By Dan Shea

August, 2000. Let me see… September, October, November. What have I done today, to help defeat the Clintonistas in the November election?

That is a question I hope many are asking themselves. This is one of the most important elections in the last fifty years. Yes, Reagan defeating Carter was important. Certainly, as to the last two elections, it would have been nice to NOT have the Clinton crowd selling out America for the last eight years, but that is almost water over the “damn” now. The repercussions of Clinton’s assault on our freedom and liberty will be echoing for years, if not decades. This coming election is pivotal- it is crucial to the continuation of the freedom of Americans that the Gore campaign be stopped at the ballot box.

It is not just a matter of whether I get to leave my grandchildren a 22-caliber rifle, or a hunting shotgun. It’s not even a matter of whether they get my MP5 or Maxim gun. It is simply about the foundations of our freedom that have been undermined by the last two Clinton terms. Our presidency is now a tarnished thing, a sick dirty joke, because of the buffoon who has sat in that office and literally sold the greatness of our nation. Clinton may be a “Smart” man, but he certainly has reduced the office of President to the lowest moral level conceivable. Only the ultra-liberal US media can still believe the Emperor is wearing any clothes.

“I HAVE A DREAM!” (Shouted out, finger in the air, echoing over the crowd) Yes, I have a dream. That dream is of George W. Bush taking that November election, and on January 22, 2001, when he walks in the Oval Office and sits in that seat of power, the sea tides change. Call me naïve, call me a dreamer, and I will admit to that… (this is a dream after all). On that fateful day, orders are issued. Executive orders. Ones that overturn eight years of Clinton ruling by fiat. A large broom is pushed through the halls of our Capitol, and Clinton’s “Legacy”, those few lying, perjuring rats who have sold out our defense technology, who have led the barbarians to the gates, who have even sold our honor, are driven from their hiding holes. The Clinton officials who oversaw the Waco massacre, the never ending cover-ups on all of Clinton’s scandals, and the manipulation of the information to Americans, well, they are no longer protected, and the investigations truly begin…..Justice is allowed to truly be blind, and to resolve the crimes of the last eight years.

(Earth to Dan…. Earth to Dan…. Are you out there?) Uh… sorry… Yeah, that’s probably not going to happen. But, you know what? It is a far more likely thing to wish for than to think that another Clintonista term will leave ANY of our freedom intact. It’s not just about the guns. On every front, Freedom is being attacked. Our privacy, our possessions, our free speech, our freedom of religion, freedom against unreasonable search and seizure. Is the ownership of arms by free men one of the underpinnings of a free society? Yes, but it is not the only issue here.

It is necessary to move ahead, to keep our eye on the objective. If we “Conservatives”, or we “Libertarians”, we freedom oriented majority, get caught up with internal squabbles, divide our votes or stay home on election day, well, the damage could be irreversible.

Imagine a Gore presidency. I don’t need to fill in the blanks, you can do it yourselves.

That should be enough motivation to make all of us grab every eligible voter we know, lock elbows, and march straight to the voting booths on that fateful November day, and to ensure the Clinton “Legacy” does not continue on!

– Dan

By Larry Pratt

Maryland Alderman Wants Federal Law Banning Toy Guns!

When I first read the story in the Washington Times newspaper I thought it was a joke, a spoof. I double-checked the date of the paper. No, it was April 20th not April 1st. The headline read: “Buyback Of Toy, Water Pistols Sought.”

The story told how Cynthia A. Carter, a Democrat alderman in the city of Annapolis, Maryland, wants police to buy back cap guns, water pistols and other toy weapons to curb violent behavior in children. She’s quoted as saying: “Children can’t distinguish between a real gun and or a play gun, nor do they understand the difference between life and death.”

She wants people to weigh the possibilities, asking: “What good does a toy gun do and what harm does it do?”

Still not sure that this story was for real, we contacted Alderman Carter, interviewed her and here’s the way it went:

Q: So, what’s wrong with kids playing with toy guns, cap guns, water pistols?

A: Well, if you follow me, when they were making toys guns which, first of all, should never have been, to take something that could be so detrimental, something so deadly, and turn it into a toy, and capitalize on it at the cost of children and the risk of their lives, and just bodily harm.

So, they got away with it over the years. But, with time change, like with the seatbelts and the metal detectors at school and other precautionary measures taken to protect the children, I think we better look at what we have here — to do the same thing. Times have changed.

I don’t know if you’ve ever seen some of those video games. There is some pretty nasty stuff on there — shooting and killing and destroying each other. Children need at this point in time, with thing being as they are, to be taught to respect, to care and to love.

And when they get older and if they decide they want to get a gun and do hunting or collect them as a hobby or whatever. But the same laws they have restricting children from tobacco, driving and alcohol need to be put on any form of a gun….

Q: You think police should buy back these violent video games, too?

A: Absolutely! Absolutely! If we could get some of those things —these kids get together in these rooms, turn on these videos and freak out. I can’t stand to look at them. Can you imagine what’s going through these young minds? But, we had better take note and check ourselves.

Q: Should it be illegal to make these toy guns?

A: Absolutely!

Q: Really?

A: Absolutely! And if I had my way it would be.

Q: Making toy guns should be a crime?

A: Yes.

Q: And what should be the punishment?

A: The same as it would be if you made a real gun.

Q: But, it is not illegal to manufacture most guns. What specific punishment would you support for those who make toy guns?

A: I’m sure the Federal Government could find a fine — I guess the same fine that there would be if a kid was sold a real gun.

Q: So, there should be a Federal law against selling toy guns?

A: Absolutely. Absolutely.

Q: You seem to think that all guns and all uses of guns are bad.

A: Understand what I am saying. What it’s doing mentally to the children. What you do with a gun when you become of age — some fathers think it is right to take these boys out and show them how to kill an animal. These children cannot distinguish a difference —their minds absorb — and, again, and my backup on the whole thing is that if you train up a child in the way he should go, when he gets older he will not stray from it.

Q: Right. That’s from the Old Testament book of Proverbs.

A: Exactly, Proverbs 22:6.

Q: So, if you train up a child to know the difference between a toy gun and a real gun then…

A: You can’t.

Q: Sure you can.

A: No, you can’t. The idea that it is a very destructive piece of equipment that was made to look like, and to be played with to kill, is the whole direction this whole thing has gone.

Q: But is all killing bad?

A: Yes. If you teach a child to kill…

Q: What about self-defense?

A: There is a difference. A child does not have the ability, to my knowledge — and I’m talking about little children — to kill somebody to defend themselves.

Q: But, I’m alluding to that Proverb you quoted. It’s true. So, if you trained up a child, with toy guns, to teach them to respect real guns, and use them for self-defense, when necessary, then —

A: No.

Q: Sure you could.

A: You know, there’s one thing about anything that happens in this world. There’s no correct way of doing it. I want to initiate something that needs to be initiated, and that right now is to let children know that guns are not toys. And we start by eliminating them as toys.

Q: But toy guns are toys.

A: We’re adults and we know. But we should know better by now that we need to stop manufacturing them and giving them to kids and stop letting it be a toy.

Q: But what’s wrong with training kids to know about and respect real guns and to know how to use them in self-defense?

A: We can teach the children about a lot of things. But to teach them about using a firearm to kill, they have to first learn to respect life before they can learn the rest of it. We as parents are supposed to protect these children. They should not have to have a firearm to protect themselves or to get a meal (?).

Q: No, I’m not talking about kids having real guns. I’m talking about training them, when they are kids, to learn to use a real gun later, possibly in self-defense — which, incidentally, shows a respect for human life!

A: No. I don’t agree with that. We have other things to teach our kids. We need to teach them to respect life.

Q: But, it’s not either/or. You can do both. You can demonstrate a respect for human life by using a gun to defend your life or somebody else’s life.

A: This is something the Lord (?) has laid on my heart. I find it necessary, just like we need to put prayer back in school. This is what I want to do for my community. The kids cannot watch TV all day long. They cannot watch certain movies and things on there. They cannot do those videos. We need to put a book in their hands, or they should learn to ride horseback, go to the arts, dancing. This is what we need to do. But there are not too many parents in the homes taking care of kids nowadays.

Q: We’re not going to disagree on that. Are you aware that hundreds of thousands of people in this country — some studies says millions — of Americans use guns in self-defense every year?

A: Should a five or six-year-old kid be put to that? I’m not talking about someone who is 19, 20 or 21. I’m talking about the youth. We gotta start somewhere.

Q: I’m sorry. I’m not getting my point across. I’m saying that one valid reason for allowing kids to have toy guns is to show them how to use real guns responsibly when they grow up for, among other things, self-defense.

A: Then take them to a whorehouse and show them how to have sex! You might as well do the whole nine yards.

Q: Really?! So, you think teaching kids how to responsibly use firearms is like teaching them to fornicate?!

A: No, baby. Self-defense didn’t mainly start in the home. That is where most children are harmed where they are molested by those who are supposed to love and care for them. We gotta teach these kids that that is not the thing to play with.

Q: I’m not talking about teaching kids to play with real guns!

A: Not every child can distinguish between a real and a toy. Their minds are not developed that way. We are the parents, the care-takers. And we must direct these children the right way.

Amazing, no? — and truly lunatic — which is why Cynthia A. Carter is our “Anti-Gun Nut-Of-The-Month.”

Larry Pratt is Executive Director of Gun Owners of America located at 8001 Forbes Place, Springfield, VA 22151 and at http://www.gunowners.org on the web.

By Robert Hausman

In this second installment of SAR’s special coverage of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms’ (ATF), first in a series of published in-depth looks at the firearms industry in America, the topics of illegal firearms trafficking, gun tracing, the history of U.S. firearms regulation, and some statistical information on transfers and ownership of National Firearms Act regulated arms are presented.

In a study published in 1999 of the sources of trafficked firearms identified in ATF illegal trafficking investigations involving youth and juveniles, the greatest source of illegal firearms (50.9%) were firearms trafficked by straw purchasers or straw purchasing rings. Trafficking in firearms stolen from a dealer came in second at 20.7%, and trafficking in firearms by unregulated private sellers (as distinct from straw purchasers and other traffickers) came in third at 14.2%.

Trafficked firearms stolen from residences comprised 13.6% of the sources of firearms in the study, while firearms trafficked at gun shows, flea markets, auctions, or in want ads and gun magazines came to 9.9%, and firearms trafficked by licensed dealers, including pawnbrokers, totaled 6.3%. Street criminals buying and selling guns from unknown suppliers were a source of only 4% of the guns under study, while trafficking in firearms stolen from common carriers came in at 2.5%, and other sources (such as guns sold over the Internet and illegal pawning) comprised only 1.4%.

ATF has discovered a small number of dealers account for a large proportion of the firearms traced. In 1998, among all dealers, 14% had one or more firearms traced to them in that year; about 32% of the pawnbrokers and about 12% of other retail dealers had a trace that year. Only 1.2% of dealers in 1998 were associated with 10 or more traces. These approximately 1,000 dealers accounted for well over 50% of the traces to retail dealers that year.

About 330 dealers, a fraction of one percent of the total, were associated with 25 or more traces and accounted for about 40% of the traces to dealers in 1998. While the average time-to-crime for traced firearms is about six years, many traced firearms are recovered in three years or less.

Approximately 200,000 trace requests were made in 1999. Not all trace requests result in the identification of the original licensed retail dealer or purchaser of the traced firearm. A gun trace currently identifies the first retail dealer for about 60% of trace requests and the first retail purchaser for approximately 40% of trace requests.

Factors Inhibiting Tracing

The factors inhibiting the tracing of firearms include non-responsive dealers. Though dealers are required to respond to trace requests within 24 hours, and many do respond promptly to trace requests, ATF says some dealers totally disregard or refuse to comply with a request; others fail to respond within 24 hours and still others supply incorrect information.

Another difficulty is in tracing secondhand guns. Federal law does not require unlicensed sellers to preserve transfer records (of non-National Firearms Act regulated arms), nor are gun owners required to keep a record of the serial number of their firearms or to report lost or stolen firearms. Thus, it is generally impossible for a crime gun trace to identify purchasers beyond the initial retail buyer.

Some traces cannot be completed because the firearm is lost or stolen while in transit between two licensees, and not reported as such to ATF. Current regulations do not specify whether the shipping or receiving licensee is responsible for reporting the theft or loss of a firearm while it is in transit. Interstate carriers are not required to report the theft or loss of firearms shipped in commerce. In fiscal year 1999, there were 1,290 crime gun traces in which the FFL-holder claimed it never received the firearm sent to it.

The intentional obliteration of firearms’ serial numbers by criminals poses a serious threat to the effectiveness of the firearms tracing system. ATF restores obliterated serial numbers at its three national firearms laboratories. On June 23, 1999, ATF issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to impose marking requirements that would make it more difficult to obliterate serial numbers.

Gun Law History

ATF’s report notes that prior to the enactment of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which established the present system for federal licensing and regulation of gun dealers, the firearms industry was regulated by three major pieces of national legislation.

The first was the Revenue Act of 1918, which imposed a tax on the sale of firearms and ammunition by the manufacturer or importer of the firearm or ammunition. The tax is 10% for handguns and 11% for all other firearms. The tax has been in effect, with few modifications, since 1918.

The National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) was enacted to combat “gangster” violence that had increased markedly during alcohol prohibition. The NFA imposes an excise tax on manufacturing and transferring a narrow class of firearms, defined by statute, including machine guns, short-barreled shotguns and rifles, silencers and “gadget” guns such as umbrella guns and pen guns.

By taxing the manufacture and transfer of these arms, the NFA sought to reduce the availability and the commerce of these arms to the criminal element. The NFA also requires that these arms, and each transfer of them, be recorded in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record.

The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 applied to all firearms and prohibited anyone not licensed as a manufacturer or dealer from transporting, shipping, or receiving any firearm or ammunition in interstate or foreign commerce. Licensed dealers and manufacturers could ship firearms interstate only to other licensed dealers and manufacturers, and to those who had or were not required to have a license under state law to purchase the firearm. Licensed dealers and manufacturers were required to keep records of firearms transactions.

The law prohibited any person from shipping or transporting in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm or ammunition to any felon, person under felony indictment, or fugitive from justice, and these prohibited persons could not ship or transport any firearm or ammunition in interstate or foreign commerce. Although later repealed by the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), many of its provisions formed the framework for the GCA.

The Gun Control Act of 1968, by creating a licensing scheme that regulates the interstate movement of firearms, helps individual states enforce their own laws regulating firearms possession and transfers by generally prohibiting the transport and shipment of firearms across state lines. Before the GCA, differences among state controls over firearms commerce impaired the ability of states to enforce their own laws. The GCA’s interstate prohibitions were intended to minimize the impact of different state laws, which had led to illicit commerce in guns between states with little firearms regulation and states with strict controls.

The GCA generally prohibits the importation of firearms. However, it contains an exception for firearms which are of a type “generally recognized as particularly suitable for, or readily adaptable to, sporting purposes.” Since 1968, factoring criteria, which include overall length, frame construction, weight, caliber, and safety features, have been used to determine if handguns meet the sporting purposes test.

The Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA) contained many provisions aiding the firearms industry and individual gun owners. Unfortunately, the law also banned the manufacture of machine guns for civilian use. Among the FOPA’s positive provisions, was one amending the GCA to allow dealers to conduct business temporarily at gun shows, provided the gun show was located within the same state as the dealer’s licensed premises.

The FOPA also reduced most recordkeeping offenses committed by licensed dealers from felonies to misdemeanors and amended the GCA to provide that ATF could conduct only one warrantless inspection of a licensee for compliance purposes in any 12-month period. Prior to 1986, the GCA did not include any specific mens rea (meaning “guilty mind”) requirements. The FOPA amended the GCA to require proof of either a “knowing” or a “willful” state of mind for all GCA violations.

The FOPA prohibits ATF from establishing any national system of conventional gun registration. Before 1986, the GCA provided for the seizure and forfeiture of any firearm or ammunition involved in, or used or intended to be used in any violation of the GCA. The FOPA amended the GCA to require “clear and convincing evidence” of intent to violate the law before the government could seize and forfeit firearms used in GCA violations. In addition, the government must begin forfeiture proceedings within 120 days of seizure.

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 was implemented in two stages: an interim stage and a permanent stage. The interim provisions went into effect on February 28, 1994, requiring dealers to submit a “Brady Form” to a chief law enforcement officer (CLEO) who had the option of conducting a background check on the prospective handgun purchaser. The law required the dealer to wait for up to five business days for the CLEO’s response before the handgun could be transferred to the buyer.

The permanent provisions of the Brady Act went into effect November 30, 1998. It was at this time that the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, (Sometimes referred to as the “NRA Plan”) came into use for checking the backgrounds of buyers of both hand and long guns in states where it applies.

On September 13, 1994, Congress passed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which made it unlawful, with certain exceptions, to manufacture, transfer, or possess certain firearms defined as so-called “semiautomatic assault weapons” not lawfully possessed on the date of the law’s enactment. The 1994 law also made it generally unlawful to possess and transfer large capacity ammunition feeding devices (those holding over 10 rounds) manufactured after September 13, 1994.

The 1994 Act also required those applying for federal firearms licenses to submit photographs and fingerprints as part of their application, and to certify that their firearms business complied with all state and local laws, including zoning regulations.

By Nick Steadman

SADW is a monthly electronic publication from Nick Steadman Features. Nick, intrepid world traveling reporter for much of the arms industry, files this 40,000 to 50,000 word report once a month to his loyal subscribers. Those lucky ones pay a mere $50 (US) £32.50 (UK) per year for the privilege of getting the hot tips and insights from one of the industry’s insiders. Nick’s unique perspective is globally based, as is his wit. Each issue is full of insight and information for those with an interest in Small Arms, as well as his observations on world travel.
UK DEFENCE SECRETARY ON SA80 MODIFICATION OR REPLACEMENT: the following are extracts of a recent letter (paragraphs re-set, our underscoring) sent by the UK Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon, to the moderator of the Cybershooters mailing list:

‘We commissioned the Design Authority for the weapon to assess its reliability and to design potential modifications. These modifications have been the subject of extensive trials carried out in Alaska and Kuwait to replicate the extreme conditions in which UK forces might be called on to operate.

The trials demonstrated that we can achieve significant improvements in the reliability of the SA80. The proposed modification package represents a whole system approach to improving the reliability while maintaining the weapon system’s overall effectiveness. They include modifications to the gas plug, a redesigned bolt, a new magazine, a modified firing pin, stiffer recoil and piston rod springs, a replacement hammer, a redesigned extraction and ejection system, a redesigned cocking handle and, for the Light Support Weapon, a replacement barrel.

We are currently assessing the wider implications of the trials report and a number of key issues are being considered. One of these is the cost of modifying the existing weapon and whether it is more cost effective to procure a new weapon such as the C7 or G36 rifles.’

Note the large number of modified components which would be required if the SA80 (particularly the LSW version) was retained and upgraded – it’d be virtually a new weapon. We can’t believe this option would be remotely ‘cost-effective’, and we’d be simply amazed if at least a partial replacement was not now ordered.

ARMSCOR (PHILIPPINES) NEWS: for 2000, Armscor in the Philippines is offering a new ‘heavily-customised’ .45 ACP M1911 pistol variant for IPSC competition. It has also increased its production volume on ammunition, which in the past was mostly taken up by domestic demand, and now aims to meet US requirements from its Las Vegas location. Armscor is also getting more into IPSC and home defence ammunition. Amongst its military ammunition lines, Armscor produces petal-crimp blanks in both 5.56mm and 9x19mm. The 9mm loading is the full length of a ball cartridge, the 5.56mm blank rather shorter than the full-length pointed versions favoured by the UK forces. Armscor also offers .22 rimfire (Short & LR), .22 WMR, .30 US Carbine, 9x19mm, .32 Auto, .380 Auto, .38 Super, .38 Spl, .357 Mag, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, 5.56mm M193, 20g BB and 12g (No 4 to No 8 shot plus 00 Buckshot). All the centrefire metallic loadings are FMJ (ball) except .357, which is available in JHP and JSP versions. E-mail: armscor@info.com.ph

.20 COIL GUN CONCEPT: in an issue of National Defense at the end of 1999, Larry Schamber, an engineer at Allinson Transmission, a division of General Motors in Indianapolis, wrote that he had developed a computer concept for an electro-magnetic coil gun firing a 23.14gr stainless steel projectile at up to 6,673 fps, delivering an ME of 3,030 Joules. The bullet is 0.2” in diameter and 1” long, and is intended to be fired in a 6” barrel. He added that the only recoil forces result directly from the bullet’s functioning. Though he considers making this into a viable hand-held weapon would be difficult, he nevertheless believes it is feasible.

EOD EQUIPMENT REQUIRED BY UK MOD: the UK MOD is seeking expressions of interest by 31 Aug 2000 in contracts to produce unspecified EOD equipment (quantity ‘a few hundreds’), which it says will be ‘manufactured from plastics and will incorporate explosives’ (go figure!). It will be a ‘build to print’ deal. UK MOD Contact Tel (0117) 913-1628, Fax 1940.

SUSAT – NEW APPLICATIONS: the 4x SUSAT scope issued for front-line SA80s in the UK forces has apparently found a new niche. A photo run by Navy News showed Royal Marines from 42 Commando RM practising with their tripod-mounted .50 M2HB machine guns aboard HMS Ocean off the coast of Sierra Leone.

Mounted on top of these guns, several inches above the boreline, were SUSATs. We noticed in particular that the gunners’ eye was right up against the eyecup of the scope, which has a very short (about 1”) eye relief, designed as it is for light-recoiling 5.56mm weapons. However, we would not particularly want to use a heavy-recoiling .50 with a scope of this design. The scope base was also right against the firer’s nose and the large range drum beneath it was against his chin. The M2 guns shown were clearly fitted with the short barrels as inherited from the (pre-laser rangefinder) Chieftain tank ranging gun role. Others guns of this type have also been noted with the Parachute Brigade. We understand the maximum all-out range is considerably reduced with these short tubes, by as much as a couple of thousand yards.

Though at typical engagement ranges this is probably of no great concern, it would be relevant for more distant fire with AP ammunition, which (unlike 40mm grenades) depends for its effects on maintaining a decent downrange velocity. Interestingly though, we found a couple of years ago in the USA that the popular but pricey .50 MP (APHEI) bullets would still punch neat holes in quarter-inch mild steel targets at 200 yards when fired only at subsonic velocity. In the same circumstances mild steel-cored .50 ball bullets were defeated – they simply burst their GM jackets and the cores were compressed to about half their original length.

HOPPES No 9 LAWSUIT: a 34-year-old man in the USA is suing Brunswick Corporation and Kmart, the Dominion Post reported, for an unspecified sum, claiming he’s suffered permanent damage to his lungs and respiratory system from inhaling Hoppes No 9 Nitro Powder Solvent, a product owned by Brunswick that most readers have probably used at some time in the past. Reportedly the plaintiff says he suffered shortness of breath, chest pains & dizziness after cleaning a gun back in 1998 with Hoppes No 9, requiring extensive treatment, and has developed asthma and diabetes. It’s also claimed the solvent’s packaging carried inadequate warnings.

MORE US SMART GUN DEVELOPMENT AWARDS: in mid-May 2000, CNN reported that Smith & Wesson and FN Manufacturing Inc were each awarded a $300,000 R&D grant by the US Justice Department for development of Smart Gun prototypes and related personalisation technologies such as fingerprint recognition.

WALTHER ‘SMART GUN’: German sources confirm that Walther in Germany has been developing ‘Smart Gun’ concepts for some five years now, and prototypes already exist, though the company is reportedly awaiting some firm evidence of demand before proceeding further. Such demand seems unlikely to materialise in Germany or the rest of Europe any time soon, at least insofar as official agencies are concerned, the USA being so far the only country to get a bee in its bonnet about user recognition for firearms – now primarily as a means to subject firearms to consumer product controls.

UK SPECIAL FORCES SMALL ARMS CONTRACT GOES TO CANADA: the UK MOD has awarded a contract (value unstated) to the Canadian Commercial Corporation in Ottawa for a fixed quantity of new 5.56mm small arms systems (NSAS), in lieu of SA80, for British special forces and some other users. Optical sights and bayonets are also required. Decoding this deal, the supplier is clearly Diemaco Inc of Ontario, and we’d guess the quantity for SAS and SBS is probably no more than 1,000-1,500 weapons, but maybe extra if the (unspecified) ‘other users’ extend much beyond the Para Pathfinder Platoon. Given the optical sight, we imagine the primary weapon is a variant of the flat-top C7A1 (M16A2) or a Diemaco equivalent of the M4A1 SOPMOD Carbine, in both cases probably with Modular Weapon System enhancements for adding extra accessories to the weapon without having to remove the optics. Why all the guessing? Simply because the MOD usually provides absolutely no details on special forces orders like this, despite the fact the taxpayer is footing the bill. However, we know there is wider interest in the British army in an M4A1 lookalike, and special forces tend to like the extra flexibility of the MWS approach.

It crossed our minds that this order might also be cover for a bigger Diemaco buy – maybe even to include the 20,000-odd rifles the MOD is said to be considering to completely replace the SA80 with rapid reaction forces – but maybe that would be too devious even for Whitehall. We shall see. SAS (who do not use SA80) and Pathfinders already have M16A2 variants in service, but presumably cane their equipment considerably more than line infantry. We imagine the new buy is to introduce an element of uniformity across the whole special forces spectrum.

STERLING SMG PARTS: Internet sources suggest that PAWS Inc in the USA, which launched the ZX6 (9mm) and ZX8 (.45) Sterling-based semi-auto carbines in 1989, is still able to supply parts for owners of Sterling SMGs. Last address we have (dated 1994) is:-

PAWS Inc
8175 River Road NE
Salem, OR 97308 USA
Tel(503)393-0838
Fax(503)393-0915

Readers will recall that Royal Ordnance acquired Sterling Engineering, then essentially killed it off. It was thought at the time that this was possibly to prevent Sterling’s then latest 5.56mm assault rifle becoming a rival to the Anglo-German HK 50, lovechild of the Royal Ordnance/Heckler & Koch marriage, which later evolved into the Bundeswehr’s H&K G36 rifle. We recall that, after the Sterling production plant had been disposed of, Royal Ordnance was (ironically) compelled to ask PAWS at one point for possible assistance with SMG parts to keep its past Sterling customers supplied with spares. That said, we’re not convinced about the concept of a Sterling clone in .45 ACP. We used a PAWS .45 once in Texas and found it mighty hard to control by comparison with the 9x19mm version, which is a pussycat.

UK ANNOUNCES NEW 9x19MM REQUIREMENT: surprisingly, the UK MOD has announced a general call for expressions of interest in a new five-year contract for 9x19mm NATO ball ammunition, covering a total of 17.5 million rounds. The deadline is 30 Jun 2000, UK Contact Tel (0117) 913-1551. Only one loading is sought, suitable for use both in UK pistols and SMGs, and which must comply with British & NATO specifications. We can assume the UK forces weapons involved are the Browning Hi-Power, SIG P226/228 and the MP5, MP5K and MP5SD SMGs, possibly even the odd 9mm Sterling too. The last five-year British contract was awarded to IMI in Israel; let’s hope this time round the MOD can at least find a NATO or EU supplier to meet its needs. Ideally Royal Ordnance should get it, otherwise what price its new ten-year ‘partnering’ arrangement with the MOD?

By Chris Choat

FIREARMOUR GUN LOCK COMBINES FIREARM SAFETY AND ACCESSIBILITY

Firearmour Gunlock System, recently introduced by Firearmour LLC, allows gun owners to keep a loaded firearm readily accessible without risk of harm to family members. This combination of accessibility and security, makes the Firearmour Gunlock System the most advanced, versatile gunlocking system available. The Firearmour Gunlock System features high-rise digital buttons that can be easily used in darkness and provide access to a loaded firearm in less than five seconds. Other gunlocking systems require keys or the use of a thumbwheel combination which both require the gunowner to locate a source of light, and generally take a longer amount of time to open. For added security, the mechanical combination of the Firearmour lock can be reset to over one thousand sequences. The Firearmour Gunlock System is constructed of sturdy, tamper-proof, stainless steel. When the lock is closed, a latch moves under the lip of the unit and is completely inaccessible, even with a prying tool. If there is an attempt to pry the lock, the lip is forced down over the locking mechanism, making it impossible to open the latch. One of the unique features of this gunlock is it’s pin-lock system. The bottom of the unit is covered with a removable, honeycomb-holed stainless steel plate, allowing the three moveable pins to be adjusted to fit any size firearm, including revolvers, automatics and shotguns. This allows for the lock owner to utilize one lock for a variety of guns. The back of the Firearmour lock features mounting holes that allow the owner to bolt the lock to the floor or a piece of furniture. An optional aircraft cable that enables the lock to be attached to a bed frame or automobile seat to prevent theft, is also available. To purchase a Firearmour Gunlock System, or for more information, including a list of compatible guns, as well as mandatory pin location settings for each type of firearm, contact Firearmour LLC, Dept. SAR, P.O. Box 953, Garden City, KS 67846. Phone: 1-888-486-5625. On the web at www.firearmour.com.

ATV PISTOL HOLSTER AND POUCH

CDS, Inc., announces another innovative ATV accessory, the ATV Pistol Holster and Pouch! Better known in the piney woods of the south as “a place for my snake gun”. This ATV Pistol Holster & Pouch is perfect for carrying your sidearm on the ATV and almost any revolver or semi automatic pistol will fit. The ATV Pistol Holster & Pouch makes the gun easily accessible, it is ambidextrous, and a pouch on the opposite side is large enough to carry a full box of 3” shotgun shells, a can of soda, bullets, etc. The ATV Pistol Holster and Pouch securely attaches across the gas tank with adjustable straps and 32 square inches of Velcro. For more information on this and other innovative ATV accessories contact CDS Incorporated, Dept. SAR, 708 Trenton Street, West Monroe, LA 71291. Phone: 1-800-791-1333. Fax: 1-318-325-0386. They can be reached by e-mail at cdsinc@bayou.com.

STREAMLIGHT INTRODUCES NEW PROPOLYMER FLASHLIGHTS

Streamlight, Inc., has announced the introduction of a new series of alkaline battery-powered flashlights which provide extreme durability at a more affordable price. Streamlight’s ProPolymer series for outdoor and recreational use features three new flashlights—the Streamlight 3C, 2AA and the 4AA. The new ProPolymer offer a number of features not previously available from flashlight manufacturers in the outdoor and recreational market. Each light features unique dual head and tail on/off switching which allows the user to engage a tail cap button for momentary operation or rotate the bezel for a constant stream of light. Each light in the new ProPolymer series is designed in a virtually indestructible, non-conductive Polymer case. Their soft rubber non-slip grips provide the assurance needed when working in construction environments which could potentially make a light slippery and hard to grasp. Each roll-resistant flashlight has a rubber face cap for impact and shock resistance and an unbreakable polycarbonate lens. Additionally, all three are submersible in water up to 200 feet—making them ideal for diving enthusiasts. The new flashlights use a xenon bi-pin bulb which is many times brighter than conventional bulbs. The Streamlight 3C (8.77 inches long) operates for up to 5.5 continuous hours and has a spring-loaded clip that can be easily attached to clothing. It provides up to 12,000 candlepower of light. The Streamlight 2AA (6.06 inches) operates for up to 4 continuous hours and feature a pocket clip. It provides up to 3,500 candlepower. The Streamlight 4AA (6.38 inches) operates for 4 hours and provides 6,000 candlepower. The Models 2AA and 4AA also offer an optional helmet clamp for mounting on a helmet. All three new lights are available in olive drab, yellow or black and come with a wrist lanyard. For more information contact Streamlight, Inc., Dept. SAR, 1030 West Germantown Pike, Norristown, PA 19403. Phone: 1-800-523-7488. Fax: 1-610-631-0712. On the web at www.streamlight.com.

ADVANCED ARMAMENT INTRODUCES PHANTOM SUPPRESSOR

New from Advanced Armament Corporation is the high tech Phantom suppressor. The PHANTOM is a thread-mounted suppressor for 9mm pistols, carbines and submachine guns. Compact and light weight, the PHANTOM is constructed of CNC machined aircraft quality aluminum alloy and stainless steel. The internal components of the PHANTOM are designed to minimize first round pop, and are tuned to provide enough back pressure to cycle a number of popular Browning style semi-automatic pistols without the use of expensive and cumbersome recoil enhancing equipment. Equally suited for sport shooting and tactical applications, the performance of the PHANTOM can be increased by up to 30% by introducing a small amount (approximately 5cc) of water into the rear of the baffle stack. Like all Advanced Armament Corp. suppressors, the PHANTOM features a stainless steel rear mount to prevent excess thread wear common with all-aluminum suppressors. For more information on this and their full line of other suppressors contact Advanced Armament Corporation, Dept. SAR, 221 West Crogan Steet, Lawrenceville, GA 30045. Phone: 1-770-277-4946. Fax: 1-770-963-6556. Their website is www.advanced-armament.com.

By Phillip H. Dater

In the firearms sound suppression industry, we are primarily concerned with reducing exceptionally short duration, broad spectrum, impulse sounds in order to reduce their intensity and mask their characteristics. Although impartial observers can provide relatively satisfactory subjective comparison of the perceived sound signatures, the impressions will vary with the number of suppressors compared, the ability of the observers to describe the sound, and the selective hearing loss of the observer. What is pleasing to one person may be obnoxious to another, depending on hearing acuity. For example, shooters and others subjected to repeated high intensity sounds have significant hearing loss that decrease their sensitivity to high frequency sounds. In addition, typical media descriptions of suppressed sound signatures are meaningless hyperbole, describing such events as a whisper, whoosh, hiccough, or pop of a cap gun. Each of these descriptions has different connotations to different readers.

To objectively compare suppressor performance and evaluate changes during the design process, it is necessary to measure the sound level in some objective fashion utilizing standard (or consistent) conditions and precision equipment, none of which is available at Radio Shack. Reasonably accurate results require suitable equipment to measure sound pressure levels and a standardized, repeatable protocol for measurement.

All of us are familiar with the vague concept of what constitutes sound, but the specific definition is more obscure. Perhaps the simplest definition of sound is any pressure variation that the human ear can detect.

CHARACTERISTICS OF SOUND and MEASUREMENT UNIT

The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of the sound and is measured in Hertz (Hz). One Hertz is one cycle per second. The tone of a given sound varies with the frequency. Although certain musical notes may be a pure tone (single frequency), the vast majority of sounds in our environment are made up of multiple simultaneous frequencies.

In addition to frequency, sound is characterized by its intensity or amplitude of the pressure variations. The threshold of human hearing (minimal sound pressure) is 0.0002 dynes per square centimeter (or 20 millionths of a Pascal, abbreviated 20 (Pa). That threshold is approximately 5 billion times less than normal atmospheric pressure. This pressure variation is so small that it causes the tympanic membrane (ear drum) to move a distance less than the diameter of a hydrogen molecule. Because the ear can tolerate sound pressure levels over a million times more intense, measuring sound levels in micro-Pascals would result in some unbelievably large and unmanageable numbers. To avoid this, we use a logarithmic scale.

Logarithms are a mathematical trick to simplify the multiplication and division of unwieldy, large numbers by converting these numbers to powers of a common number, usually 10 (common or base 10 logarithms), which are the exponents of 10. Multiplication and division is then reduced to the simpler process of adding and subtracting the exponents. For example, the number 100 can be expressed as 10 squared or 10 to the 2nd power. The logarithm (abbreviated “log”) of 100 is 2. In a similar manner, the logarithm of 1,000 is 3 (10 to the 3rd power). If we were to multiply 100 by 1,000, we could simply add the exponents (or logarithms) to obtain 5 (10 to the 5th power, or 100,000). With large numbers, it is a simpler process.

The Bel (named after Alexander Graham Bell) is defined as the logarithm of the ratio of two levels of power. For convenience, we use the decibel (1/10 Bel). The decibel is not an absolute unit of measurement, and the dB scale (for sound pressure levels) uses the threshold of human hearing as the reference level, defined as 0 dB. Because of the logarithmic nature of the dB scale, each time we multiply the actual sound pressure level in micro-Pascals by a factor of 10, we add 20 to the dB sound pressure level. For example, a sound level of 200 (Pa corresponds to 20 dB; 2,000 (Pa to 40 dB; 2,000,000 (Pa to 100 dB; 200,000,000 (Pa to 140 dB; etc. The threshold of pain for impulse sounds is approximately 141 dB. Unfortunately, significant hearing damage can occur with sound levels of 140 dB where there may be no pain. Hearing can be damaged without pain or ringing in the ears!

For the purist, the term sound pressure refers to measurements made in sound pressure units (Pascals or microPascals). The term sound pressure level (SPL) refers to measurements made in decibels.

CHARACTERISTICS OF IMPULSE SOUNDS

Although most sounds in our environment are composed of relatively long duration pressure variations, there are also short and exceptionally short pressure variations referred to as impulse sounds. By definition, impulse sounds have a duration of less than one second. Because of the short duration of these sounds, the ear is less sensitive in perceiving loudness. Researchers have shown that the perceived loudness of sounds diminishes with the duration of the sound impulse. It is important to remember that although the perception of loudness is less with short impulses, the risk of hearing damage is not reduced. This will be discussed in more detail later.

Sound impulses of a firearm are generated by the sudden, explosive expansion of high-pressure gases at the moment a bullet leaves the muzzle of a firearm. The non-suppressed sound pressure level returns to normal atmospheric pressure within 100 or so microseconds of the projectile leaving the rifling. A microsecond is one one-millionth of a second. These are pretty short times. In the case of a suppressed weapon, the most intense sound pressure peak (loudest component) is an even shorter, almost instantaneous, pulse lasting at the most 20 to 25 microseconds. This is followed by several other pulses of far lower intensity for another 100-200 microseconds. If an instrument will not respond to pulse duration 20 microseconds or less, it will fail to record the loudest suppressed pulse and will provide grossly inaccurate suppressed sound levels.

HEARING DAMAGE and OSHA SPECIFICATIONS

The subject of hearing damage from high intensity sound levels is somewhat confusing with claims that sounds ranging from over 85 dB up to 140 dB or more will cause hearing damage, depending on who is making the claim. The correct answer is that all are correct, depending on conditions and characteristics of the sound. Hearing damage is dose related, whether from short duration high intensity sounds or continuous low to moderate intensity sounds. The dose is related both to the intensity of the sound and the duration (time of exposure).

If the sound were a simple on-off phenomenon (such as having a sound instantly reach full intensity and remain there until turned off suddenly, it would be fairly simple to calculate “dB-seconds,” Pascale-seconds,” or some other such measurement of sound energy over time. Unfortunately, the calculations are significantly more complex. The sound doesn’t actually start instantaneously, but rather it rises to its maximum level over a period of time and decays back to zero over a finite time interval when turned off. This makes the calculations slightly more complicated, because there is some sound dosage while the sound is building to its maximum and while it is decaying back to zero. The amount of sound dose to the ears is related to the area under the “curve” when the sound level is graphed with respect to time.
This process becomes even more complicated with real world sounds, none of which are simple on-off phenomena. What appears to be a simple pulse (as in a gunshot) is, in reality, a series of ultra short, high intensity spikes leading to the highest peak level and decaying back to near zero through a series of more spikes. Dose becomes a calculation nightmare.

Hearing damage requires a certain average dose of sound over a specified time duration. Studies have shown that whether the dose is a sustained, relatively low-level sound or whether it is a high intensity pulse makes little difference provided the absolute amount of sound energy is the same.
To help quantitate sound doses for hearing damage, the concept of L(eq) was created. L(eq) is the “equivalent noise level over a specified time interval.” Many of the figures on noise exposure are based on this figure. The L(eq) of most noises is calculated to be the equivalent of a constant sound level 40 hours a week for a full year. As an example, the sound level of a single shot from a .38 caliber revolver is approximately 156 dB. Because the duration of the noise is less than 10 milliseconds, this is the equivalent of listening to a 68 dB sound for 40 hours a week for a whole year.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has established a “legal” safe limit (Leq) of 85 dB, which is considered to be the maximum over a year’s period that does not cause hearing damage. This is called the L(eq)85, defined as a sound dose of 85 dB for 40 hours a week for one year reaching the ear. More than that causes hearing damage; less does not.

When considering gunshot noises, it is relatively simple to reasonably estimate noise dose by assuming that the duration is less than 10 milliseconds. In this estimation, which errs on the conservative side, the assumption is made that the sound instantaneously rises to the peak level and then instantaneously drops back to zero after the 10-millisecond duration. In reality, the firearm sound peak has a duration of only a few microseconds with multiple lesser peaks (still potentially harmful) lasting up to about 10 milliseconds as discussed later.

Using this model, a .22 rimfire pistol with a peak sound level of 153 dB requires approximately 115 shots to reach 85 dB L(eq). A 12-gauge shotgun at 156 dB would permit only 56 shots for the 85dB L(eq).

Hearing protection with only modest reduction (23 dB) will permit the firing of 23,000 rounds through the .22LR pistol or 11,200 rounds of 12 gauges before reaching the 85 dB L(eq). The use of a sound suppressor producing 30 dB suppression will extend the safe use of the .22LR pistol to over 115,000 rounds!

Sound measurements are made with a peak reading sound meter (described later). A peak meter records only the greatest instantaneous sound peak without consideration of the duration of the sound. When suppressing the sound at the source with a sound suppressor, there is a significant decrease in the duration (as well as energy) of the sound impulses above 85 dB. This gives a disproportionate decrease in the actual L(eq)85 per shot as compared to using hearing protectors of equivalent sound reduction.

There is a problem in that our environment is not silent, and every ambient sound over 85 dB contributes to the L(eq). Sounds assaulting our ears and eroding our permissible total dose include many sounds around our homes (lawnmower, food blender, rock music, etc.) as well as noise in the work place and in nature. Only those sounds above 85 dB really enter into consideration.

In summary, only a few high intensity pulses can be tolerated without hearing damage, while a large number of lesser intensity repetitive pulses will be classified as “safe.” Hearing protectors significantly reduce the intensity of the sound reaching the ear, permitting a greater number (or longer duration) of sounds without resultant hearing damage. Firearm sound suppressors are generally more effective at reducing the exposure than are hearing protectors, because sound suppressors attenuate the sound at the source.

The “standard” location for measuring firearm sound levels is 1 meter to the side of the muzzle. Our experience is that this location is generally close enough to the sound levels measured at the shooter’s ear for practical purposes. The next problem is how to measure firearm sounds. It is not as simple as running down to Radio Shack and getting their $40 Sound Meter.

The Larson-Davis microphone calibrator positioned on the microphone. The calibrator with its known sound level is used to confirm the accuracy of the meter system. Photo by P.H. Dater

GENERAL INSTRUMENT REQUIREMENTS

The most important specification for a sound measuring system (which includes the microphone, pre-amplifier, and meter) is referred to as the “rise time.” This is an indication of the shortest duration sound pulse that the instrument can accurately record. Although no present day transducer and system can follow the pressure rise with perfect accuracy, the device chosen must be able to reach a peak before significant pressure decay occurs. The standard instrument system for measuring the impulse sound levels of gunshots has a rise time of 20 microseconds or less as specified in MIL-STD-1474C. Meter systems with a rise time greater than 20 microseconds will miss measuring the first (and highest) suppressed impulse. Interestingly, meters with 50-microsecond rise time will usually measure a reasonably correct non-suppressed sound level because of the longer duration of the non-suppressed sound pulse. It is essential to remember that the rise time of the overall measuring system is limited by the rise time of the slowest component. If the meter is capable of a 20 microsecond rise time, but the microphone cannot respond to a pulse shorter than 100 microseconds, then the performance of the entire system is no better than 100 microseconds.

B&K Model 2209 sound level meter with microphone, adapter and microphone extension. Although long discontinued, this has been a standard of the industry for firearm sound measurements. Al Paulson photographer.

SOUND METER COMPONENTS

The basic sound level meter consists of a microphone (usually a condenser microphone) with pre-amplifier and body of the meter (which includes weighting networks, meter amplifier, detector, hold circuits, and display). Although there are a number of sound meter manufacturers, the only two producing portable meters suitable for firearm sound measurements in the field are Brüel & Kjaer (B&K) and Larson-Davis Laboratories (LDL). B&K, located in Denmark, has representatives worldwide. Larson-Davis Laboratories is located in Provo, Utah.

The B&K model 4136 microphone and the º inch to Ω adapter next to a No. 2 pencil for size comparison. The B&K 4136 microphone is equivalent to the Larsen-Davis 2530. Al Paulson photographer.

MICROPHONES: Types & Usage

The microphone, also referred to as a transducer, converts the sound signal to an equivalent electrical signal. Because of its stability, linearity, reliability and precision, a condenser microphone is the most suitable type of sensor for portable sound meters.

The maximum sound level is another limitation of the microphone. Remember that sound is air in motion in the form of waves of pressure. When dealing with sound levels of over 160 dB, these waves of pressure can be significant in terms of pounds per square inch. Microphones with a large diaphragm can be seriously damaged by powerful pressure waves, and the inertia of these large diaphragms can seriously limit the rise time at high sound pressure levels. For these reasons, the 1/4-inch instrumentation microphone is the standard sensor for measuring high intensity firearm sound pulses. Measuring only 1/4 inch in diameter by about 3/8 inch long, these microphones have small enough diaphragms to withstand pressures up to about 175 dB and have flat frequency responses out to around 65,000 Hz.

Although there are several types of 1/4-inch instrumentation microphones, MIL-STD-1474C specifies the use of the pressure (or random incidence) microphone for measurements. Examples of suitable pressure microphones are the B&K 4136 and Larson-Davis 2530. The pressure microphone is oriented at right angles to the sound source (usually toward the sky) so that the sound waves “graze” over the surface of the microphone. It is important to avoid subjecting any of these microphones to more than 95% relative humidity during testing, since this will affect the microphone’s calibration, frequency response and rise time.

BODY OF THE METER:

Weighting Network: Weighting is the process of altering meter sensitivity at specific frequencies to compensate for the sensitivity of the human ear at varying frequencies and sound pressure levels. Although most sound meters offer the choice of three weighting networks: “A,” “C,” and none (also called “Linear”), “A” weighting is specified by MIL-STD-1474C.

Detector: There are three basic detectors: RMS (Root Mean Square), Impulse, and Peak. The RMS and Impulse detectors have rise times varying from over 35,000 microseconds to as much as 1 second, none of which has any application in measuring firearms sound levels. Because firearm sounds are short duration pulses, and because we are interested in the absolute maximum (or peak) sound pressure generated, it is necessary to use the Peak detector. This measures the highest peak impulse that is longer than the rise time of the system.

Hold Circuit: The Hold circuit is designed to store either the maximum peak or maximum RMS sound level value. When measuring continuous sound levels, the meter will continuously update the display of the sound level. However, when measuring short duration events, the display will progress to the next event too quickly to obtain the reading. The hold circuit stores this maximum reading. For firearms sound measurements, the meter is set to utilize the peak detector and hold the result until the meter is manually reset.

Display: There are two basic types of display: analog and digital. The analog display is the conventional meter with a needle pointing to markings on a dial. In the case of the B&K 2209, the range on the dial is 10 dB without having to manually set the range. This is referred to as having a 10 dB dynamic range. Instruments that are more modern have a digital display that shows numerals on a liquid crystal display. Generally, this type of display will have a dynamic range of 60 dB without having to manually set the range.

CALIBRATORS

All electronic equipment is subject to slight changes in calibration with time and age. In order to have results that are believable, it is necessary to recheck the calibration of the sound meter, microphone, and accessories periodically. This is accomplished with a calibrator, which is an electronic device that emits a tone of a specific frequency and at a specific sound pressure level. The calibrator should be able to trace its calibration to a primary standard. In order to maintain accuracy of the system and tracability to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (N.I.S.T.), it is necessary to have the calibrator returned to the manufacturer at regular intervals (not over one year) for re-certification.

SPECIFIC METERS

There are three general categories of sound level meters: Types 0, 1, and 2. Type “0” is a laboratory reference meter and is not used for field measurements. Type “1” is classified as high precision, and Type “2” is a general-purpose meter. There probably should be another category of meters used strictly for balancing stereo systems to include those sold by Radio Shack and Edmond Scientific Co. There are two available, suitable, and reasonably affordable Type 1 measuring systems suitable for measuring the sound pressure levels of both suppressed and non-suppressed gunshots.

1. B&K 2209:

The original and traditional meter is the B&K model 2209 Impulse Precision Sound Pressure Meter, manufactured by Brüel & Kjaer. This is a portable, battery operated, relatively compact meter which was designed for field sound measurements. It uses an analog (meter needle) readout, and (in the “peak hold” mode) it will retain the highest instantaneous peak sound level. Its primary disadvantage is that it has a 10 dB dynamic range, so it is necessary to set the range selector on the meter to the correct scale. This means that the operator either must have good idea as to the sound level or else must expend a moderate amount of ammunition finding the correct range. The 2209, however, is ideal for firearm sound measurements, because it has a 20-microsecond rise time and a maximum input approaching 175 dB. B&K discontinued production of the 2209 in 1980, eventually replacing it with the 2231. The 2231 has a digital readout and wider dynamic range, eliminating the necessity of presetting the range closer than about 70 dB to the expected reading. Unfortunately, the 2231 suffers from two fatal flaws for firearm silencer measurements. It has a 50-microsecond rise time. In addition, it has a 130 dB maximum input without a separate attenuator. Furthermore, adding an attenuator may adversely affect rise time. At this time, the only instruments B&K builds with suitable rise times are measurement amplifiers, which are prohibitively expensive and require AC power, limiting their usefulness for field measurements. Fortunately, the B&K 2209 can sometimes be found on the used market, usually for about $5,000 with microphone and accessories.

2. Larson-Davis 800-B:

The second “affordable” alternative is manufactured by Larson Davis Laboratories in Provo, Utah. Similar in function to the B&K 2209, the LDL Model 800B features a digital readout with a 60 dB dynamic range. In addition, the 800B features a rise time of 20 microseconds or better. Normally, the LDL 800B has a maximum input of 140 dB, but it can be special ordered with an option to provide a 160 dB maximum input. Additionally, by recalibrating the meter to read 10 dB low, the maximum input can be stretched to 170 dB, which is more than enough for virtually all non-suppressed levels in calibers less than .50 BMG. A new meter, with the 160 dB option, 1/4-inch microphone, calibrator and accessories, will cost about $5,000.

The Larson Davis Model 800B has several interesting options. The most useful is an RS-232 interface, which allows the meter to be driven and read by a laptop computer. This can greatly speed up meter setup, data acquisition, data recording, and statistical analysis of the data. At Antares Technologies, Inc. we have written a program specifically for this purpose, which we will be happy to share with interested users.

3. Other Meters:

To the best of the author’s knowledge, there are no other readily available meters suitable for measuring firearm sound levels in the field. Inappropriate meters include the B&K 2231, the Quest 2700, and a number of other Type 1 meters. No Type 2 meters or products from Radio Shack should be even remotely considered.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AFFECTING MEASUREMENTS

Environmental factors, within reasonable limits compatible with life, affect principally the microphone and its ability to accurately translate sound variations into electrical impulses. The absorption of sound in air varies with frequency, temperature, and humidity in an exceptionally complicated fashion, and absorption is more pronounced at the higher frequencies. Besides temperature and humidity, other factors affecting sound measurement include wind, barometric pressure, and reflections from both the ground and other surfaces.

In addition, it is useful to note that firearm sound levels vary from test to test. This is because atmospheric conditions (temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, etc.) affect the burning rate of gunpowder as well as the acoustic impedance of air. Although this affects the sound levels of both suppressed and non-suppressed weapons, it is more pronounced in the suppressed weapon due to the shorter duration of the peak pulse.

Wind:

Wind has several effects on sound measurements. If over approximately 5 meters/second (12 MPH), the wind pressure will affect the movement of the microphone diaphragm, resulting in an erroneous reading. This is a particular problem with higher frequencies, especially when using a free field microphone. This problem can be minimized by using the windshield supplied with the sound meter. This shield consists of a ball of porous foam that blocks the wind pressure but has no significant attenuation of the sound pressure waves. The windshield cannot mitigate an additional wind effect. If the wind velocity is moderate, the wind will attenuate the sound upwind and reinforce the sound downwind. Both US military and NATO specify that measurements to be made when wind velocities are less than 5 meters/second.

Temperature and Atmospheric Pressure:

Increasing temperature has two effects: (1) a decrease in microphone sensitivity and (2) an increase in atmospheric absorption of sound. The microphones are rated for operation between -10 and +50 degrees Celsius (14 to 122 degrees Fahrenheit). Increased barometric pressure also decreases microphone sensitivity. However, any changes in atmospheric sound attenuation due to pressure changes are a function of temperature variations that accompany changes in barometric pressure. If necessary, peak pressure sound measurements can be scaled to standard conditions of 101.325 kPa (760mm Hg) and 288.16 degrees Kelvin (60 degrees Fahrenheit) using Sach’s Scaling Laws. Although the correction will be minimal with the temperatures and pressures involved, it is necessary to record both temperature and ambient (station) atmospheric pressure if scaling is anticipated.

Humidity:

High humidity slightly decreases absorption of sound by the atmosphere. All of the condenser measurement microphones will operate in a satisfactory manner when the relative humidity is between 5 and 95 percent. More than 95 percent humidity may cause moisture condensation on the microphone diaphragm, which will significantly decrease microphone sensitivity.

Ground Surface Effect & Reflections:

As mentioned previously, the inverse square law states that the sound intensity decreases with the square of the distance. Because a reflected path from the noise source to the microphone is always a greater distance than the direct path through the air, it is logical to assume that peak sound intensity from the reflected path will always be less than that from the direct path and will have no effect on the maximum peak reading. Experiments in Finland, however, have shown empirically that this is not necessarily true in the case of suppressed measurements, and that measurements made over concrete will be approximately 2+ dB higher than measurements made over grass or other sound-absorbing material. This suggests that the maximum peak of the suppressed pulse is less than 20 microseconds in length, and the reflected pulse with its slight extra delay is being measured. Regardless, US Military and NATO standards dictate that measurements are made over a non-reflecting surface, such as grass.

MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES and a SUGGESTED MEASUREMENT PROTOCOL

Authorities in the measurement of overpressure associated with explosions suggest that sound pressure measuring systems featuring a 20 microsecond rise time (such as the B&K 2209 or LDL 800B) will miss some of the initial peak. Although this may be true, the bias is probably small (in the order of one or two decibels). In spite of this small bias, the standard of the firearms suppressor industry, NATO, and the US military is to utilize instrumentation with a 20-microsecond rise time.

Under ideal circumstances, the investigator would locate the weapon and transducer (microphone) in a temperature-controlled, echo-free environment with no operator in the measurement field. As with a lot of ideal scenarios, this is impractical, and some compromises must be tolerated.
Measurements are standardized as being made one meter (39.34 inches) 90 degrees to the side of the muzzle and at a height of 1.6 meters (5 feet) above ground over grass or another non-reflecting surface. The process is simplified if the microphone and preamplifier can be separated from the meter with a cord. In this situation, the simplest microphone stand is to insert a 6-foot piece of conduit or rebar a foot into the ground and then attach the microphone and preamplifier to the pole at the 5-foot level with rubber bands. A folding table back a few feet can hold the meter and accessories. If the microphone cannot be located remotely from the meter, the meter can be mounted in place using a tall camera tripod or a camera clamp attached to the post.
Spacing of the firearm from the microphone is also critical, and the most basic method, suggested by Al Paulson, is to tie a one-meter piece of dental floss to the microphone. The other end of the dental floss is tied to a rubber band that loops over the muzzle of the weapon. A piece of brightly colored string attached to nails can be laid out on the ground in a right angle to help maintain consistent alignment of the weapon visually. Far more sophisticated setups can be constructed.
The next step in obtaining sound measurements after setting up the jig or fixture is meter calibration. The meters rarely drift, and calibration should remain constant. However, to be certain that the equipment is functioning normally, it is necessary to check the sound meter system with a calibrator that has been recertified within the past 12 months. Each meter uses slightly different calibration procedures. For the LDL 800B, the meter is set to utilize the fast detector with no weighting (linear). After placing the calibrator on the microphone, the meter is checked and adjusted for a reading of 114 dB according to instructions by Larson Davis.

For the firearm sound measurement, the meter is set to utilize the peak detector in the “hold” mode (to freeze the highest peak reading), and the weighting is set to “A” (as specified in MIL-STD-1474C).

Normally, non-suppressed readings are made first, primarily because if changes in the setup need to be made, it will not be necessary to repeat all of the suppressed readings to keep all data consistent. If the non-suppressed reading on the LDL 800B is greater than 160.5 dB (the meter maximum input), it will be necessary to either change the microphone spacing or, preferably, recalibrate the instrument to read 10 dB low and add 10 dB to each reading.
Just prior to each measurement, press the reset on the meter to clear the memory and ready it for the next sound pulse. Hold the weapon parallel to the ground at shoulder height (1.6 meters) with the muzzle in such a position as to make it perpendicular to the microphone. The string on the ground visually helps in this alignment. Move the weapon sideways just until the slack is out of the piece of dental floss and the rubber band is not stretched. Fire the weapon. After making the weapon safe, record the meter reading, reset the meter, and repeat the process. After 10 rounds, average the data to provide the mean non-suppressed sound level.

Using the same procedure, repeat the 10 measurements with the suppressor attached to the weapon and average this data to obtain the mean suppressed level. The difference between these means is the degree of suppression. When recording the data, be certain to also record the ambient temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, and date. Although you should record the temperature with a thermometer at the location of the tests, the other data can be obtained from the nearest weather bureau or from NOAA weather broadcasts, which are available throughout the United States. It is important to record the station pressure (actual atmospheric pressure in the vicinity of the test site), not the pressure corrected to sea level. There are some excellent and affordable digital barometers, hydrometers and thermometers available that will allow the investigator to make on-site measurements of the required data.

The last step is to recheck the meter calibration with the calibrator to be certain that there has been no meter drift. There should be none, and the recheck calibration should be within 0.1 dB of the initial calibration. If there has been a greater change, there are several possible interpretations. (1) Check battery condition and replace if necessary. (2) Verify that environmental conditions do not exceed the operating specifications of all equipment being used. (3) If neither of the preceding checks has revealed the problem, then return the meter, calibrator and microphone to the manufacturer for necessary repairs and recalibration and recertification.

With all sound measurements, it is important to remember that there will be minor day-to-day variations in the data obtained, which appear primarily to be due to ambient temperature variations. Such variations will commonly be a decibel or two.

SOURCES

B&K has numerous sales representatives throughout the world. They can be contacted at Brüel & Kjaer Instruments, Inc., 185 Forest St., Marlborough, MA 01752; phone (508) 481-7000. Although the B&K 2209 is no longer in production, some of the factory representatives can occasionally help locate a used instrument. B&K also has some measurement amplifiers that are well suited for measuring suppressed gunshots, but the cost of a complete setup will be in the tens of thousands of dollars. B&K can also direct users to providers of short-term leases or rentals, although this is an expensive option for more than a month or two.

Larson Davis Laboratories has sales representatives throughout the United States. LDL can be contacted directly at 1681 West 820 North, Provo, UT 84601, phone (801) 375-0177. For the calibrator, 1/4-inch pressure microphone, and microphone extension cable, the current cost is about $5,000. The RS-232 computer interface will add another $850.

Although not involved in the sale or supply of sound measuring equipment, Antares Technologies Inc. (Box 3538, Boise, ID 83703) has developed software to drive the Larson Davis 800B from a DOS-based laptop computer. This software sets and resets the meter, records the data on disk, and performs statistical analysis on the data.

References:

Brüel & Kjaer, Measuring Sound, 1984

Brüel & Kjaer, Measurement Microphones, 1988

Brüel & Kjaer, Sound Intensity, 1988

Crum, Richard (FBI) and Owen, Edward (BATF), “Silencer Testing,” Crime Laboratory Digest, v14n2, April 1987

Department of Defense, Military Standard Noise Limits for Military Materiel (Metric), MIL-STD-1474C, 8 March 1991

Grubelich, Mark, Sandia National Laboratories (Albuquerque, NM), personal communication (1990)

International Organization for Standardization, Acoustics Testing of silencers in situ, ISO/TC 43/SC 1, 1994

North Atlantic Council (NATO) Defense Research Group, Panel on the Defense Applications of Human and Bio-Medical Sciences Research Study Group on the Effects of Impulse Noise, AC/243(Panel 8/RSG.6), 6 April 1987

Paulson, Alan C., personal correspondence

Sampson, Steven, “A Decibel Primer,” 73 Magazine, July 1995

By Robie Kulokivi

A short and effective combat shotgun is a good tool for the police officer or the soldier in house to house operations. The effectiveness of the shotgun is due to its cartridges’ payload, delivering several projectiles instantly to the target, covering a proportionally large area. The compromise is in “bulk” due to the large construction of the weapon dictated by the recoil energy. Magazine cartridge capacity is typically limited to seven cartridges. Perhaps this small caliber submachine gun is a solution addressing this problem. A weapon firing .22 LR caliber rimfired ammunition is light, has mild recoil, a high rate of fire and a possibility for a tremendous magazine capacity.

The MGV has roots in America

Even if this special MGV 176 smg may bring to mind the Vasily Degtyarev designed machine gun 7.62 x 25 mm model 1929 with its top mounted disk magazine, the roots actually start in the USA in the 60’s.

Gun designers Richard Casull and Kerm Eskelson, made their first semiautomatic .22 caliber prototype carbine in 1960 with authority sales in mind. After project funding, testing and some technical improvements, the Western States Arms mfg. commenced marketing the patented .22 LR Casull M290 Carbine in 1965.

This self-loading rimfire rifle or carbine was slightly reminiscent of the Thompson submachinegun in profile, except for the drum magazine that was placed horizontally on top of the gun, and the magazine fit 290 rimfire cartridges. The marketing, however, did not bring the expected success and due to slight sales only 70 guns were made. The manufacturing rights were sold to the American Mining and Development Company in 1969.In 1972 the company changed its name to American International Company (AIC). They negotiated a production deal with the Austrian gun company Voere, who also made some technical changes to the design. The profile of the gun remained the same but a selector was added and the triggering mechanism offered single shots and cyclic. The magazine construction was also slightly changed and the capacity of the drum reduced to 177 cartridges.

The American marketing company, led by Mr. Charles Goff Sr. went to great lengths to promote this Austrian manufactured caliber .22 LR American 180 M-2 submachine gun to U.S. police officials and the military for special applications. The gun was constructed of steel and aluminum. The stock, grip and handguard were of wood or plastic. The magazine was made of steel stampings. Fieldstripping was easy and the smg was disassembled into three main parts: the stock, receiver and barrel. The precision cast and machined parts and the assembly was of highest quality. The manufacturer made approximately 5000 submachine guns before production was discontinued in Austria.

This special American 180 model had its next generation marketed by American Arms Incorporated by Mr. Goff Junior in the late 1980’s in the USA. This was as a self-loading rimfire rifle, as well as the smg versions. Ilarco took over production for a short period, and by the end of 1990, an Oregon based company called E&L MFG. INC continued the production and marketing of the semi-automatic version called American SAR 180. The company also improved the magazine and offered 275 cartridge capacities and transparent drum construction. Would there be a chance, with further technical changes to reawaken any police or military interest in this weapon? A submachine gun with no recoil, light report and an extraordinary cartridge capacity should lift some eyebrows.

The small caliber version from former Yugoslavia

The development of the MGV 176 submachine gun started in northern Yugoslavia by the end of 1980, in the Slovenian province. Slovenia became an independent state in 1991 out of the former Yugoslavia. The gun described in this article was made in 1989 at the Gorenje Sovd factory in the city of Velenje. Current production is unknown to this writer. The Yugoslavian government directed any internal sales and the ORBIS export company took care of foreign marketing.

It is interesting to notice that Slovenia, where this substantially modernized version of the original American 180 smg is made, is a neighboring country to Austria. Perhaps there has been a flow of technical ideas over the border? Be that as it may, the Yugoslavian manufacturer filed for patent of the Avtomat kal. 22 HV MGV 176 (patentno zasciteno). The total amount produced is unknown but the technical finish and manufacturing of the smg and serial number gives the impression that several thousand have been produced.

Perhaps the most important modernization is, when compared to the original American and Austrian guns, that the upper and lower receiver are made of polymer (plastic). This small submachine gun incorporates several other technical improvements also.

Finer details

The .22 caliber MGV 176 submachine gun is delivered with two 162 cartridge drum magazines, maintenance kit and a suppressor. Next we will study the subassemblies.

Upper receiver

The construction material for the upper receiver is impact resistant plastic. The barrel and lower receiver attach to it. On top of the rear part is a rail for the rear sight or an optional optical sight. The front sight is integrated in the front part of the receiver, which in turn forms a barrel shroud. The magazine latch is also on top. The bolt is of machined steel and has a fixed firing pin, which is more like a “ledge” (for rimfire). The bolt fits inside the inner rear part of the receiver. The cocking lever is on the left side and it has a sliding dust cover.

This submachine gun is blowback or recoil operated and fires from an open bolt, so it remains to the rear, held by the sear if cocked. The bolt can be removed for maintenance by pushing the mainspring guide in the firing direction to release it, and the lifting spring will guide the bolt out of the receiver. The ejection port is on the underside of the upper receiver.

When the stock is in its folded position, a notch on the shoulder rest fits into a recess in the floor of the barrel shroud, locking into position and making a front grip for a steadier firing position. On the left side of the receiver, both rear and aft, are fixing points for a carry sling.

Lower receiver

The lower receiver frame is also made of black plastic. It contains the complete triggering mechanism and safety features. At the rear of the pistol grip is the grip safety and to the left is the safety switch. When the switch is turned to the front and one red dot is visible, the submachine gun is ready to fire, if the grip safety is simultaneously pressed in. If the switch points to the rear, and the green dot is visible, the gun is set on “safe”.

It is not possible to cock the gun if the safety is on. To cock the gun the safety must be turned into “fire” -position and the grip safety must be pressed in with a normal grip.

The folding stock is hinged at the rear of the lower receiver. The rear part facilitates the stock locking mechanism also, which locks the folding stock into its extended position. To release the lower receiver from the upper receiver the stock must first be unlocked from its folded position. It is released by pulling the shoulder rest to the rear and releasing the locking notch from its recess in the upper receiver. With a tip of a cartridge or pin a detent must be pressed at the rear of the upper receiver. This releases the lower receiver, and the rear can be pulled downwards. The front part of the lower receiver rotates around a pin to the rear of the ejection opening and can be pulled away from the upper.

The trigger mechanism

The sturdy parts of the trigger mechanism within the lower receiver are machined of steel. The parts are fixed with axles or pins going trough the lower receiver. Both the safety switch and the grip safety lock the sear preventing any accidental discharge. A loaded and cocked gun can be dropped without hazard.

This submachine gun has a trigger selector; by pressing it against a slighter resistance the gun fires semi-automatic and by pressing it fully to the rear over a noticeable ledge it fires cyclic, or full-automatic. The cyclic firing rate is approximately 20 cartridges per second, depending on cartridge type.

The Barrel

The barrel is quick-detachable for maintenance. The barrel lock is on the underside of the upper receiver in front of the ejector opening. The barrel fits within the barrel shroud and the rear upper part of the barrel is machined to facilitate the magazine. The gun serial number and caliber is also marked on the barrel. The muzzle of the barrel protrudes from the shroud by 20 mm and is not threaded. The suppressor coupling fits over the muzzle when installed.

The suppressor is 170 mm long and when attached to the barrel prolongs the barrel length by 150 mm. The suppressor attaches by means of a clamp bushing which attaches to the smooth cylindrical muzzle when the locking nut is turned. This type of attachment does not need threads. For testing purposes the MGV 176 barrel was threaded and a Finnish-made suppressor (BR-TUOTE, Finland) was installed.

To sum up the good features of this submachine gun we should note that the user operated switches are logically placed. The safety construction is dependable and safe. Choices of material are modern, durable and easily maintained. Disassembly of the gun is simple and spare parts are easily replaced.

The horizontal drum magazine

The standard magazine fits 162 cartridges. The magazine floorplate and the inner follower parts are made of steel pressings and the magazine upper frame is made of transparent plastic. The driving force, to feed the cartridges, is given by a spring motor, or winder, which is detachable from the upper frame. The spring motor fits on top of the magazine and is attached only after the magazine is loaded. Tension is wound to the motor mainspring by turning the winder three and a half (3.5) rotations. The spring motor has a switch or brake, to lock the feed for safety or if the wound motor has to be detached from the magazine.

In a filled magazine the .22 LR cartridges are placed within in three horizontal, circular layers on top of each other. Looking down at the magazine from above shows that all bullets point to the center of the magazine. The inner wall of the magazine has small ledges in a vertical direction and the rimmed bases of the cartridges fit in between these. Due to the ledges the only feeding direction for the “stack” of cartridges is down. Pressing down on all the cartridges is the spring floor. The spring motor forces the upper frame to rotate counter-clockwise each time the bolt pushes a cartridge from the feedlips into the barrel chamber. The last cartridge is pushed to the feed lips by a cartridge shaped follower. The feedlip assembly is hinged to the bottom of the magazine floorplate and is placed on top of the floor opening to control the feed of cartridges. It also functions as an ejector forcing the cartridge cases straight down. The loaded magazine can be removed from the gun at any time without accidental spill of cartridges. The Austrian and American guns have the feedlips, or loading gate attached to the upper receiver. This technical approach made it mandatory to lock the spring motor before removing a loaded magazine, otherwise the force of the spring motor would have emptied all the cartridges from the magazine floorplate opening.

To fill the MGV 176 magazine the spring motor must be removed. It is released by pressing the locking studs protruding trough the floorplate. If tension has been wound to the motor then it must be locked before removal by turning the switch to the outer position, covering the “0” -mark. Turning the magazine upside down, it can be placed on a table. The feedlip assembly must be turned to the left. Now the opening of the floorplate and the cartridge shaped follower made of steel can be seen. By turning the floorplate slightly clockwise, the follower is withdrawn one step and the first .22 LR cartridge can be placed in the magazine. The floorplate is turned again and the next cartridge can be placed.

The cycle continues until 53 cartridges have been placed, that is the cartridge amount of the first layer. The floorplate is turned again against a ledge of slightly harder springpressure and the steel follower forces the spring floor one layer down. Now the cycle can be done again and as easy as in the first layer. As this, and the third layer, are without a follower they both take 54 cartridges. There is no spring force during the filling of the magazine other than the change of layers. After the last layer is full the feedlips must be returned to their original position on top of the opening in the floorplate. The last cartridge is placed directly between the feed lips. Now the magazine is loaded with 162 cartridges.

The spring motor, or winder, is replaced on top of the magazine so that the locking studs lock securely in place. The spring motor switch must be turned to its center position covering the “8” -mark. To give the motor mainspring enough force to feed all cartridges, the rotor must be turned 3.5 rotations. The ratchet notches that connect to the magazine frame make the typical noise while winding the rotor. The transparent frame makes it possible for the operator to see the remaining amount of ammunition in the magazine. The magazine is actually mechanically very simple and dependable. Filling of the magazine is easy and takes only 5 minutes including all tasks. Emptying it by firing takes only eight seconds.

For testing purposes a customized magazine was made out of a 275 cartridge American 180 magazine made by E&L Mfg of the USA and one original Slovenian MGV-176 magazine. Due to the different approach of the feedlip assembly, it was necessary to use parts from both magazines, the Slovenian floorplate and the American magazine frame and internal parts. There was an added bonus due to the internal plastic construction of the American parts. When this 275 cartridge customized magazine was filled and compared to a filled original 162 cartridge magazine, both tipped the scale at 0.7 kg. Total loaded weight remained the same but the amount of cartridges increased with 113.

This large capacity magazine has five layers of cartridges and must be used with the original E&L Mfg spring motor as the original Slovenian drive has power to feed only three layers and must then be rewound. For the big magazine the motor must be wound seven (7) rotations.

On the shooting range

A filled magazine is connected to the top of the gun by placing the magazine floor front lip under the ledge of the barrel and pressing the rear part against the magazine latch until it locks. If the spring motor is not wound it must be done before firing, otherwise the magazine will not feed. The latch on the spring motor must be turned towards the center, unlocked position.

The gun is cocked with the left hand by pulling the cocking lever to its rearmost position and returning it to the front. The firing hand must hold the pistol grip and press the grip safety simultaneously to facilitate movement of the bolt. The bolt remains to the rear held by the sear. The moment the firing hand is released from the grip the gun is on safe, and the bolt immobilized. If necessary the safety lever can be turned pointing rearward, on safe, locking the trigger as well.

The folding stock is turned into position by pulling the shoulder rest strongly rearward to release its locking stud in the upper receiver barrel shroud. It is swung to the rear against its locking latch at the rear of the lower receiver and locked securely in place. Depending on the firing range, one of three positions of the rear sight can be chosen: 100, 150 or 200 meters. (There is a certain optimism in the range settings when compared to the outer ballistics of the cartridge and probable combat distance). The rear sight is connected to the upper receiver via an integrated accessory rail and can be removed and replaced with an optical or optronic sight or target pointer.

When taking a steady firing position the operator must remember that the cases are ejected straight down. This means that the supporting hand must be in front of the magazine, holding the barrel shroud. Turning the safety to its forward position the gun is ready to fire. Pressing the trigger lightly against an easily felt first ledge, the gun fires single shots. The recoil is negligible and the only movement actually affecting the stance is the magazine feed and spring motor. The report of the shot is typical to a rimfire rifle so at a minimum earplugs must be worn.

With the MGV sound suppressor in place there is less muzzleflash and less blast noise to the operator and more smoke around the ejection opening. The tested Finnish suppressor was superior when firing in a confined space, keeping the blast so mild that several test shots where attempted without earplugs. This is of course never recommended during training, and is always a hazard to the operator’s or by-stander’s hearing.

The MGV 176 submachine gun fires cyclic at a rate of 20 cartridges per second if the trigger is pressed fully to the bottom. It is relatively easy to keep the burst length at 6 to 10 cartridges. The recoil and torque during full automatic fire is nonexistent, even if the gun is fired from shoulder rest. At close range it would be possible to fire simple geometrical forms of choice in the paper target. With the stock in its folded position the shoulder rest forms a front grip for the supporting hand giving a very steady position when firing from hip level.

To secure reliable function of the MGV 176, high velocity and high quality ammunition must be used. In general it can be said that the small rimfire .22 long rifle cartridge is not the best possible choice for problem free feeding during high rate cyclic fire. There are however several brands on the market that have velocities exceeding 420 m/s, bullet shapes plating for good automatic feeding. Bolt and feeding speeds are so high when firing a .22 LR rimfire submachine gun that a severe misfeed could result in dramatic bending of the cartridge and ignition out of battery. This usually ruptures the case with possible hazards to the operator.

More firepower than a combat shotgun?

To make a comparison we chose the optimal 12 gauge close combat shotgun from South-Africa, the 18,5x70mm Protecta Bulldog which weighs 3.9 kg loaded with eleven (11) cartridges and has a length of 400 mm. The typical service load has approximately 10 projectiles of .33 caliber offering muzzle velocity of 400 m/s. In comparison the caliber .22 LR MGV 176 submachine gun loaded with 275 cartridges weighs 3.4 kg with a length of 480 mm. Velocity of the high velocity .22 LR is 420 m/s. The dimensional features of both weapons are close.

Firing 10 shot bursts from the MGV’s 275 cartridge magazine, as an equivalent to the 10 projectile shot load, give us a total of 27 bursts. The same firepower from a shotgun would require a 27 cartridge magazine and would substantially increase the total weight of the loaded system.

The MGV 176’s high rate of cyclic fire produces an impact in the target not unlike several projectiles from a shot load hitting in a short time frame. The effect, however, can be regulated by adjusting the length of the burst from the submachine gun, and the area of impact is smaller. There is a substantial advantage in lack of recoil, weight and noise in favor of the .22 caliber smg in comparison to the combat shotgun.

This submachine gun, and others using the same caliber and high capacity magazines, could be a viable option for a weapon used for indoor combat and defense aboard ships or in buildings. Especially when risk of “shoot through” should be minimized and blast noise can be hazardous to the operator as in use in confined spaces. This design and caliber certainly merit further study in these applications.

By David M. Fortier

TACTICAL PISTOL I
By Gunsite
Paladin Press
P.O. Box 1307
Boulder, CO 80306
1-800-392-2400
$29.95 plus S&H
Video aprox. 50 minutes
Reviewed by David M. Fortier

Watching a master with a pistol ply his trade is akin to watching a master swordsman. Every fluid movement is done for a specific reason with no wasted motions. As you’ve watched someone break shots so fast that you wouldn’t believe they all went into one ragged hole if you hadn’t witnessed it, have you ever been envious? If you have, just remember that all it takes is the proper instruction and lots of practice. While the practice is up to you, the instruction is readily available on video tape. Put out by Gunsite, Tactical Pistol I is a highly informative and educational learning aid. It covers the basic skills needed to survive a lethal encounter using only a handgun and your wits. This video contains a mountain of information compressed down into a basic step by step training agenda. Using Jeff Cooper’s Modern Technique of the Pistol as a foundation, the viewer is taught the Weaver stance, draw stroke (presentation), flash sight picture, compressed surprise trigger break, the Guard position, failure to stop drill, malfunction clearances, strong hand and braced shooting positions, barricades and corners, and even some low light considerations. All step by step. A professionally done video, it presents its information exceptionally well. The camera work is very good and incorporates some interesting angles and footage. In combat weaponcraft my strength has always been with a pistol. While I consider myself proficient with a handgun and shoot on the Masters Level in local competition, I truly enjoyed this video. The folks at Gunsite simply know their stuff and anybody with an open mind can learn something from this video. The training on presenting a weapon and malfunction clearances alone are worth owning the video. The only draw back to this tape is that it is geared much more towards the self-loading pistol and not the revolver. So keep this in mind if you’re running a wheel gun. If you’re serious though about improving your skills with a pistol and want to learn how, then I highly recommend this learning aid.

German 20mm FLAK In World War II 1935-1945
By Werner Muller
Published by Schiffer Publishing Ltd.
77 Lower Valley Road
Atglen, PA 19310
ISBN: 0-88740-758-7
Price $9.95 plus $4.50 s&h
Reviewed by Stephen Stuart

Ever since I saw the German 20mm FLAK gun at Knob Creek, I was possessed to own one. Unfortunately, registered German FLAK guns do not grow on trees, in fact in private hands they are some of the rarest Class III destructive devices in the United States.

Unable to acquire one for hands-on training, I had to do the next best thing, I researched them in books and magazines. Luckily, today Schiffer Publishing is producing some of the best texts on obscure foreign arms. Some of their rare titles are: Panzerfaust And Other German Infantry Anti-Tank Weapons, German Trench Mortars And Infantry Mortars , Flamethrowers of the German Army 1914-1945, and today’s book review, German 20mm FLAK In World War II.

The first FLAK gun to be put into German service after World War I was the Swiss produced Oerlikon cannon. After the total abandonment of the Versailles Treaty, the firms in Germany began producing local designs, namely the FLAK 30 and the FLAK 38. Both had a single barrel and had a rate of fire that was under 500 rounds a minute.

The Maximum range for the FLAK 38 model was 4,800 meters. The different models of FLAK guns were used to cover troops and equipment in every conceivable way. Whether they were mounted on vehicles, ground mounts, railway or armored trains, and also including ferries, these FLAK guns were rugged, dependable, and deadly for low flying aircraft.

If you are a die hard destructive device fan or curious about air defense, this is a great little text to start. The 48 pages of text and photos seem to end too suddenly. I recommend it for all you big boomers out there.

TACTICAL CONCEALED CARRY I
By Gunsite
Paladin Press
P.O. Box 1307
Boulder, CO 80306
!-800-392-2400
$29.95 plus S&H
Video aprox. 40 minutes
Reviewed by David M. Fortier

Gunsite. The mere word brings to mind professional training in self defense and firearm matters. This video, put out by Gunsite, follows in their tradition of excellence. Designed to provide fundamental information on safe and effective methods for carrying a handgun concealed for the purpose of self defense. It does this quite well. Designed for someone that has already had some firearms training, not the novice, it never the less starts with the 4 rules of safety. Then a correct presentation from the holster is covered, the strengths of the Weaver stance, and aimed fire utilizing the weapons’ sights are discussed. Handgun selection for concealed carry is touched upon with the aspects of portability, concealability, and reactivity all stressed. Drawing from concealment is covered step by step in depth. Detailed instruction on drawing from a pullover garment, jacket, and fannypack is given. To address the need for a quality holster, Rick Gallagher the President of Galco International takes over. Stressing the need for a quality rig, Mr. Gallagher covers what to look for and how to choose a quality leather holster. As Galco is renowned for the high quality leather products, he is well able to instruct in proper holster selection. The video ends with a dry fire safety lecture and then a length of tape with suddenly appearing targets for dry fire practice. As I viewed this tape, the first thing that came to mind was how professional and well done it is. From the introduction by Richard Jee, the owner of Gunsite, stating the purpose of the video, through to the end it is informative and instructive. The camera work and editing is excellent as are the numerous simulations of attacks being thwarted by the proper use and deployment of a concealed handgun. My only nitpicking would be the exclusion of non-leather holsters such as the excellent Kydex rigs offered by companies such as Bladetech. All in all it is an excellent piece of work I recommend.

U.S. War Department, Handbook On Japanese Military Forces
Introduction by David Isby
Foreword by Jeffrey Ethell
Reprinted by Louisiana State University Press
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803
ISBN 0-8071-2013-8
Price $24.95 plus $4.50 s& h
Reviewed by Stephen Stuart

U.S. military field and technical manuals are some of the best sources of information concerning areas of arms and munitions, both domestic and foreign.

During World War II, the U.S. War Department produced handbooks on the German and Japanese armed services. These handbooks, which were revised during the course of the war, allowed officers in the field the chance to study and learn about their enemy from other’s past experiences.

The Handbook On Japanese Military Forces, is an excellent reference work for the World War II enthusiast or those interested in Japanese arms. Not only such diverse topics as arms are covered; Nambu pistols, rifles, grenades, mortars, artillery, and even flame throwers (this is one of the few references available on the Japanese Type 93 and Type 100 flame throwers that I am aware of). The text also includes information on strategy and life of the individual soldier. These chapters are; recruitment and training, field organizations, the Japanese Air Service, Special Forces, and the military police. The chapters on Japanese tactics are; antitank defense, jungle warfare, coastal defense, joint operations, and paratroop operations.

As one can imagine, this book truly has it all. Even though it is not an exhaustive work on just weapons, rather, it includes detailed strategy and operations of the Japanese military when this book was original written. This information alone is on a par of it’s own level. This book is defiantly a must read for one to understand the war in the Pacific. Collectors of Japanese military equipment will also find it very useful.

By Robert Bruce

Infantry Weapons Today and Tomorrow Traditionally featuring the latest military small arms, ammunition, sighting systems and related items, the NDIA’s Small Arms Section annual meeting is probably the best place in the world to get cutting edge but just barely unclassified info on what armaments American infantrymen are likely to be carrying on the battlefield of the early 21st century.

Closed to the Public

This year’s annual meeting was held on June 21st through the 24th, hosted by the US Army’s ARMAMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT and ENGINEERING COMMAND (ARDEC) at the impressive Picatinny Hilton Hotel near its headquarters at famous Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey.

Unlike S.H.O.T. and other firearms industry trade shows which are primarily set up to sell a specific product line to wholesale and retail dealers, NDIA’s Small Arms Section meetings are generally closed to the public and accessible only to those professionals with bonafide credentials and the means to pay a substantial registration fee. As such, you won’t see articles on the event in ordinary consumer gun magazines. Curiously, it is also rare to read about it in trade and professional magazines as well.

Technical Forum

According to Small Arms Section Chairman Russ Logan, Senior Vice President of Militec Corp, the NDIA conference serves as a clearinghouse for information on developments by largely unknown government organizations and a relatively small number of specialized private companies. “We’re a technical forum where the military and the industrial communities can exchange information on what is needed, what’s available now, or what’s in the works for sometime down the road,” Logan said.

While the “big boys” of gun and ammo manufacturing are always there — names like FN, Saco, Remington, Winchester, Colt and the like — the smaller, more specialized firms like Knight’s Armament and Engel Ballistic Research enjoy the same opportunity to present technical papers to a cross-section of the arms community. Through their exhibit booths and range demonstrations, they also get invaluable one-on-one access to many of the high level soldiers and civilians of the Department of Defense who make decisions for our Armed Forces and those of many allied nations. This is the place to find serious information about the serious task of infantry combat.

Generally Speaking…

The symposium kicked off as usual with a series of presentations by General officers of the Army and Marine Corps. Brigadier General John Geis, commanding general of ARDEC, and Major General Roy Beauchamp of TACOM, set the stage with an overview of how the Army identifies small arms needs, solicits scientific and industry input, then fields launchers, ammo and related items intended to meet those needs. Doing more with less and less was a common theme as these organizations struggle to overcome years of crippling budget cuts and bleak prospects for the near future despite the Republican congressional leadership’s pronouncements to the contrary.

Brigadier General Thomas Jones of the Marine Corps’ Combat Developments Command provided an amphibious warfare and urban combat perspective. The Corps, he predicted, would increasingly be in the business of fighting in cities since most of the world’s population was concentrated along ocean shorelines. He called for innovative solutions to unique problems such as urban navigation, locating and identifying enemy forces, as well as lethal and non-lethal means of clearing areas a building and a block at time.

Breakout (and run)

There were so many papers that deserved hearing this year that organizers were forced to break up subsequent proceedings into three tracks; small arms, Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT), and a bit of a catchall under Special Presentations. Since cloning of writer/photographers is (some say thankfully) not yet perfected, most of this report will concentrate on small arms highlights.

Master Plan

Army Lieutenant Colonel Bud Irish, for several years ARDEC’s Program Manager for Small Arms, and Joel Goldman of the Joint Service Small Arms Program (JSSAP), presented an overview of current and near future developments. Among other notable initiatives they highlighted the search for an off-the-shelf .50 caliber sniper rifle, a standardized shotgun for all of the Armed Forces, and “smart” grenade launchers like the Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW) and the Objective Crew Served Weapon (OCSW).

Irish laid out the realities of PM Small Arms activities in a matter-of-fact way, noting that work on the new 40mm infrared illuminating round and several other important infantry tools could not be finalized because the necessary money had not been appropriated by congress. Then, with perfect timing, he generated knowing laughter from armaments development professionals in the audience with the wry observation that the elusive miracle metal “unobtanium” was just what was needed to stretch pathetically small developmental budgets to cover what is clearly needed in the near future.

Long Range Sniper Rifle

In May of this year the Army selected a modified version of the Barrett Model 95 as its XM107 Sniper Weapon System. This bolt action .50 caliber rifle is intended for antipersonnel tasks out to 1500 meters and anti-materiel work at even greater range. According to Barrett’s George Kontis, production is on schedule and Army Spec Ops units should be getting their new fifties early next year.

Hand-in-hand with this is the Army’s search for suitable cartridges for these purposes. PM Small Arms expects to begin evaluating bids and samples later this year and make a selection early in 2000. Accordingly, several companies were in attendance to show off their candidates including Winchester/Olin with their MK211 multipurpose, M962 SLAP, and previously unknown Long Range Sniper Ammo (LRSA).

The French firm of PGM Precision, makers of the impressive Hecate II 12.7 x 99mm (.50 cal.) bolt action rifle was represented by New York based Drake Associates. This rifle, currently in service with the French Army, was on display in conjunction with the interesting Anthena PPI-AP brass sabot cartridge which was to figure prominently in Thursday’s live fire.

Shotgun News

There are at least four different shotguns in use by various branches of the US Armed Forces, a situation that fosters inefficiency in procurement, supply, training and maintenance. Matthew Zimmerman of the Joint Service Small Arms Program (JSSAP) introduced a cure for these ills in the form of XM1014 Joint Service Combat Shotgun. Capping an intense test and evaluation process, the Heckler & Koch/Benelli candidate was recently selected and a batch of guns has been delivered for “wringing out” in operational *testing. John Meloy of H&K’s Federal Operations says he’s confident that full production will soon be authorized, resulting in delivery to soldiers, sailors, airpersons and marines next year.

Starship Troopers

There was standing room only in the large lecture hall and people spilling out into the corridor when the real star of the conference was introduced. ARDEC’s Steve Mango and Alliant Technology’s Sharon Boone presented a comprehensive look at the capabilities of the SABR, or “Selectable Assault Battle Rifle.” Alliant is the prime contractor for this innovative assault rifle/grenade launcher also known as the OICW “Objective Individual Combat Rifle.” Heckler & Koch makes both the grenade launcher and the assault rifle components, with the last based on their superlative 5.56mm G36.

Already having satisfactorily demonstrated the extraordinary capabilities of SABR’s “smart” grenade launcher, fire control and 25mm ammunition, Alliant had just delivered six production prototypes to ARDEC for troop testing. If all goes well with the planned schedule of testing, modification, and improvement as emerging technologies are integrated along the way, SABR should be in the hands of line infantry units by 2007. This is not all that far away given the realities of peacetime R,D&A.

Is Paris Burning? Amusingly, the French just can’t seem to help themselves when it comes to reinventing the wheel. No matter how many times they have tried and fallen short of improving on existing weapons (nearly always) they steadfastly refuse to buy from other nations. The latest case in point was detailed by Retired French Army Colonel Guy Rageot, now with GIAT Industries, in a paper on how their FAMAS assault rifle (only slightly more successful in export sales than the sad British SA80) is in the process of being belled and whistled as a Gallic OICW.

As can be seen in the accompanying graphics from his lecture, the GIAT ICW “Individual Combat Weapon” of the future is a bullpup over/under 30mm grenade launcher/5.56mm assault rifle with on-board fire control that feeds into a helmet mount display. It sure seems to me that they could save a lot of time and francs by signing on to buy the American SABR. But then, the French consider Jerry Lewis to be a cinematic genius….

Crew Call

SABR’s big brother is the OCSW “Objective Crew Served Weapon” a 25mm automatic grenade chunker that also takes advantage of computerized fire control and inductively set “smart” fuze technology. ARDEC’s John Cline provided an update on the status of this exciting weapon that is intended to replace the decades old .50 cal. M2HB and the heavy and sometimes cantankerous 40mm Mk19 on ground and vehicle mounts within five years.

Beam Me Up

The science fiction of today is in danger of being overtaken by some fascinating experimental programs unveiled at the conference. It has been said that we are nearing a finite level of development for manportable kinetic energy weapons (conventional small arms and ammo) so visionary engineers are pushing the envelope along a variety of other interesting avenues.

**Gratuitous rant follows; However, others convincingly argue that this is largely due to the spreading infection of “political correctness” as America’s 60’s peacenik civilian leadership sends our Armed Forces on ill-considered, feel-good missions worldwide; putting them into danger but handcuffing them with unrealistic restrictions on the use of necessary force. It can’t be denied that the scramble for non-lethal means of dealing with our enemies has diverted appalling amounts of scarce money from traditional weapons upgrade programs. Hell, the Army and Marines don’t have enough basic small arms ammo to conduct much needed sustainment training! The full costs of this Clintonista soldierphobic arrogance and willful stupidity will undoubtedly be paid in American lives when the next inevitable high intensity war takes place. (End of gratuitous rant**)

Editor’s added rant: (While it is not the editorial policy of SAR to slam politics, many of us are veterans of the various services. We understand the mission of the soldier on the field, of the sailor at sea, of the airman in the air, as being essentially the same; to fight the battles this country sets out for them. All too often we hear the horror stories of the active duty personnel that we work with, and how their preparedness and ability to do their jobs is suffering from the current administration’s policies. If reading that makes you uncomfortable, imagine how it must feel to be in harm’s way with the current politically correct dogma clouding up your mission and putting you at risk. Go Robert… Rant on this one for sure!- Dan)

Army Research Lab’s Louis Jasper showed three semi-amusing programs that appear to have their major practical applications in domestic law enforcement or as lawsuit bait for ACLU attorneys. (So, why aren’t Justice Department funds being spent instead of the Defense Department’s money?)

Don’t want to shoot up an approaching truck full of high explosives because the suicide mission terrorists inside might be harmed? Well, the Directed Energy Vehicle Stopper System “shoots” pulsed microwaves into a target vehicle where they go to work on electronic boxes and wiring to slow or stop the engine.

Want to disperse a crowd of demonstrators without tear-gassing the CNN camera crew that’s giving them worldwide publicity? The Electrical Driven Acoustic Source Experiment is a sound cannon that makes it very uncomfortable for people to hang around inside the range fan. One wag suggested that the same thing can be accomplished by playing rap music on a big boom box. Or, depending on the type of Third World dungheap agitators, playing anything by Ludwig van Beethoven …

Jasper’s last and perhaps most interesting program is the Vortex Ring Gun System, designed to efficiently propel an incapacitating agent with the energy shock wave produced by firing a large caliber blank. A diverging nozzle in the device forms the atomized chemical and shock wave mix into a high speed doughnut-shaped cloud with a 50 meter range —sort of a smoke ring from Hell.

As seen in the accompanying illustrations, successful tests have been conducted showing the capability of knocking down a 150 lb. mannequin at 30 ft. One goal of the continuing experiment, says Mr. Jasper, is to develop a multi-shot device possibly based on the drum fed GL-6 40mm grenade launcher (Or the Manville Gun of “Dogs of War” cinema fame).

Army After Next

While some may make fun of “think tanks” with “eggheads” sitting around coming up with pie in the sky ideas, I humbly suggest we should all be grateful for guys like Dr. Stephen Small of JSSAP. Small’s presentation, entitled “Light Fighter Lethality After Next,” was a quick look inside an elite group of armaments-oriented scientists and experienced military professionals who are charged with laying groundwork for arming the future soldier.

This is an ongoing program designed to project emerging technologies some decades ahead. It seeks to guide development of weapons that can be barely imagined right now but are firmly rooted in the reality of technological probability.

The “Seeker Projectile” is a case in point, envisioned as a small, light, wrist mounted device that launches a very smart round. The little warhead is a subminiature cruise missile that will know what it needs to hit as it leaves the launcher and will fly all by itself in whatever path needed to hit the target! Don’t laugh, just two decades ago in 1979 would you have believed that “smart” programmable airburst grenade launchers like the SABR and OCSW would be successfully tested and economically feasible by 1999?

Naysayers abound and — with the hard earned conviction of bloody experience in the real world — they insist that all of this is just flapdoodle. Put your trust in tough, motivated, well trained and brave Ranger type soldiers, they say. Wars, big and small, are won by men with simple, rugged and reliable weapons who will meet and defeat the enemy at close range on his own ground and under the worst possible conditions. “Hoo-aahgh!”

But sadly, the supply of these Ranger type soldiers is getting smaller by the minute in a soft and valueless America and in most of the rest of the “free” world. The heroic generation that won WWII is almost gone now and few since meet the standard they set. Realists know that America must use its technological edge to stay ahead of the likes of real warriors like the Mujahadeen and fanatical North Korean commandos.

We take at least a small measure of comfort in the belief that effective kinetic energy weapons like the M16A2 and the M249, and those that fire “dumb” bursting munitions like the M203, are already on hand in great numbers. We can rely on them to work as well or nearly as well as those of our likely enemies in the mud, rain, snow, sand and dust anywhere on our planet anytime in the next 20 years.

Meanwhile, Dr. Small and others at the Light Fighter Lethality (LFL) project are committed to guiding scarce developmental monies toward the most likely avenues of dramatic improvement in the ability of “Land Warriors” (and probably Land Warriorettes) to dominate the future battlefield at long and close range.

(Oh, please don’t tell the Rangers that LFL is programmed to have more than $9 million for gathering and thinking over the next five years while Rangers, SF, and Marine Force Recon have to beg for enough training ammo to maintain basic proficiency….)

Hand Grenade Sit-ups?

It is endlessly fascinating to behold the ingenuity shown by persons of the engineering persuasion in developing new ways to kill, maim, or otherwise incapacitate their fellow humans. Thank God for them and for the fact that many are on “our” side.

In the category of “Why didn’t I thank of THAT!?” is the information contained in one D.W. Leeming’s paper with the intriguing title “Application of an Innovative Grenade Warhead to Defeat Combat Body Armor.” Mr. Leeming, an engineer with the British firm of Numerica Ltd., described the results of recent practical testing and computer modeling carried out in a joint experiment with Royal Ordnance. This was directed toward the goal of maximizing efficiency of the lowly hand grenade which has remained essentially the same since the 1800’s. The problem, he explained, is that traditional grenades are sadly ineffective against GI type Kevlar vests and similar body armor. And beside that, their fragmentation pattern is grossly inefficient.

Numerica’s solution, somewhat awkwardly named the Next Generation Hand Grenade, is to attach an uprighting mechanism consisting of a symmetrical series of spring loaded legs around its base. Four seconds after being thrown, when the grenade is likely to have come to rest near the target, the legs snap down and push the grenade body upright. A half-second later it detonates, sending fragments in a highly efficient pattern radiating out from the body with few chunks wasted going up into the sky or down into the dirt as in conventional designs. Diabolical!

MOUT

Anticipating the request by Marine General James and many, many others, ARDEC has long been working on items designed to substantially increase the effectiveness of American fighting men in Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT). ARDEC’s Colonel Gary Payne listed eleven initiatives in various stages of development including more non-lethal munitions (stun grenades, etc.) devices to breach thick barricaded doors or reinforced concrete walls, remote detonation of booby traps, and even safe 5.56mm ammo for realistic training in urban combat.

Many of these, Col. Payne pointed out, are available now “off the shelf” from private industry, but he challenged the attendees to come up with new solutions. This is a wide open field for developments that will undoubtedly have endless applications in urban law enforcement.

(Again the question arises of why DoD is having to fund this out of its pathetically meager budget when Janet Reno’s Injustice Department is flush with cash.)

Past as Prologue

In contrast to the many somewhat dry technical papers being presented by engineers, marketing types and others, came a cautionary tale of real urban warfare by a Marine who had been right in the middle of it. Nicolas Warr, author of the book PHASE LINE GREEN, was a 2nd Lieutenant commanding a platoon of Company C, 1st Battalion, 5th Marines in Vietnam during the notorious Tet Offensive. His vivid and insightful paper “Operation Hue City — Lessons Learned” laid out many of the challenges that are just as valid in MOUT today as they were back in 1968.

One particularly relevant aspect of the battle was the effectiveness of what Warr called “killer teams” made up by pairing a heavily armored M48 tank with the lightly armored but heavily armed Ontos. The tank could maneuver with relative invulnerability while drawing enemy fire. Sitting back in a safe overwatch position, the Ontos’ crew could spot where the fire was coming from and almost instantaneously wipe out the source with up to six 106mm recoilless rifle rounds. It is food for thought that there is nothing comparable to the Ontos in today’s Marine Corps as it wrestles with the probability of more urban combat missions.

Exhibits

Both large and small firms as well as government agencies traditionally show their capabilities and wares in exhibit booths around the perimeter of the lecture halls. These are where one can meet real designers and builders and actually put your hands on guns, ammo, sights and related systems. Many of these displays showcased items that were being introduced at the symposium in technical papers and would also be demonstrated later in the week on the range at nearby Ft. Dix.

Some highlights include the previously mentioned OICW from ARDEC and Alliant, H&K’s XM1014 shotgun and UMP45 submachine gun, Reed Knight’s SR-25 Lightweight Match Rifle, and just outside the exhibit hall, ARDEC’s remarkable high lift gun platform.

This last is a clever blending of developmental programs for remote-controlled weapons and a standard issue crane as used by certain specialized units of combat engineers. Called the Counter Sniper Weapon, it features a classic .50 cal. M2 HB machine gun with side mounted tele lens video camera that is aimed and fired by an operator using a video screen and joystick. Its unique usefulness comes in being able to lift it high above the battlefield —over the roofs of buildings or thick tree lines — to quickly dispatch enemies without actually exposing the human operator.

Its advantages in urban combat were particularly obvious where it was parked just outside the Parsippany Hilton. Had this been the Baghdad Hilton, the lift arm could take the gun right up to the highest floor to find adversaries with the video camera or thermal sight, then take them out with a devastating burst of .50 cal fire. Obviously, other weapons can be substituted as called for by the tactical situation.

Demonstrations

Another big difference between NDIA’s conference and others is the live fire portion, coordinated and conducted quite ably again this year by FNMI’s Sal Fanelli. According to Fanelli and Russ Logan, there is no comparable professional forum in which many of the same items presented in technical papers and exhibits are also shown in action on a range.

“It’s one thing to hear about a weapon in a nice, air-conditioned auditorium the way we do it and the Brits do it at Shrivenham (UK),” Logan says. “But, that’s nothing like the real world of the muddy boots soldier. Sitting uncomfortably in the bleachers in 90 degree heat watching actual weapons being fired is a very different reality.”

This “very different reality” can quickly alternate between fun and farce as Murphy’s Law (Whatever can go wrong will, and at the worst possible time) randomly asserts itself. Semi and full auto guns that worked perfectly well earlier in the day in function tests sometimes pick the worst possible time to jam up and refuse to fire. Sights that were perfectly zeroed a mere hour ago suddenly lead the shooter astray from heat mirage or a brisk crosswind. As embarrassed and uncomfortable as these and other mishaps may make the demonstrators, at least they don’t face — as a soldier does — the very real prospect of death because his gun won’t work at the critical moment!

This year the NDIA live fire included impressive demonstrations by nine domestic and international firms and closed with a spectacular presentation by the National Guard’s 42nd “Rainbow” Infantry Division.

In what may be thought of as the ultimate .50 caliber sniper rifle, an M1 Abrams tank crew from A Troop, 2nd Battalion, 102nd Armor of the New Jersey National Guard, fired several rounds of Winchester/Olin M962 SLAP-T (Saboted Light Armor Penetrator-Tracer) ammo from an American Apex Corp. (Columbus, OH) Aimtest subcaliber device inside the Abrams’ 105mm main gun. The gunner got a first round hit as the dart-like penetrator streaked out to 1500 meters and slammed into a tank hulk, showing not only the effectiveness of the SLAP-T, but also the efficiency of the Aimtest device as a low cost training device.

Representing France’s PGM Precision, Drake Associates (Islip Terrace, NY) fired the French Army’s .50 caliber Hecate II bolt action with Anthena PPI-AP ammo, reportedly putting seven rounds inside the perimeter of a 14 inch/___cm tire rim at 1150 meters. Bob Drake says the brass sabot Anthena cartridge is being evaluated by the Army for standardization in the Long Range Rifle program.

SSK Industries (Wintersville, OH), is famed for its “Whisper” line of subsonic ammo and astonishingly big custom handguns. Owner J.D. Jones, a guy with a great sense of humor and boundless firearms expertise, demonstrated both by popping metal plates — the sound of impact splatter was louder than the firing of the weapon — and lighting up a derelict tank with spectacular pyrotechnic effects from incendiary loads. Call SSK if you want to kill, clean, and cook a Kodiak Bear with one shot….

Well known scopemaker Trijicon was represented by former Army Special Forces Lieutenant Colonel Mike Harris, now retired and head of Special Analytical Services (Dover, FL). Mike demonstrated several of Trijicon’s specialized optics on their appropriate weapons including a carbine, assault rifle, and squad auto weapon. “Murphy” got him right at the end of an otherwise flawless demo when his M249 jammed.

Christensen Arms (Fayette, UT) pressed longtime shooter, NDIA member, and cartridge guru Jim Frigiola into marksmanship duties with their light and highly accurate CarbonONE rifle. Jim repeatedly “gonged” a steel plate set 400 meters downrange, validating the rifle’s graphite/epoxy sleeved stainless steel barrel.

Swiss Munitions (Thun, Switzerland) took the prize for the most elaborate target preparation by lugging two identical body armor sandwiches more than 200 meters downrange (carefully stepping around 40mm duds) in preparation for a dramatic penetration test of their 7.62mm SWISS-P AP tungsten carbide cartridge. Franco Wagner dropped down behind a beautiful ERMA SR 100 sniper rifle and put three rounds of new Army standard armor piercing M993 into one sandwich, then three SWISS-P rounds into the other. Later on, after the range was closed to firing, they lugged the armor back to show unmistakably that their round outperforms what our GI’s are issued.

The red polo shirt uniformed Gemtech (Boise, ID) demo team, led by Doc Phil Dater, put several of their excellent suppressors to the test, a welcome opportunity for the audience to remove their earplugs and marvel. Depending on your choice of launch platform, choose the “Raptor,” “Predator,” or “Mossad” for close range critical applications.

While the M16 family of weapons has been around for decades and is now made quite well by a whole bunch of different manufacturers, M2 Corporation (Las Vegas, NV) has some executive security variants of the M16 that command immediate attention. Mark Pierson conducted an astonishing torture test of the 8 inch barrel M16S by hosing 500 rounds downrange in continuous full auto bursts from five BETA C-MAGs. “Murphy” was thwarted as this went off without a hitch and the smoking barrel and handguard refused to melt. The laws of physics decree a catalog of reasons why accurate and effective .30 caliber subsonic rounds are nearly impossible to build with consistency and economy. Engel Ballistic Research (Smithville, TX) seemingly defies these laws with two rounds that have been snatched up by some big players in the special operations business. Former USMC Scout Sniper Dan Nafe demonstrated Whit Engel’s unjacketed 7.62mm/.30 cal “Thumper” and new jacketed PBS (Precision Bonded Subsonic) rounds, ringing a 3 inch square steel plate placed some 75 meters downrange.

Mad Minute and More

The industry show was immediately followed by an impressive twenty minute live fire demonstration by Guardsmen of the New Jersey and New York National Guard’s 42nd Infantry Division (Mechanized).

Intended to show how dismounted infantrymen are supported by the organic heavy weapons of a modern mechanized infantry battalion, the show began when two rifle squads double-timed out and jumped into sandbagged fighting positions directly in front of the bleachers, then locked and loaded M16’s and M249’s. Heavier weapons were positioned on a long line to their right, including 7.62mm M60 and .50 caliber M2HB machineguns, 40mm MK19 grenade machine guns, and two M113A4 mortar carriers.

The tactical scenario called for the squads to spot an enemy mechanized infantry unit moving their way and to call for appropriate elements of fire support beginning at 4000 meters. Starting with the long range 120mm mortars, each group of heavy support weapons fired in turn. Finally, it was time for the riflemen to deal with some amazingly hardy survivors who had miraculously closed to less than 300 meters despite the cumulative effects of successive crew served weapon bombardments.

The riflemen and machinegunners made short work of the invading foot soldiers — represented by a bunch of prepositioned Type E silhouettes — with a storm of 5.56mm ball and tracer crisscrossing the immediate range front and thoroughly air conditioning the “enemy.”

These young men and countless others in American uniforms are, after all, those the Small Arms Section is pledged to support now and in the future. Keep at it guys, there is much work that remains to be done and new generations are going to need everything you can come up with.

By Jim Schatz

This article was written as a guide for dealers and manufacturers for conducting successful and safe demonstrations of small arms to all audiences, military, law enforcement and civilian personnel. These guidelines also apply to demos conducted by military and law enforcement personnel performing “dog and pony” shows for the public and other organizations and to anyone who travels regularly to crowded ranges and machine gun shoots.

This information is a compilation of the experiences and recommendations of the author and numerous members of the Heckler & Koch Inc. Federal Operations and Training Departments based on many years of conducting small arms demonstrations. The author alone has conducted more than 400 live-fire demonstrations during his 15 years of employment with HK, not to mention many similar demos conducted during a preceding 7 year military career. Like the fundamentals of marksmanship or the laws of physics, there are basics for conducting demonstrations that apply to any weapon, and to demos conducted at any location and for all audiences.

The recommendations provided herein will be most helpful for the novice demonstrator. The experienced demonstrator may find this information rudimentary. However it will still act as a refresher, a shake of the snow globe if you will, of the critical details for one of the most important, and dangerous, sales tools of those dealing in small arms, ammunition, and destructive devices. A demo, good, bad or otherwise can and will make or break the sale.

This article hopes to document and remind us all of what is important when conducting such demos and what can happen when Mr. Murphy jumps on board with both feet. It is hoped that these guidelines will help insure the conduct of safe and successful demonstrations, regardless of the level of experience of the demonstrator. At the same time this is not the gospel and many readers and experienced demonstrators will certainly be able to add to this list and may even question some of the recommendations and ideas. This is good; the author and readers welcome your input, as there are no absolutes in life.

Throughout the article true accounts will be provided as examples to reinforce the messages conveyed. While these tales are true the names have been changed to protect the innocent and to avoid embarrassment for the unfortunate individual involved in the story. Only a few of these examples come from the HK files.

Parts I and II of this four part series will cover General Guidelines for a Successful Demonstration. Part III will follow with tips concerning Specific Safety Guidelines and Precautions during demonstrations. Part IV will discuss Ammunition and Specific Weapon Guidelines.

The Definition of a Successful Demonstration

“A successful demonstration is a day where no one at the demo gets hurt, all the guns work as designed, you hit all your targets and, if you are a salesman the customer leaves with the intention to buy your product, in that order. Strive for perfection!”

Safety is the first concern but preparation is the key to a successful demonstration!

Even when you have done all that you can to insure a safe and 100% successful live-fire demonstration it is important to remember that many factors are simply out of your control.

Example 1:

An experienced manufacturer’s rep was asked to conduct a demo for a federal agency allegedly interesting in purchasing 100 long guns. Unbeknownst to the rep the prospective customer showed up at the demo with another manufacturer’s product and had been obviously coached by the manufacturers rep. Certain individuals from the agency used the demo to steer the decision-makers attending the demo away from the products of the rep invited to showcase his wares.

Lesson: Demos can be counterproductive to your goals due to outside influences beyond your control. It is very important to lay the groundwork and “know your enemy” before investing the time and effort to conduct the demonstration.

Without preparation there is anarchy. What can go wrong will go wrong during the demo. If you think it will take 30 minutes to prepare or set-up it will take 90 minutes.Being unprepared for the demo sets you up for failure. The degree of success obtained using the live-fire demonstration as a sales tool is directly proportional to the time you spend preparing for it. If you are prepared for the demo before arriving at the site of the demonstration not only can you concentrate on the objective of the visit but you will also be more attentive to safety concerns.

General Guidelines for a Successful Demonstration

•1. Safety is the first priority at any live fire demo! If all else goes perfect during your demo but someone is hurt as a result of your demo it is the injury the attendees will remember. Never shortcut or sacrifice safety when conducting a demonstration, for any reason.

•2. A demonstration is only successful when all (100%) of your weapons and accessories work flawlessly. Any stoppages or failures will most likely be seen and frowned upon by the onlookers and could jeopardize the outcome of the sale.

•3. Preparation is everything! Inspect and prepare your demo kit (weapons, magazines, belts, accessories, range materials, etc.) the day prior to the demo. Arrive at the site of the demo ready to shoot!

•4. Test fire and confirm the zero’s of your demo weapons the day of the demo and if possible on the range where the demo will occur. Arrive enough in advance to test fire and confirm your zeros before the attendees begin to arrive. Test firing just prior to the demo will provide as great a guarantee as possible that your weapons will function properly during the demo on that day and under those unique conditions. Test fire each weapon with one full magazine in all available modes of fire.

•5. Arrive 1 to 2 hours prior to the start of the demo for set up and preparation time. This will allow you sufficient time to test fire, confirm zeros, set up your firing line, refill magazines, lay out literature, post signs, etc. prior to the arrival of the attendees. Arriving early and being set up and ready to fire before the attendees arrive will show that you are prepared and organized. It will also allow you ample time to answer the questions of the early arrivals that may not be able to stay for the entire demo.

Early arrival also provides a buffer time for unexpected events, forgotten items and for the all-important mental preparation prior to precision error-free shooting.

•6. Know your products! Memorize specifications, features, prices prior to the demo.

•7. Know the prospective user, their current weapons and needs, the key players and obstacles or negative attitudes you may encounter as in example 1 above. Model your demo to address the unique requirements of the attendees of the demo. Set realistic goals for the day and strive to reach them.

•8. Avoid the urge to try and impress the attendees with your expansive knowledge of firearms. Concentrate on the merits of products you are showing and the needs of the customer.

•9. Don’t try to cover your entire product line in the time allotted unless the customer is seriously interested in buying everything you offer! Find out before the demo and concentrate on the weapons that the customer is most interested in. Select those primary weapons for live fire demonstration and leave the others for static display only. This reduces demo and cleaning time, ammo costs, the possibility for problems or safety issues with too many guns on line and most importantly allows you to concentrate on selling the weapons that the customer is most likely to buy.

•10. Keep the verbal briefing portion of the demo short, no longer than 20 minutes at a time. Most persons will only retain 30 – 50 % of your “sermon”, some far less depending on the conditions and their interest. If necessary, take breaks throughout the demo to speak to them on additional subjects/products. Dividing the demo into phases with a short briefing prior to each phase works very well. (I.e. talk about and shoot pistols, break, talk about and shoot sub guns/rifles, break, talk about and shoot shotguns, break, closing comments.)

Include in your briefing the following information:

* Who you are and what you do for your company.
* Provide a brief description of your company and it’s relationship with any parent organizations, etc.
* Additional services provided by your company, i.e. repair, training, reconditioning, trade-in programs, programs to provide sample weapons for user test and evaluation, Individual Officer Sale Program, etc.
* Describe the products you will demo and a short bit on each one. Include at a minimum:
—Features and merits
—Operation
—Assembly/disassembly
—Accessories, options, variants, etc.
—Procedures for use and clearing
—Proper and effective firing position or methods
* Invite attendees to take literature, price lists, business cards, etc. after demo is completed.
* Invite attendees to test fire weapons at close of briefing.
* Offer and provide the loan of ear and eye protection to those without.
(Note: Yes they should bring their own but its your demo so be prepared to
protect the eyes and ears of those who didn’t think ahead to protect themselves.)

•11. Load your magazines and belts prior to arriving at the range to save time. Inspect, fit and adjust if necessary your holsters, belts, slings, rigs and equipment prior to leaving for the demo so you know they are ready for immediate use.

•12. Arrive at the demo with weapons that are clean, properly lubricated and prepared for the demo.

•13. Load, unload and fire the weapons in a correct and professional manner, in other words in the way that they would be loaded and fired during actual use. For example, load the long guns with the weapon in a firing position. Don’t load the rifles or shotguns with the weapon laying in your arms upside down to make the insertion of the shells/magazine more convenient for you. Practice your loading and manipulation of the weapons with inert dummy rounds prior to the demo until you can do it without fumbling or watching your hand motions.

Example 2:

One of the finest shotgun demonstrators in the world today makes loading of the magazine look fast and easy through years of hands on practice. He always holds the shotgun in the firing position while loading and looks downrange or at the attendees and his movements are slick and precise. Many attendees look at how easily and quickly the gun can be loaded by this seasoned professional though they would be hard pressed to duplicate his proficiency without extensive practice. Nonetheless like those of us who buy sporting goods because they work so well in the hands (or on the feet) of professional athletes this is a key factor in their overall impression of the product.

Lesson: Practice makes perfect. Spend time refining your demo skills, especially with a new or unfamiliar product.

•14. Depart the range only after it has been returned to a condition at least as good if not better than it was when you arrived. Do not leave your brass or trash behind on the range! Return the range equipment and materials to their correct location. Range hogs are seldom invited back.

Example 3:

A team from a major manufacturer built a sizeable concrete block wall on a military range during a large demo. The purpose of the wall was to be turned into small concrete fragments by automatic fire from the team of inconsiderate shooters. At the close of the demo the team packed up their guns and left behind thousands of pieces of concrete block, and brass and trash, for the range crew to police up and nothing to haul it away in. This manufacturer is now banned from using this range and would be hard pressed to sell even a shovel to the organization to which the range belongs.

Lesson: Respect the range and thus its caretakers! Don’t expect someone else to clean up after you. Follow the hikers motto and “Pack out what you packed in”.

•15. Have literature and your business cards and info available during and after the demo for attendees to receive. Pre-filled literature bags or folders complete with all of the applicable product information and pricing, to include your business card, insures that each attendee receives all of the pertinent information and also keeps the literature from blowing around the range in the wind, disturbing your presentation.

Example 4:

During a demo on an outdoor range an experienced and very well meaning Class II manufacturer forgot himself for just a second, concerned that his unsecured literature was blowing across the customers range. Not wanting to litter up the picturesque range of the prospective customer the gentlemen took off after the airborne trash with a fully loaded automatic rifle. Needless to say the attendees were not impressed, especially when the flustered man realized what he had done and where he was in relation to the firing line and crowd, spun around to return to the firing line and swept the crowd with his locked and loaded rifle.

Lesson: Secure your literature with rocks, rubber bands, bags or binder clips before the demo begins and mind your muzzle.

•16. Display company “colors” and logo’s on the range whenever possible or practical. Unique demo uniforms for you and all your personnel make a good impression and also help the customer to find you when they have questions. Light colors are best in the hot sun but show “range crud” easily. Stay away from wannabe outfits that resemble the uniforms of your customers. •17. Keep the range and your personal appearance neat and orderly before and during the demo to make a good impression.

Example 5:

A hired shooter for a well-known manufacturer was demoing an excellent product for a crowd of government types, many of which were special operations personnel who were interested in the product to be shown. However, the state of appearance of the shooter, being grossly overweight and in all the wrong places and woefully underdressed, resulted in the attendees only watching the man’s physique during the demo and not the gun or his results on target. The shooter’s personal appearance was the talk for years to come, not the fact that he hit every target he was shooting at.

Lesson: Consider your appearance at all times. If you don’t look the part for the crowd you are demoing for, find and hire someone who does.

•18. This is not a joke! Keep breath mints handy for you and your people during the demo. No one wants to stand and listen to “Johnny Trenchmouth” up close on the firing line during a two-hour demo and will miss most of what you are saying concentrating on your atrocious breath instead. Cola soft drinks, tea and coffee (caffeine drinks) make this condition worse, especially first thing in the morning.
•19. Make the guns look good! Try to be as, or more, proficient (and safe!) with the weapons than the attendees. It is key to a successful demonstration that you come across as a professional in every way.

Example 6:

Another well-meaning hired gun shooting for the guy in example 5 spent hours setting up reactive targets for a large crowd of VIP onlookers. Once his portion of the demo arrived, the crowd watched anxiously to see the gunner engage the three dozen or so targets he labored to set up in full view of the waiting crowd. When the smoke (from the exploding targets, which concealed the remaining targets,) cleared, the shooter was out of ammo and many targets still remained.

Lesson: There are two here. Be able to hit what you aim at, especially when the attendees know what your targets are. Pyrotechnics are great for demos but create smoke, which moves with the wind and obscures targets quite effectively. Use and position them strategically.

Continued in the next issue of Small Arms Review….