Model of 1909 had a unique rear monopod elevation system that fits into the rear of the wood butt stock and employs a double elevation screw and a foot plate that slides on a bar attached to the elevation screw. When in the closed position, the elevation screws screwed up into the buttstock and the foot plate rotated along the axis of the gun and locked into place with a metal catch. When the foot plate was unlatched, the elevation screw could be extended by an elevation wheel. When the desired height was obtained, the elevation wheel could be locked into position and the foot plate rotated to be perpendicular to the axis of the gun.

The gun was also fitted with a bipod that is attached underneath the front sight barrel band. The bipod is rather flimsy and an often field expedient solution to help prevent the bipod from collapsing was to run a length of leather strip from one front leg through the trigger guard and back to the other side front leg. The legs can be folded back and secured to the hand guard during transportation.

The front sight for the Model of 1909 consisted of a thin blade slightly beveled to the front, and on each side is cut a circular groove to better define the sight proper. The lower portion has a dovetailed lug and engages the dovetail groove of the front-sight carrier allowing for adjustment for deflection. The front sight is protected by a hood.

The rear sight has an adjustable leaf that is graduated from 0 to 2,800 yards. The drift slide moves forward and back on the leaf and on the top is small open sight. There is also a circular aperture disk containing five sight openings: four peepholes, 0.04, 0.06, 0.08 and 0.10 inch in diameter, and one large aperture which contains an open sight. The entire rear sight in on a movable base that by turning the windage correction knob moves the base left or right for windage corrections. There is a scale on the base with wind-gauge graduations, each point of which corresponds to a lateral deviation of 4 inches for each 100 yards.

The Automatic Machine Rifle Model of 1909 was issued for service with the Model of 1908 Warner & Swasey telescopic musket sight, which was originally used for sharpshooter use with the Model of 1903 Springfield rifle. The sight was mounted on a dovetail bracket on the left side of the receiver rather than directly above the centerline of the weapon. The rationale behind this was that the barrel heated up during firing and produced heat mirages that distorted the sight picture. Mounting on the side of the receiver enabled the firer to avoid the heat mirage and keep proper target acquisition. The sight also aided in target recognition and allowed the gunner to observe his strikes. The sight is 6-power and has a field of 4 1/2 degrees. The glass reticule is etched with vertical and horizontal cross lines and a stadia line, the latter being so placed that it spans the height (5 feet 8 inches) of an average man standing at a distance of 1,000 yards. Located on the top of the telescopic sight is a brass placard with wind and range tables and a drift table.

Each rifle was furnished with feed strips made of sheet steel, spring tempered, by means of which the cartridges are fed into the rifle. Each feed strip is designed to hold 30 cartridges. The ammunition box is designed to hold 10 loaded feed strips (300 cartridges), and is made of seasoned white oak or ash. It is about 18 inches long and nearly 8 inches wide. The end and sides are dovetailed together, and the bottom is secured by screws. The body contains five longitudinal partitions, in each of which can be placed two feed strips. The lid is held closed by the lid catch. On the left end of the box and the front side are leather handles. The seats for the handles are recessed so the handles will be flush with the sides of the box.

The machine gun and its tactical use were new and unproven in the first decade of the twentieth century. Major General Julian Hatcher, in his book Hatcher’s Notebook, best describes the tactical role of the machine gun and how it was put into service. “Now if at that time we had known the least thing about the tactical role of machine guns, we would have realized that we ought to have two kinds in the Army at the same time; the heavy type for one kind of action and the light type, for a totally different use. We didn’t, however, realize this or anything else much about these matters, so we adopted this light gun as THE machine gun of the Army. In those days, every regiment had a machine gun platoon, made up by detailing men from regular companies for temporary duty in the machine gun platoon. This platoon had four guns. It was a regular authorized company, but just a scraped together aggregation of men who could best be spared from their places. Many times the temptation to get rid of unwanted problem children was solved by company commanders by sending them to the machine gun platoon. A pretty sorry outfit it was, as a rule.”

The Automatic Machine Rifle Model of 1909 was not a bad gun but was ill suited to be the main machine gun of the U.S. Army, though this was the historic roll it played from 1909 to 1916. It was finally realized that different types of machine guns were needed for different tactical roles. The Model of 1909 was relegated to training use during World War I being declared obsolete in 1918 and ultimately superseded by the far superior Model of 1918 Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR).

The Model of 1909 saw limited use in a tactical role at the landing at Very Cruz in 1913. Then one day in 1916, all hell broke loose and the gun acquired a reputation for unreliability that to this day has cast a dark shadow over the gun.

In April, 1916, the Mexican bandit Pancho Villa staged a sneak attack across the U.S. border, raiding the small town of Columbus, New Mexico three miles north of the U.S. and Mexican border. The raid on Columbus occurred in the middle of the night and caught the sleepy town completely by surprise. No one was expecting an attack. There was a small garrison of U.S. Cavalry stationed in Columbus with a machine gun platoon consisting of four Model of 1909 machine guns which, when routed from their sleep, managed to collect themselves and their guns along with ammunition and began to take defensive positions.

Some civilians and soldiers were killed in the ensuing battle and reports emerged stating that none of the Model of 1909s were able to operate reliably during the course of the fight. Afterward, the excuse given by the machine gun crews was that the night was so dark they had trouble with the complicated loading and feeding of the weapon.

The newspapers of the day, already horrified that the attack even occurred in the first place, jumped on this information and raked the U.S. Army and the Chief of Ordnance over the coals declaring that the rules of warfare should be changed so that battles would only take place during daylight hours so that our machine guns could take part in the action. The newspapers called the Model of 1909 the “Daylight Gun” for this reason and wrote many scathing and satirical articles on the subject.

However, in an article published in the November 10, 1917 issue of the Saturday Evening Post, Hatcher, then a Captain, made the following statements. “The night was dark, and naturally some trouble was experienced with the guns. Occasional jams occurred; but in each case the trouble was overcome and the guns continued in the fight. At least two of the four guns were always in action. These guns were not always firing though, as they frequently had to stop for lack of a suitable target.

“To fire machine guns in the dark streets of a town without a well defined target,” Hatcher continued, “is to risk killing friend as well as foe.

“There were many highly excited people present, however, and to these it no doubt seemed that all the guns should be firing, regardless of whether an enemy was in sight or not. Thus, it happened that a report started that the machine guns were not a decisive factor in saving the town; and in spite of occasional jams, they fired nearly 20,000 rounds of ammunition in the fight.”

The result of this controversy resulted in the Army re-evaluating the heretofore haphazard methods of training and then establishing a proper machine gun school. The former machine gun platoon comprised of misfits and trouble makers was replaced and a machine gun company was formed in each regiment.

The machine gun school was established in Harlingen, Texas in the Rio Grande Valley. The machine gun instruction school taught the proper training for the Colt Automatic Gun Model of 1895/1914, the Maxim Model of 1904, the Automatic Machine Rifle Model of 1909 and the Lewis Gun Model of 1916.

The school ran for nine months until war was declared in April 1917. The men who went through the school became the backbone of the U.S. Army machine gun corps during World War I.

They were desperately needed because the United States was truly ill-equipped to enter the war. The total inventory of machine guns in the U.S. when war was declared consisted of 670 Model of 1909s (for the Army), 282 Colt Maxim Model of 1904s and 143 Colt Automatic Guns Model of 1985/1914s. There were also 353 Lewis guns but they were chambered for the British .303 cartridge.

The Automatic Machine Rifle Model of 1909, for better or worse, has its place in early machine gun development and history. Due to lack of training of the troops it failed to live up to expectations. Yet, both the French and British versions of the same gun went to war and served admirably and with distinction.

Thompson submachine gun enthusiasts simply use the phrase, “West Hurley’s.” By most accounts they are the scourge of the Thompson community – sometimes with good reason. They are nothing like the Colt’s in beauty or manufactured like the World War II guns to exacting government specifications. But they are a brother none the less to their earlier siblings, though some would argue a step-brother.

The first West Hurley Thompson’s rolled off the assembly line in 1975 as a product of the second Auto-Ordnance Corporation in West Hurley, New York. This was a company started by Numrich Arms Corporation (NAC) founder George Numrich and then President of NAC, Ira Trast. The new Auto-Ordnance Corporation (AOC) was formed to begin production of a new semiautomatic .45 caliber Thompson rifle, one that resembled the famous American Tommy Gun. In conjunction with the Thompson semiautomatic rifle, AOC also put back in production the full auto 1928 model with a newly manufactured receiver and frame. Full auto West Hurley (WH) Thompson’s immediately found a niche market as an inexpensive substitute for a Colt, Savage or Auto-Ordnance at Bridgeport. The initial retail price as shown in the 1975 NAC catalog was $425.

All references to the Auto-Ordnance Corporation or AOC in this story relate solely to the new Auto-Ordnance Corporation at West Hurley, New York unless followed by the words “at Bridgeport” (Connecticut).

The full auto WHs were mostly Model of 1928s, but a small quantity of M1A1 models were produced right before what has come to be called the May 1986 machine gun ban. WHs have continued to enjoy a niche market in the post 1986 period because, again, they are the cheapest Thompsons in the market place. While many purists howled and degraded the efforts of Numrich and Trast in the 1970s, everyone will agree AOC did place over 3,800 more transferable Thompson’s in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR) for all to use and enjoy. Absent a few post sample guns built from various other manufacturers from time to time, the WH full auto Thompson’s are the end of an era.

The purpose of this story is not to degrade the manufacturing process of a very small American company that produced a $425 machine gun. It is to inform owners and potential owners of full auto WH Thompsons about some of the parts used during the production – and problems associated with those parts.

AOC certainly could have used the United States Postal Service motto for flat rate shipping – “If it fits, it ships.” Standardization is not a word normally used by WH owners. Each WH Thompson is truly unique when it comes to fit, function AND parts. There is no WH specific production year or serial number range that is the best to buy – or any to be avoided. A NIB (New in the Box) WH is not a guarantee a WH Thompson will run; it only means no one has tried it out.

The majority of WH parts examined for this story are of low quality investment casting and do not conform to original ordnance specifications. Even when manufactured correctly, the resulting part is much rougher and softer than an original Colt or GI part. Many WH parts are easy to identify because of the purplish hue. Some cast parts are challenging to properly blue because of silicone that is added to the steel alloy to improve the flow when the molten steel is poured into the mold.

The saving grace is all the WH parts will interchange with GI manufactured parts. Replacement for most is always the best option.

Danger!!!

One part in particular is dangerous. The 1928 buffer pilot, commonly referred to as only the pilot or the buffer, was originally designed as a one piece machined part. Sometime during production of the WH Thompson, AOC designed and manufactured two-piece pilots. The reason the pilot was originally designed as a one piece part can be seen in the accompanying pictures; WH pilot’s can and will come apart. All owners, including dealers stocking used Model of 1928 WH Thompsons for sale, need to check the pilot (right now) to insure it is of one piece construction or a GI part. Any two-piece WH pilot should be destroyed. Why risk the potential for injury over what is now a readily available and inexpensive part.

West Hurley Parts

Most WH parts do not pose a threat of bodily injury but can and do affect the function of a Thompson. Stated below is a listing of known parts manufactured by or for AOC:

• Actuator (Model of 1928 only)
• Barrel
• Bolt (M1A1 model only)
• Breech Oiler (Model of 1928 only)
• Buffer Pilot – (Model of 1928 only)
• Butt Stock Slide Group (Model of 1928 only)
• Compensator (Model of 1928 only)
• Drum magazines (Model of 1928 only)
• Frame
• Grip Mount
• Magazine Catch
• Rear Sight, adjustable (Model of 1928 only)
• Rocker pivot (fire control lever)
• Safety
• Sear
• Sear lever
• Trip
• Vertical Fore Grip & Pistol Grip Many WH parts can be easily identified because of the lack of manufacturer markings. All U.S. government subcontractors during World War II were required to apply a marking to their production; while “S” and “AOC” (at Bridgeport) are the most common subcontractor markings, many others exist. A great reference for manufacturer markings on Thompson parts can be found in Frank Iannamico’s excellent Thompson book, American Thunder II. Careful examination and comparison of WH parts to known GI originals make distinguishing these parts an easy matter. CAVEAT: Original parts manufactured by Colt are also unmarked; Colt parts have been found on WH Thompsons.

Mr. Trast

Mr. Ira Trast, retired president of Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York, graciously agreed to be interviewed. He stated at the beginning that due to the passage of time, he has probably forgotten many of the day to day production details that would be of interest to collectors nowadays. But he agreed to provide whatever information he could remember. Mr. Trast pointed out the new AOC was manufacturing both Thompson rifles and submachine guns so he was not focused solely on the production of the full auto guns during his tenure as President.

Mr. Trast stated the production of the receivers and frames were subcontracted to a local company in Saugerties, New York named Quality Manufacturing Company. AOC supplied Quality Manufacturing with the tooling for production of these parts. The tooling was quite old and had to be modified to fit Quality’s machines.

AOC had a large inventory of Thompson parts when production of the first Thompson guns began in 1975. The first full auto Thompsons were made using all GI parts but as sales increased, inventories of GI parts began to dry up. Mr. Trast spent many hours scouring the country looking for many of the Thompson parts mentioned during this interview. Mr. Trast stated it is important to point out GI parts were not only used in the beginning, but as available during the 11 years the full auto Thompson was in production. AOC only used their own subcontracted parts until new supplies of GI parts could be found. Toward the end of the production run, there was really no need to look for GI parts because none were available in any quantity.

The early Thompson guns featured original Lyman rear sights but soon supplies began to run low. Mr. Trast believes it possible AOC may have used some sight bases purchased from the Model Gun Corporation (MGC) of Japan on the full auto WH Thompson but he is not 100% sure. Sometimes parts used on the Thompson Model 1927 rifle were used on the full auto guns – and vise versa. He is certain that AOC soon subcontracted the manufacture of the sight base and these bases were fitted with an Enfield sight leaf assembly. Later, AOC had a sight leaf assembly specifically manufactured for the base. Mr. Trast remembered the cast sight bases would sometimes come loose from the receiver so AOC began using large rivets to correct this problem.

The horizontal fore-grips and sling swivels were very plentiful as were the butt stocks. Rear grips were plentiful at first, but later had to be manufactured. All the vertical fore-grips were made by a subcontractor, the identity of which now escapes Mr. Trast. As the stock slide inventory was depleted, aluminum stock slides from MGC were used. The MGC slides were not without problems so AOC began subcontracting the manufacture of the stock slide in the GI pattern but of aluminum alloy.

Many of the smaller parts like sears, trips, rocker pivots and safeties were manufactured by IONA Industries, Newburgh, New York. While AOC used other subcontractors at times, Quality Manufacturing Company and IONA Industries were the two subcontractors that manufactured the majority of parts for AOC. Both were located close to West Hurley, New York (and both are now out of business). Generally, Quality Manufacturing manufactured the bigger parts and IONA Industries manufactured the smaller parts. Mr. Trast stated there may be variations or changes of the same AOC part as production continued over the years.

Mr. Trast did not recall a problem or any issues with separation involving the two piece buffer pilot. AOC used GI buffer discs.

Compensators were another item that was soon in short supply and the manufacture of this part was subcontracted to IONA Industries. AOC roll marked the Thompson bullet logo on the top of the newly manufactured compensators in-house. Mr. Trast stated AOC had all the original Thompson roll dies starting at the Colt era. However, the older machinery necessary to use these early roll dies was not readily available and therefore many of the original dies could not be used. AOC had to remanufacture some tooling and dies when production began in 1975.

The supply of breech oilers also became a problem. Mr. Trast said AOC manufactured a few oilers, but “could not get it right.” The oilers manufactured were discarded. He does not remember purchasing any aftermarket oilers for use in the full auto guns but added this was a long time ago so anything is certainly possible. With no oilers available, a decision was made to delete this part altogether.

AOC refinished and sold GI drums at first. Supplies soon ran low and it became difficult to locate GI drums that were not too pitted and/or rusted and could be refinished into an acceptable product. AOC purchased and converted MGC drums to work in real guns. These first drums were named the XL drums, but the modifications only allowed for the loading of 39 rounds. AOC also used MGC drums for their .22 caliber Thompson by welding a .22 stick magazine inside the drum body.

A decision was made to manufacture new drums but it was almost two years before the new L (50 round) drums were on the market. This was a major effort for AOC that ran into many problems, especially with the rotor spring. AOC formed a new company for this venture, Valentine International. A decision to manufacture the C (100 round) drum came later. It was believed only 1,000 Colt era C drums were manufactured with each one being individually numbered. Mr. Trast believed AOC limited production to only 1,000 numbered C drums. As with the AOC L drum, the rotor spring became a big issue on the AOC C drum.

AOC manufactured the barrels for the Thompson guns in-house. Completed barrels were sent to a subcontractor to cut the fins and thread the ends of the barrels for the receiver and compensator. Mr. Trast remembered the early barrels with the large fins and sharp edges. AOC developed a tool to radius the sharp edges of the fins; this procedure was done in-house. As production continued, the later barrels were much nicer than AOC’s first efforts in this area. Mr. Trast does not remember if the front sight was manufactured in-house or by a subcontractor.

Mr. Trast recalled the purplish parts and how the bluing process was a problem for AOC. He believed the problem may have had something to do with impurities in the steel used to manufacture the parts. AOC always purchased high quality 4140 gun barrel steel but sometimes it came from outside the USA. He said it was a continual effort to properly color the parts.

The supply of bolts became an issue when the AOC M1 Thompson was introduced in 1985. As supplies of M1A1 GI bolts were exhausted, AOC subcontracted out the production of the M1A1 bolt.

As the interview came to an end Mr. Trast made a comment that will be of great interest to all WH owners. The “A” at the end of the serial number on the full auto Thompsons stood for “automatic.” Mr. Trast believes the ATF asked AOC to use this designation to easily differentiate the serial numbers of the full auto guns from the Thompson rifles.

Parts, Parts and More Parts

Actuator: This is a commonly found WH part with several known variations. Careful examination will reveal a casting line down the middle in many of them. Most WH actuators have what appear to be milled cavities in the side; however, later variations were machined from bar and are without these cavities. The cocking ball on the unrelieved WH actuators is actually a separate part and staked to the body of the actuator. This can be another dangerous part. One WH owner reported the cocking ball came off during firing and hit him in the head nearly requiring stitches (another excellent reason for everyone anywhere near a firing line to always wear shooting glasses). There are also differences noted in the knurling on the cocking balls; some are plain or without knurling. The WH actuator can cause functioning problems and bend or break during firing; it should be replaced with an original GI part.

Barrel: This is a commonly found WH part with several known variations. The fins on many of the early WH barrels are very sharp. Sharp edges and corners are characteristics of many WH parts. However, later production WH barrels can be found with radius fins. Most WH barrels are known to have head spacing or chamber issues. If all WH internal parts have been replaced with GI parts and functioning problems continue, a WH barrel may be the cause of the problem. Cosmetic issues aside, this part may be used if brought back into proper specification.

Bolt: As supplies of GI M1A1 bolts became exhausted, AOC subcontracted the manufacture of M1A1 bolts. WH bolts do not have a manufacturer code as found on the WWII GI bolts. The quality of the WH bolts has been reported as both good and bad. Given the large number of inexpensive GI M1 and M1A1 bolts now available on the market, this part is a good candidate for replacement. AOC did not manufacture bolts for the 1928 WH Thompson.

Breech Oiler: AOC used GI oilers until the supply was exhausted and then simply omitted this part with new production guns. AOC included a notification to this effect on many of the later WH Thompsons. Research has uncovered an inexpensive oiler that has been found is several WH Thompsons, including a new in the box WH Thompson purchased in 1981. It is very possible AOC purchased and used some aftermarket oilers at some point during the production run. Irrespective of how these oilers ended up in WH Thompson’s, this oiler type is a good candidate for replacement.

Buffer Pilot (Model of 1928 only): This is a commonly found WH part with three known variations. The two-piece WH buffer pilots must be replaced – see above. It is dangerous to use this part in a Thompson submachine gun. One of the two-piece WH pilots has the flange press fit on the rod; the other has a cut out in the flange that locks on to the rod. AOC did manufacture a one piece pilot; however, like most WH parts it is not manufactured to GI specifications and should be replaced.

If there is any doubt as to the buffer pilot being a one or two piece unit, replace the pilot with a GI part (that will be marked with “S” or “AOC” (at Bridgeport) on the flat part of the flange). Don’t take a chance with this part!

Butt Stock Slide Group (Model of 1928 only): When the inventory of steel GI stock slides ran out, AOC purchased from MGC an aluminum butt stock slide group. There are two variations of the MGC slide. MGC assemblies are not manufactured to the exterior dimensions of the GI or Colt assembly and are easy to identify because the top of the rear mounting screw is visible. MGC slides also have a separate catch button. AOC soon learned the MGC slide was not meeting expectations and began production of a GI style stock slide cast off aluminum (or a light weight alloy). As with the MGC slide, the fit of the WH stock slide to the lower frame is generally very loose and the painted finish is quickly worn off. While serviceable, aluminum stock slides are good candidates for replacement.

Compensator (Model of 1928 only): This is a commonly found WH part with two known variations. It is easily distinguished from the Colt and WWII counterparts. The only marking is the trademark Thompson Bullet Logo displayed on the top of the compensator in front of the slots. The slots are usually sharp. WH compensators were not pinned from the factory and usually installed with a good dose of adhesive (as were the barrels). This WH part is quite functional and generally only replaced because the owner prefers the look of an original GI part.

Drum magazines: Most WH L and C drum magazines need work to run properly. WH drums were bringing a premium price during the 10 year assault rifle and high capacity magazine ban; this has passed. Avoid these drums unless you factor in the cost of an overhaul. Lower cost alternatives now exist. WH drums are easy to identify because the center hub is solid. In addition to the L and C drums, AOC also marketed an XL and X drum.

Frame: These have sharp edges and are often found to be not manufactured to exact GI specifications. However, this part is normally serviceable and can often be brought into GI specifications. Frames were not serial numbered by AOC.

Grip Mount: Grip mounts used on WH guns include the following variations:

• GI milled (solid stock), 1/2 inch
• GI riveted, early (retaining stud is a separate part), 1/2 inch
• GI riveted, late (retaining and barrel rest studs are separate parts), 1/2 inch
• WH riveted, steel, 3/4 inch
• WH riveted, aluminum, 3/4 inch The 3/4 inch grip mount is the most commonly found. While most are serviceable for sporting use, the WH 3/4 inch aluminum parts are particularly prone to breakage. The milled steel (solid stock) grip mount is the best for every purpose.

Magazine Catch: This is a commonly found WH part with several known variations. Some have holes and a cast diamond pattern on the end; some have a dimple instead of a hole. Many are purple in color or have a purplish hue. This part can be a source of trouble and should be replaced with an original GI part.

Rear Sight (adjustable) (Model of 1928 only): The serviceability of the WH rear sight is not as good as the original Lyman. Various parts were used to make up sights, including the following combinations:

• Original Lyman sight assemblies
• Lyman bases with Enfield Leaf assemblies
• WH steel bases with Lyman leaf assemblies
• WH steel or light alloy bases with Enfield leaf assemblies
• WH steel or light alloy bases with WH leaf assemblies

Rocker Pivot (fire control lever) and Safety: These are commonly found WH parts. Careful examination will show a casting line down the middle. Most have a purplish hue. Functioning problems can occur if the pivot and safety move up and down while the Thompson is being fired. These parts should be replaced with original GI parts.

Sear, Sear lever and Trip: These are commonly found WH parts and can be a source of many functioning problems. Most have a purplish hue. These WH parts should be replaced with original GI parts.

Vertical fore grip & pistol grip: While WH wood is not known for its beauty, it is very serviceable and only replaced for cosmetic reasons – or if a change in the grip mount dictates a different size fore grip. Butt stocks and horizontal fore grips are normally new or refinished GI production. Vertical fore grips are AOC production and known for their flat or slab sides. The pistol grips can either be new or refinished GI or AOC slab side production. When the 3/4 inch grip mount was introduced, the GI horizontal fore grips were re-inletted for the wider part. There is a great deal of variation in the wood found on WH Thompson’s during the 11 year production run.

Epilogue

When compared to a Thompson manufactured to original ordnance or GI specifications, most everything about the WH Thompson can be problematic. However, they do run with some work and replacement of most of the WH parts. When WH Thompsons were in production, the vast quantities of original Thompson parts kits as found on the market today were not available.

Mr. Trast said if complete Thompson parts kits had been readily available from 1975 to 1986, it is quite likely AOC would have only manufactured the receiver and vertical fore grip. West Hurley’s are generally an entry level Thompson because of the lower price. Is it possible to take a WH Thompson and have it completely overhauled, refurbished and brought into proper specifications? Yes. And the end product will run perfectly and look just about as good as anything that came out of Hartford, Connecticut in the early 1920s.

(Author’s note: The story of West Hurley Thompson parts is a work in progress. This is the first attempt at trying to catalog all the different Thompson submachine gun parts manufactured and used by AOC in West Hurley, New York. The author encourages anyone who has seen, owns or knows about any different parts or part variations to contact him via Small Arms Review. Additional information may be compiled into an updated story in the future in an effort to make all of us more knowledgeable with the West Hurley Thompsons. This story would not have been possible without the support of all the great members of www.MachineGunBoards.com, many of whom are WH owners that replaced most of the parts you see pictured in this story.)

It is a safe bet that everyone reading this magazine has been drawn by some inexorable force into considering a weapon that made no sense when one’s “needs” are analyzed empirically. Often times these firearms are sentimental favorites based on an affiliation with an original model not readily accessed. A recent phenomenon along these lines is represented by the Century International Arms semiautomatic AES-10B patterned after a Romanian version of the RPK light machine gun. The AK series of weapons are experiencing a renaissance/resurgence in popularity in the U.S. The AK’s association as the “enemy’s” weapon seems not to deter its growing popularity in the U.S. This stems from many factors: rugged reliability, price point, reasonably priced ammunition, an appreciation of 7.62×39 terminal ballistics, and the ever increasing quality and quantity of after-market parts.

The affinity toward AK platforms for many started with the affordable Romanian manufactured AKs arriving in the early 1990s, before the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban went into effect. While not aesthetically pleasing, ergonomic, or as inherently accurate as an AR, for many the AK was quickly turned into a “go to hell” rifle. A “go to hell” label translates into what rifle you would reach for when the world goes in the pot and you rush into your safe room looking for a rifle and pre-loaded magazines. The AK serves this role for many based on reliability no matter what field conditions it finds itself in. Smoking hand guards on an AK means it is only getting warmed up. Of course, this is an over simplification in the same vein that ARs are indeed more reliable than most give them credit for and AKs are more accurate.

The Century AES-10B RPK weighs approximately 12 pounds empty and the 23-inch 1:10 twist barrel lends to an overall length of 42 inches with wire stock unfolded and 34.25 inches folded. The wire folding stock is a unique AES-10B feature compared to most RPKs affixed with wooden stocks. The AES-10B’s wire stock comes with the added benefit that the rear trunnion is already configured to accommodate standard AK rear stocks. This is useful if an owner wants to switch out the rear stock to better suit their individual preferences unlike other semiautomatic RPK clones on the market. Most RPK clones are limited in this area fitted with either a “clubfoot” RPD-style stock or oversized AK wood stocks associated with Yugoslavian M72 versions of the RPK with no easy means available to switch out stocks unless the rear trunnion is modified. The AES-10B’s heavy barrel measures approximately 3/4 inches in diameter and is U.S. made sans chrome-lining. The U.S. made barrel contributes to the magical number of needed U.S. parts to pass BATF muster. The M14:1 LH threaded muzzle comes equipped with a slanted muzzle brake. The AES-10B RPK features an integral bipod that folds underneath the barrel until deployed. Research and observation indicates that the stamped receiver is reinforced and enlarged around the front trunnion connection to the barrel.

The RPK configured AES-10B differs from the typical AK/AKM in a number of design improvements intended to facilitate its role as a light machine gun. The barrel is lengthened and thickened to not only increase muzzle velocity, but also allow for increased heat capacity during extended fire sessions. Along these same lines the barrel is mated to a reinforced receiver housing reflective of its sustained fire role. 40-round stick and 75-round drum magazines were developed with the RPK to improve its combat rate of fire. The RPK was outfitted with folding bipod to stabilize it during deployment assisting a squad or platoon in advancing towards its objective or defending from an attack. The RPK rear sight is outfitted with sliding windage mechanism to improve fire accuracy and ease of adjustability. The original RPKs featured a rear stock identical to the Degtyarev RPD 44 machine gun. The interchangeability of parts between the RPK and AK/AKM is high including magazines.

As with most weapons adapted to suit a role beyond its original design intent the RPK has some drawbacks. The combination of firing from a closed bolt and fixed barrel translates into an operator having to use good fire discipline or the RPK will overheat and fail. Optimal sustained fire is around 80 rounds per minute. If overused, chambered rounds could “cook off;” not to mention barrel damage. The fixed barrel combined with inability to fire via belt fed ammunition cause many to question its utility as light machine gun. Comparisons to the U.S. BAR are common, though not necessarily accurate considering cartridges fired and different operating design ala closed bolt for RPK compared to open bolt for BAR. The RPK design commenced in the late 1950s and finalized by the Red Army in 1961, but did not enter wide-spread service until 1964. Each infantry squad was issued one RPK along with a 75-round drum magazine. The RPK continues in service in numerous post-Soviet countries and allies to this day with hundreds of thousands produced. The Kalashnikov’s gas piston operating system’s greatest benefit is reliability in more diverse environments due to reduced sensitivity to dirt and grime, not to mention the more powerful leverage it applies to the bolt compared to direct gas. Another key component is looser tolerances in the moving parts, giving it more latitude to function when dirty from field conditions or not cleaning after firing numerous rounds.

Century literature details an interesting story behind the AES-10B RPKs – though perhaps apocryphal. These rifles are the semiautomatic only version of the Romanian RPKs issued to elite paratrooper forces during the Communist Ceausescu Regime. The extremely rare AES-10B variant currently being offered is built using a small cache of rifles found in a sealed building in the Transylvanian factory town of Cugir. These were apparently to be issued for a planned massive troop build-up on the Romanian/Hungarian border when tensions flared between the two Warsaw Pact member states. Luckily, cooler heads prevailed and a crisis was averted. The rifles are identified by featuring a side folding stock, integral carry handle and bipod.

The Century AES-10B RPK was enjoyable to shoot at the range and amazingly effective in supplying firepower downrange. While not surprised at the lack of sub-MOA accuracy, it was very possible to hit man sized Mike Gibson Manufacturing (MGM) precision rifle targets placed at 200 and 300 yards. The prone position utilizing the integral bipod was predominately used for the evaluation; though standing and kneeling off hand positions were experimented with no problem even with 75-round drum magazines inserted. Fortunately, Echo Valley Training Center has installed two permanent “foxholes” created by turning large diameter concrete culvert pipes end wise into the ground complete with firing step in the bottom. Echo Valley Training Center features multi-stepped target berms that are strewn with reactive steel targets, fluid drained automobiles, and moving targets at ranges varying from 150 yards out to 350 yards. The protected firing positions were perfect for evaluating the AES-10B RPK in its intended fire support role. While certainly not comparable to a belt-fed switch barrel machine gun, a relatively large volume of fire was possible, especially when used with a high capacity 75-round drum with attention paid not to exceed 60 rounds per minute for any extended fire sessions. Two 40-round magazines come with AES-10B and standard 30-round AK magazines work fine as well.

The semiautomatic AES-10B firing the 7.62×39 cartridge is very controllable with its extra weight over the standard AK. In comparison to the RPK’s big brother, the PKM chambered in 7.62x54R, the RPK is a pleasure to shoot. The PKM medium machine gun is a handful compared to the semiautomatic RPK firing the intermediate 7.62×39. The wire folding stock did not prove problematic in terms of comfort or proper aiming with the AES-10B. Original thoughts of replacing the folding wire stock were shelved. At ranges under 400 yards one would not be considered terribly under-gunned with the AES-10B RPK semiautomatic. The car placed 200 yards away could not withstand the AES-10B fire. Rounds penetrated sheet metal, seats, or anything else in its path as the 7.62×39 easily passed through the car; only the wheel rims and engine block provided a modicum amount of resistance.

Multiple 7.62×39 loads were tested with the Century AES-10B such as Hornady, Wolf, Barnaul, Egyptian and Yugoslavian surplus. Barnaul Silver Bear zinc-plated and Wolf Ammunition steel cased 122gr and 124gr loads hovered in the 3 inch range at 100 yards with surplus Egyptian and Yugoslavian 7.62×39 producing similar groups. I found this acceptable considering my eyes and the non-target style battle sights that are found on the AES-10B. Unlike typical AK sights, the AES-10B’s rear sight was windage adjustable. The sights were right on out of the box. The G2 trigger was typically smooth and with reasonable pull weight measuring slightly over 5 lbs. The notorious AK trigger “slap” was present, but not all that distracting or painful if shooting gloves were used. No malfunctions were encountered in over 900 rounds fired during three range sessions while compiling this article. Interestingly, both the Egyptian and Yugoslavian surplus ammunition feature brass cases. One downside to the surplus ammunition is that it does utilize corrosive primers. Something the Russians and other ex-Soviet bloc states insisted on using due to concerns with cold weather ignition and long-term storage capabilities offered by corrosive primers. However, stocking up on it cannot be resisted considering that it can be still found at .25 cents a round or lower. Corrosive ammunition is not the destroyer of rifles many will lead you to believe as long as proper cleaning methods are followed to remove elements left over from the primer residue.

The long anticipated Hornady 123gr SST bullets mated to steel cases are starting to arrive on dealers’ shelves and were tested with the AES-10B. Seems that the original Hornady 7.62×39 loads that featured the V-Max bullet is being replaced with the SST bullet which represents a more controlled expansion with its bullet construction in lieu of the more varmint style V-Max construction. The SST loads delivered with accuracy in the 2 inch range at 100 yards. In all fairness, a magnified optic would have probably produced better accuracy results in lieu of the open sights, especially with the Hornady loads. The Century AES-10B comes equipped with a side rail scope base permitting the install of optics if desired and just not Com-bloc varieties with the advent of Picatinny-style side mounts. The thought of mounting a red dot or low magnification scope was toyed with ala what is being seen overseas on our troops M240/M249 weapons. The accuracy levels exhibited by the Hornady 123gr load added emphasis to this thought process, but was ultimately not employed. Gilt edge accuracy is not the goal with the AES-10B; it is a fighting rifle measured by a different set of parameters. Individuals will have to decide for themselves if the AES10B is worthy of a red dot or magnified optic.

Some will be attracted to the Century International Arms AES-1OB for its proven potential as a weapon, while others will find it the closest opportunity they will have to own a working replica of a historical firearm. It is very possible to state that the Century AES-10B was an enjoyable rifle to shoot and handle at the range. The AES-10B is an interesting piece of firearm development history that can still perform on the range.

SOURCES

Century International Arms
430 South Congress Ave. Suite 1
Delray Beach, FL 33445
(800) 527-1252
www.centuryarms.com

Echo Valley Training Center
www.echovalleytrainingcenter.com

Hornady Mfg. Inc.
3625 Old Potash Hwy
Grand Island, NE 68802
(800) 338-3220
www.hornady.com

Wolf Ammunition
PO Box 757
Placentia, CA 92871
(888) 757-9653
www.wolfammo.com