<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	 xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" >

<channel>
	<title>V5N5 (Feb 2002) &#8211; Small Arms Review</title>
	<atom:link href="https://smallarmsreview.com/category/articles/articles-by-issue-articles/v5/v5n5/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://smallarmsreview.com</link>
	<description>Explore the World of Small Arms</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2022 06:14:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>SAR TOURS PAKISTAN’S TRIBAL GUN FACTORIES</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/sar-tours-pakistans-tribal-gun-factories/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 23:21:36 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rob Krott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SAR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2559</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Rob Krott In the April 2001 (Vol. 4 No. 7) issue of Small Arms Review we ran an article by Rob Krott, our Military Affairs Correspondent titled “Into the Khyber”. It was about a recent trip he made to the Pakistan / Afghanistan area detailing his visit and his experiences with the local people [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Rob Krott</strong><br><br><em>In the April 2001 (Vol. 4 No. 7) issue of Small Arms Review we ran an article by Rob Krott, our Military Affairs Correspondent titled “Into the Khyber”. It was about a recent trip he made to the Pakistan / Afghanistan area detailing his visit and his experiences with the local people and customs he encountered. Given the recent events of 09-11-01, we asked Rob to submit an additional article with some insight into the guns and the local gun industry specifically and this is his follow up.</em></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" width="700" height="443" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-19.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7790" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-19.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-19-300x190.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Krott, in the Karkhanai Bazaar outside of Peshawar, having a bad-hair, but good-firearms day.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The narrow point of the Khyber Pass is at Ali Masjid. Above the Ali Masjid mosque sits the Ali Masjid fort, which overlooks the entire Khyber Pass. Here the road is one way as it’s only thirty meters or so wide. Before it was widened two camels could not walk abreast. To fully appreciate the Khyber Pass you must imagine trying to escape through the pass on foot while being shot at by Pathan snipers. Testifying to the near impossibility of such a feat, is a British cemetery full of graves from the Second Afghan War of 1879. The Khyber Pass walls bear the insignia of many British regiments, such as the Royal Sussex, the Gordon Highlanders, and the South Wales Borderers, to name but a few. Mute testimony to the far-flung reaches of a vanished empire, they reminded me of the arrogance of Daniel Dravot and Peachey Carnehan in Kipling’s The Man Who Would be King. At 1,200 meters in elevation, sitting at the end of the Khyber Pass railway and just eight kilometers from Afghanistan is Landi Kotal. Formerly “contraband city” full of hash and guns for sale and the plush homes of rich smugglers hidden behind compound walls, the smuggler’s trade has now moved to the Karkhanai Bazaar near Peshawar. After Landi Kotal the road forks: left to the Afghan border and right to Khyber Rifles headquarters. Bearing left it didn’t take long before we crested the last hill at Michni checkpoint to see the border post at Torkham. Beyond that lays Afghanistan. Unless you have a special pass and an Afghan visa this is the last stop — fifty-eight kilometers from Peshawar. The Michni guards are Khyber Rifles regulars armed with .308 Paki G-3s. These and our guard’s Kalashnikov were just about the only weapons I saw which weren’t locally made.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img decoding="async" width="700" height="443" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-37.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7791" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-37.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-37-300x190.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Gun toting Afridis chat with fellow tribesman at the Khyber Pass entranceway while the rattle of gunfire is heard just up ahead.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong>Cottage Industry</strong><br><br>Situated about 25 miles south of Peshawar in the middle of the NWFP on the road to Kohat is Darra Adam Khel, a small village boasting about 100 gun shops and noted for its cottage firearms industry. Darra was responsible for equipping the bulk of the Mujahideen during the early days of the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Darra Adam Khel’s sole industry is weapons manufacturing. The town’s mom-and-pop gun shops house a cottage weapons industry unparalleled any where in the world. Darra produces about 20,000 firearms a year. With the average weapon selling for $100 that’s conservatively 2 million dollars a year being injected into this little village’s economy. Other than making guns or firing guns there’s not much else to do. Oh, yeah, there’s always hand loading the empty brass.<br><br>I went to the Home and Tribal Affairs office for a travel pass. An officious and obnoxious little Punjabi told me no. A discussion followed that finished with the comment: “It (Darra) is closed and I have no reason. If you decide to close one of your states to foreigners, you may do that (in your country).” Darra is frequently “officially” closed. Especially during the periods of heightened tribal and political unrest. The bureaucrats prohibit travel to Darra by foreigners, because of the very real possibility of kidnapping — a Pathan tribal specialty (ransom is 200,000 to 300,000 rupees or about $4,500 to $6,700). So travel to Darra is seldom authorized.<br><br>Here’s how unauthorized travel to Darra usually works: after finding and paying a guide/translator and a driver you proceed to Darra. At each police checkpoint you contribute to the local police officer’s personal pension fund. Surreptitiously slipping a wad of dirty rupees to the guide/translator who then mumbles a few entreaties in Pashto while presenting this baksheesh to the policeman, leaves you free to go. On the buses which service Darra the Pushtuns carrying weapons pay a set price to these same policemen. The size of the bribe is commensurate with the type of contraband weapon — say, 50 rupees for a pistol and 100 rupees for a Kalashnikov.<br><br>There has been less demand for weapons since the withdrawal of the Soviets, but the shops of Darra and others like them still do a good business supplying the various political factions, tribal groups, and, yes, criminals which occasionally make Pakistan (especially Sind and Punjab) a dangerous place to be. Inspector Pir Iqbal and sub-Inspector Adnan Orkzal of the Frontier Police in Peshawar told me there are over 7,000 Kalashnikovs in private hands in Karachi, the capital, where ethnic and political violence had broke out anew with nearly 300 people being killed in the past few months. Guns are also run into Kashmir, the new border flashpoint between Pakistan and India.<br><br><strong>Nooristan Gun Factories</strong><br><br>While not as well known as Darra there are also gun factories in Nooristan (not to be confused with the Nuristan across the border, but just as remote). In the village of Sakhakot near the famous Buddhist ruins at Takht-e-Bahi we picked our way along the muddy street as two mangy curs fought over some scrap. Small boys ran up to tug us toward some shops. A man wearing the traditional shalwar kameez, sandals, and a pakol &#8211; the flat, rolled pancake beret peculiar to Chitral, walked by with three rifles slung over his shoulder so we knew we were in the right place.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img decoding="async" width="700" height="443" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-35.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7792" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-35.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-35-300x190.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Gun shop proprietor and the universal symbol (in Pakistan) for a gun shop.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The gun shops of Sakhahot Malakand in the Azam Khan Market are small with the manufacturing sheds of mud-brick and tin located in the back alleys. Using standard patterns these artisans can crank out any of a dizzying array of firearms in a day on their small forges and meager collection of drill presses. A light machine gun completely made by hand would take a while, say ten days to two weeks. Also available are fragmentation grenades (do you want to trust these fuses?), anti-tank mines, small mortars, anti-aircraft guns, and heavy machine guns — mostly copies of the detritus left by the Soviet Union’s failed Afghan adventure. Weapons can also be made to order. Authentic Kalashnikovs can be had for as little as $300, but your made in Pakistan copy may be a better bargain. I mean, who wouldn’t want their very own “Special Rolex” Kalashnikov?</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="443" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-31.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7793" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-31.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-31-300x190.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Nooristan gun maker with a variety of Kalashnikov knockoffs. Weapon to the right is 8mm. Weapon hanging on wall sports Bren inspired .303 magazine. Heavy cartridges for a handmade, shoulder fired auto weapon!</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Weapons parts and loaned tools gripped in their greasy hands, small boys scurried to and fro. Schooling is considered unnecessary for an eight year old who can already file out a Tokarev frame in his father’s gun shop. One of the gun builders was smoking hash. I lit his joint for him with my Zippo and immediately wondered what the effect might be on the weapon’s tolerances. There was an interesting and eclectic collection of hybrid weaponry here: a British Sten gun chambered for 7.62 x 39mm and fitted with a Kalashnikov magazine. A very poor man’s AK, I guess. The idea of firing it made me a little nervous. I wouldn’t want to fire one of these, especially the ones chambered for rifle cartridges. Even without knowing the psi generated in the chamber, operating a submachine gun designed for a pistol cartridge with a muzzle velocity of 1280 fps versus the Kalashnikov round’s 2330 fps is not a smart bet.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="545" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-27.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7795" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-27.jpg 545w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-27-234x300.jpg 234w" sizes="(max-width: 545px) 100vw, 545px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Peshawar gun shop owner displays camouflaged 8mm Kalashnikov … just what you always wanted.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>There were other variations on the Sten including double magazine equipped weapons in bizarre calibers such as .32 ACP or .30 caliber US carbine. Given the history of the area I wasn’t surprised to see so many copies of British military and sporting small arms including: Webley .32 and .38 caliber revolvers, more Webleys in any caliber imaginable, British Smith and Wesson .38 revolvers, Sten guns, and British .303 SMLEs (very popular especially with the older gentlemen who grew up with this weapon). Another good dependable bolt gun, the Mauser 98K, is also very common.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="498" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-19.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7796" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-19.jpg 498w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-19-213x300.jpg 213w" sizes="(max-width: 498px) 100vw, 498px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Pathan trader in Kabul with Afghan jezzail and Khyber swords. First sword from right and second jezzail from right now reprise in Krotts collection.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>While the CETME rifle or G-3 is made under license in Pakistan these weapons are too complicated for the backyard machinists to fabricate. But the Pathan gun makers copy the G-3 magazine and barrel and use them with a Mauser bolt action in .308 / 7.62 NATO to make a weird hybrid complete with knurled pistol grip, military sights, and heavy straight stock with butt plate. There were bolt action AK-style hybrids including one 8mm Kalashnikov and various bolt guns with Kalashnikov actions or parts.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="443" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-17.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7797" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-17.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-17-300x190.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Krott with Pathan elder (how about that beard?) in the Karkhanai Bazaar near Peshawar. Stock decoration courtesy of The World’s Most Dangerous Places.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>There were many Tokarevs in various calibers including .32 ACP as calibers larger than this are difficult to own in other parts of Pakistan, hence the popularity of this less than adequate caliber. I handled an interesting folding stocked semi-auto pistol incorporating Broomhandle Mauser and Tokarev design features which seemed to be a popular design in all the shops. I don’t know what to call it, but I want one.<br><br>Custom orders were not a problem. You name it and these guys build it &#8230; with varying degrees of effectiveness. I was told I could order an M79 Grenade Launcher or a 9mm Luger. While I did manage to send home a muzzle loading jezail from Kabul what I really wanted was a perfect copy of a 9mm Artillery Luger with snail-drum magazine and shoulder stock holster. While the workmanship appeared good (in many cases I couldn’t tell the difference from a factory piece without a detailed examination) the quality of the materials is still in doubt. Early on guns were made from old iron railroad rails and scrap metal. Now the steel is supposedly imported from Belgium, though I think several weapons were truck springs, construction rebar, or car frames in a previous life. Factor in unsophisticated forgings, castings from scrap, and parts filed from blanks of sub-standard steels and you’ve got to wonder if these weapons will hold up under the pressures generated by modern cartridges.<br><br>But the prices are certainly attractive: a Krinkov .222 made in Pakistan costs 4500 rupees (about $100 US). In comparison an original Soviet TT-33 Tokarev pistol captured in Afghanistan sells for 10,000 rupees ($220) while the “best copy” of a Tokarev costs 3,000 rupees. That’s $67 for a semi-auto pistol. According to Peer Alasha, a gun dealer “All Kinds of Arms and Ammunition Available Here” in Sakhahot, I’d just missed some excitement by about four hours. Early that morning the MCB bank just up the street was knocked off by six men with Kalashnikovs and robbed of 6 million rupees. Hmm. Wonder where they got the guns?<br><br>I wanted to test fire a couple of the more interesting weapons, but that wasn’t going to happen. They wouldn’t let me fire a locally made rifle: “Sometimes they blow up and the pieces could hit you in the head.” That answered my questions about quality assurance. Robert Pelton of The World’s Most Dangerous Places TV show wanted to video some weapons being fired so for a little product sampling we followed Ali Khan down a narrow alley between the gun shops and across a field to a promontory overlooking a river gorge. The weapons were a locally fabricated Tokarev and an authentic Chinese AKM (Type 59). I wasn’t too excited about the choice of weapons as I’ve fired a lot of Tokarevs and countless Kalashnikovs. I wasn’t too happy about the ammunition cost either: they wanted 800 rupees ($18) for a handful of rounds.. Pelton banged away with the Chinese Kalashnikov. Next was the pistol so I stepped up to pop a few caps. “It’s a very good copy,” I was told. Ejection was poor with every other round hanging up. Every time it jammed I would execute an immediate action drill. And every time it malfunctioned Ali would reach around to grab the weapon out of my hand. He nearly got a 7.62mm pistol round through his palm. On purpose. I finally gave him an elbow and told him to just let me shoot the damn thing.<br><br>The ammo was poor quality as well (which probably had a lot to do with the ejection problems) and I could discern differences in loads of the locally manufactured ammunition via the change in sound and recoil. While ammunition was a problem in the past (gun makers fabricated their own cartridges by reloading spent casings, using melted scrap for bullets, mixing their own powder, recasting old bullets, and re-priming old primers with match heads) you can now buy “factory” loads albeit still made in Pakistan. These rounds, as demonstrated with the Tokarev, are less than dependable.<br><br><strong>Khyber Pass Guns</strong><br><br>The next day, joined by “Baba,” a white-bearded bespectacled Pathan bearing a striking resemblance to Crumb’s “Keep on Truckin’” caricature, we went out to the gun bazaar just past the Khyber Pass do not enter sign for some more “shopping.” I inspected one of the notorious .22 caliber “Stinger” pen guns which crudely resembles a ballpoint pen. A favorite of tourists and also the Paki airport police and customs inspectors who know just what to look for on the X-ray machine at the Peshawar airport. There’s also the risk of being informed upon by the seller or any of the various hangers-on who seem to follow foreigners around. It is illegal for a foreigner to purchase a weapon. The dealers know this but are more than willing to sell you a piece anyway. Outside the tribal areas Pakistan has fairly strict gun laws governing the licensing and registration of rifles and pistols. Possession of an illegal firearm and use of a firearm in the commission of a crime carry harsh penalties.<br><br>The following day we went to Baba’s village, Regi, a series of walled compounds separated by narrow streets and alleys. Machine gun posts and gun ports on cornices provide interlocking fields of fire with their neighbors, usually related by blood or marriage. The Pushtuns are famous for kidnapping, yet I could travel unmolested into some of these border villages and have tea in the family compounds under protection of malmastia, one of the tenets of Pukhtunwali.<br><br>Entering the compound of some of Baba’s kinsmen we had some tea and I met a dizzying array of cousins. Finally we all piled into some Toyotas and drove out to a nearby riverbed for some shooting. The targets were Pepsi cans set up at the bottom of the riverbank which served as an eight-foot high backstop. On top of the bank in the fields beyond were several people working while cows milled about near the top of the bank. When I pointed this out I was told not to worry, just be careful! I knew if I hit somebody with a ricochet I’d never get out of there alive. Of course I got first crack. Someone handed me an AK saying it’s zeroed for 60-70 meters. I checked the rear sights. The target was about 75 meters away. No problem. There was now a crowd of about 40 or 50 spectators, mostly men carrying weapons. It was time to earn some credibility. I’ve been in similar situations before, but never with friendlies wandering around the target area. I heard some muttering behind me and assumed some rupees were being wagered. I placed the selector on semi-automatic, chambered a round, took a good stance, checked my stock weld and sight picture, and dropping into the “rice paddy prone” (which surprised a few people) I immediately snapped off one round. BANG! and a pop can went flying into the air. There was a large collective shout and I cranked off six more rounds, keeping the pop cans dancing as everyone clapped and cheered. Baba was effusively happy, clapping me on the back as I handed back the Kalashnikov.<br><br>After some more plinking some one handed the weapon back to me and I burned off a magazine using three round bursts. The Pathans had demurred when I flicked the selector to full-auto. They tend to hose the general area of the target on full-auto and I had to prove to them that I could put all rounds on target on full-auto. Baba wanted me to burn a magazine off into the air. Something these boys occasionally do. Unfortunately what goes up must come down. I had to field strip the AK to demonstrate my proficiency as Baba was bragging I was a weapons expert.<br><br>We went back to the house for more tea. In the front room (for guests) was an oil portrait of the family patriarch, Captain Khan Bahader Abdul Qadir Khan, an officer in the British Army’s frontier force, mustachioed, turbaned, and bemedaled with sword. A very imposing figure, Captain Khan entered the military service in 1901 and retired in 1935. The assembly of about a dozen young and middle-aged men were all very proud of their grandfather. This sense of history and reverence of one’s distinguished ancestors is another admirable trait of Pathan culture.<br><br>As I was admiring the portrait one of the young men, Mohammed Ali Kalil, asked me if I liked duck hunting. Well, hell, yes! One of the cousins brought out a leather gun case. When they snapped it open there on the velvet was an immaculately preserved .12 gauge Greener double barrel E17 grade shotgun. A silver plate on the butt stock announced it as a gift commemorating the captain’s thirty-four years of service. My admiration of the shotgun and Captain Khan’s illustrious military career led to a general discussion of weaponry and soon I was being handed M-16s (Iranian arsenal stamps), an SVD, a PKM, and an RPD which all appeared as if from nowhere. I was told there were five M-16s on the compound and they were very popular with the Pathans. Some one made a joke and I was told to look up. Near the ceiling was a space all along one wall. There must have been a catwalk because behind the wall were three men laughing and smiling while brandishing weapons. I was glad I was a friend. You don’t want to be an enemy in the land of the Pathans.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="506" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-11.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7798" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-11.jpg 506w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-11-217x300.jpg 217w" sizes="(max-width: 506px) 100vw, 506px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Rob Krott holds a handmade Pakistani AKM. Workmanship was excellent.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><em>SAR Military Affairs Correspondent Rob Krott has traveled extensively for the TV show The World’s Most Dangerous Places which can be seen on the Travel Channel. He hasn’t shot anything, or anybody, with his Afghan jezail.</em></p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>INTERVIEW WITH TY MELIGAN OF TL GUNS</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/interview-with-ty-meligan-of-tl-guns/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 23:20:47 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matt Smith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SAR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TL Guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TY Meligan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2556</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Matt Smith SAR has a policy of trying to bring new Class 2 manufacturers to the attention of the readers, as well as our interviews with long time industry people. We recently had the opportunity to sit down with Ty Meligan of TL Guns and ask him a series of questions about his background [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Matt Smith</strong><br><br><em>SAR has a policy of trying to bring new Class 2 manufacturers to the attention of the readers, as well as our interviews with long time industry people. We recently had the opportunity to sit down with Ty Meligan of TL Guns and ask him a series of questions about his background and history as a Class Two Manufacturer. Ty is located in Oregon, a state that has a very high machinegun rating per capita including many other dealers and manufacturers. He has been getting a lot of attention on the Internet among the Class 3 community there, and we thought we should bring him to the attention of the SAR community.</em><br><br><strong><em>SAR: Ty, how did you get into the firearms business?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> It started about six years ago with a gentleman named Dan Tanner. I went by his gun shop one day, where he had machineguns and suppressors all over his walls. I started asking questions and discussing what I knew about them from the military. I had no idea that you could legally own this stuff, but there it was in front of me. I got to know Dan as a friend, and he eventually asked me to help run his equipment to manufacture suppressors. I told him it had been a while since I had done that, but I quickly came back up to speed on the equipment, and started manufacturing suppressors for Dan.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: What kind of technology were you using for the suppressors?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> I wouldn’t really call it “Technology”. It was basically just flat baffles. I was working as a machinist manufacturing what Dan wanted. I was making .223 cans, 9mm MAC cans, integral Mark 2 cans, and screw on .22 cans. Sales were mostly to local residents, but we did have some Internet sales, as well.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: When did you become involved in the designing of suppressors?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> After I had been working for Dan a while, I approached him and asked him if I could try some of my own ideas. Dan gave me the go ahead to make the improvements that I felt were necessary to improve performance on the cans. I started by trying ideas from suppressors I had used in the military, but I knew I could improve on these designs as well.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: Ty, what was your military background that exposed you to suppressors?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> I was in the Army Special Forces as an 18 Bravo Weapons Sergeant. We were attached to an infantry unit at Fort Sherman in Panama. My main function was as an armorer. We captured weapons, and did documentation on what we found. Often, we found weapons with modifications to them, held together with rubber bands and paper clips. One of the most interesting weapons ever confiscated was an old M16 that was so worn it had a hole in the magazine well where you place your thumb to drop the magazine. All of the plastic had been removed and replaced with wood. Who knows how it had made its way from Viet Nam to South America. We did a lot of work with the HK MP5 SD and HK muzzle cans. This is where I was first exposed to the K baffle, and I wanted to improve upon this design. I started doing my own version of a baffle with different types of cuts, different angles, and different ways of manipulating the gas. I’ve also attacked other aspects of suppression such as how to reduce ejection port noise and reduce the overall sound signature.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="240" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-42.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7849" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-42.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-42-300x103.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /></figure>



<p><strong><em>SAR: How long did you work with Dan Tanner before going out on your own?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> I worked with him off and on for two years, until one day when Dan told me that I was really good at this and should be doing this on my own. He complimented me on my workmanship, quality, and new designs, and encouraged me to get my own manufacturing license, which I did. I started out part time, since I had a full time job as an electrician. There was a student that was going to a local Christian college studying advertising and marketing. He asked if he could do his final report on my business, from where I started to where I am now. This included manufacturing from the raw materials to the finished cans. The first year in business, I made about 20 suppressors, which was mostly for fun. I was making good money as an electrician at the time. The second year, I made about 60 suppressors. I was out in the shop more working at night. The third year, I made nearly 100 suppressors. This was the point where I started asking myself what I really wanted to do. At about the same time, the company I was working for went out of business, which more or less made up my mind to start manufacturing full time. I did some advertising, got my web site built, and my business just took off. I think the main thing that kept my business going was that customers liked the quality, the looks, and the price.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: Tell us about your shop and the equipment you’re using.</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> My shop was originally in my garage, where I had kept my two race cars. One by one, the cars were removed as I started getting equipment. I’ve got a nice lathe, a couple of milling machines, a drill press, a grinder, a solvent tank, a bead blast cabinet, a band saw, and an Iron Worker punch. I just picked up a nice Okuma CNC lathe. It has eight tool heads and a seventeen-inch swing. A new industrial park has gone in nearby, and I have moved my shop there. I have gone from a 24 X 30 shop to a 2000 square foot shop. I will also open up as a general machine shop, in addition to the firearms business. It is only about 2 miles away from my former location.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: What were the first suppressors you started manufacturing once you were out on your own?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> Integral Mark 2 pistols. At the time, many of the other suppressed Mark 2’s were full of packing material and miscellaneous parts and pieces. They were a pain to get back together. I wanted to simplify the design, and reduce the number of items in the assembly. I started by combining the baffles and spacers into one piece. My design includes an aluminum inner tube over the barrel with an end cap, the spacer and baffle assembly, the outer tube, and an end cap. I started with a setscrew to hold it all together, but found that after a couple years of use, a gap developed between the receiver and the tube. I don’t like to copy other people’s stuff, because not only is that not righteous, I like to come up with my own ideas. I decided to drill a hole in the bottom of the end cap, where you could stick the end of an Allen wrench to tighten or loosen the threaded end cap. I now thread my outer tube onto the receiver, mill a slot for the sights, which are welded from the underside of the tube, and it all makes a nice package. Some of the other guns that we suppress are the Ruger 10/22, 77/22, Buckmark .22 rifle, Marlin Papoose .22 rifle, various sub-machineguns and high power rifles. I also make a screw on .22 suppressor.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="462" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-35.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7850" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-35.jpg 462w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-35-198x300.jpg 198w" sizes="(max-width: 462px) 100vw, 462px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The TL Guns six-barrel .22lr M133 Minigun.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong><em>SAR: What type of materials do you use in your suppressors?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> On the stainless guns, everything is stainless. On the parkerized guns, the only thing that’s steel is the barrel, the outside tube, and the end cap. All the internal parts, including the baffles, are stainless. The outer tube is 4130 chrome moly, and the end cap is tool steel.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: How does the 77/22 suppressor differ from the 10/22 suppressor?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> The internal barrel for the 77/22 is 15 inches long, verses 13 inches for the 10/22. The outside tube is therefore longer by 2 inches on the 77/22. Both guns use the same baffle stack, but the 10/22 has a 16 inch tube and the 77/22 has an 18 inch tube.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: Can you describe your .22 screw on suppressor?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> This can measures 1 inch by 6 inches long, and is made totally of 304 stainless. Two mounts are available for this can. The first type is a 1/2 by 28 internal thread for an external threaded barrel. The second type has a 1/2 by 28 internal thread and an 11/16 by 24 external thread to fit inside an internally threaded bull barrel. This eliminates the need for a thread protector on the bull barrel. This suppressor is designed for both rifle and pistol use.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: What other pistol suppressors do you offer?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> I have a 9mm pistol suppressor that measures one inch by seven inches long, and weighs 4 and 1/2 ounces. Most of these are threaded 1/2 by 28, but I can also do a 1/2 by 32 if necessary. These suppressors are made of 7075 T8 aluminum, and will cycle on a Glock 17, some Glock 19’s, Sig P226, and all Beretta 92’s without a recoil regulator. I also have a .40 caliber pistol can, that includes a recoil regulator to insure cycling in all pistols, including Glock’s.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: Have you had any problems with your cans?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> I’ve only had a few cans to come back for repair. One was from a dealer in Alaska who had worn out the spring in the recoil regulator of his .40 cal pistol suppressor after firing thousands of rounds through it. Another instance was when I received back the second 10/22 rifle I had ever suppressed, from George Denkins. Back in those days, I wasn’t Parkerizing, I was moly coating. George wanted the suppressor rebuilt and parkerized. He had had his suppressor on a full auto 10/22 and shot the heck out of it. When I opened up the tube to rebuild it, I was pleased to find out that there was only a small amount of carbon, and no lead build up. I also had to recall some .223 cans that I sold. I had an idea for lightweight .223 cans using a thinner tube material than usual. I made ten of these and ended up recalling them all because with excessive firing they would heat up and bulge. Seven of the ones I received back had only been fired in semi auto and were fine. Two of them came back blown up, and one has never been sent back. I replaced all of these for free with cans made of my regular materials.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: What suppressors do you make for submachine guns?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> I make an MP-5 can, using Gemtech’s three lug quick disconnect, as well as suppressors for the UMP-40 and UMP-45 with a quick disconnect that I designed. I make a combination can that can be used on both a 9mm or .30 caliber weapon. I can supply adaptors including three lug mounts, threaded adaptors for M11/9, MAC 10, Uzi, KG-9, or any other thread pattern required on the host weapon. I also make Uzi cans, as well as Smith &amp; Wesson 76 cans. One of the most interesting cans I’ve built was an integral suppressor on a Yugo 49, which is the only one that I know of in the world and is it awesome! This gun was originally 7.62 X 25mm and was never designed to be suppressed. John Nichols is the lucky owner of this weapon, which is now a 9mm. I made an adaptor so that Sten magazines can be used with this firearm. This adaptor will also allow you to use Sten magazines in a PPSH-41. I just made a new suppressor for a 5.45 X 39mm for the AK-74 Krinkov or full size rifle. It is an exact exterior copy of the Russian suppressors, which are not available in the United States. This is a complex suppressor which utilizes four different external pieces, and has a tang on the front that can be rotated to different positions for more accurate firing. I manufactured this suppressor based on a picture out of a Russian book that was scaled by Steve Hill of Spotted Dog Firearms of Arizona. The idea came from a friend of Steve’s who works for the SAS, where they have a real suppressor in their vault. I designed the internals, since there were no specifics available on the baffle stack. Another big seller is the Greasegun suppressor that I manufacture. I’ve produced over thirty of these in the last several months, as no other manufacturers seem to be making these actively right now. This can looks similar to my MAC suppressors which have the two stage look. I use an inch and 3/4 tube for one stage and then press four inches of two inch tube over the main tube to give it the two stage look. The can is ten inches by an inch and 3/4, with the two inch back piece. Anyone who wants one of these should send me a barrel and $400, and I will send you back the suppressed barrel assembly. These are extremely efficient suppressors! One of my personal achievements is an integrally suppressed 30.06 Ruger M77. It sounds like a pellet gun when you fire it. I’ve also built these in .308 on a Remington 700 rifle. I port the barrel so that the velocity of military ball ammo is reduced to 960 feet per second. These are basically one hundred yard guns, but are extremely quiet, and you don’t have to use expensive subsonic ammunition.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="600" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-40.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7851" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-40.jpg 600w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-40-257x300.jpg 257w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" /><figcaption><em><strong>Ty shooting an HK UMP .45 with a TL Guns suppressor and patented quick mount.</strong></em></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong><em>SAR: What other products do you offer, other than suppressors?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> I can repair just about any machinegun. Krinkov’s and M16’s are my favorites to work on. My favorite Krinkov has a six inch barrel with a K grip and my favorite M16’s have seven and 1/2 inch barrels, which all cycle like a champ. Occasionally, I have to retard the timing, and I do this by adding material to the hammer to eliminate the light strikes. Another specialty is to modify weapons into short-barreled rifles. My M96 Robinson rifle has been shortened and now has a ten-inch barrel. I’ve also started to build a semiautomatic MG-42, and I’m having to figure that one out as I go along.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: Ty, I think the most impressive firearm you’ve shown me is actually your minigun. Can you tell us how this firearm came to be?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> Yes, one of my most unique projects has been manufacturing the six barreled .22 LR “Minigun”. I call it the TL-M133 Electric cannon. This was a collaboration between myself and Brian Abbot. His idea was to have a collar in the front for holding the barrels symmetrically in the front, and a collar in the back to keep everything straight. The collar in the back included skateboard bearings around this round tube to allow the barrels to rotate. I liked the concept but not the execution. I told him to let me design and build my own version of this gun. He was mainly after a certain look, while I wanted it to function properly. We bought six Butler Creek bull barrels, threading each of the barrels 1/2 by 28 on the ends with a collar going over the threads, and barrel extensions that thread over the barrels to hold the collar on. There are two more collars that go over the barrel extensions and a soup can that goes in the middle to give it the Minigun look. After the first prototype was put together, we found it to be very heavy, and weighing about fifty-six pounds. We milled down the barrels and shaved eight pounds off the original weight. We used a stainless steel shaft and some eight inch diameter aluminum tubing for the outer housing, with a flat plate of aluminum inside, and two other pieces, one coming up in the front with a high speed bearing pressed into it, and the other piece with a smaller high speed bearing pressed into that in the rear. The shaft goes through the bearings, with the front bearing holding the shaft and the rear bearing keeps it from tipping up and down. There is also a collar on the shaft to keep it from sliding out. When it was first put together, there was too much weight on the end, which made the assembly sag and bounce. To eliminate this problem, I put a bolt on the end of the shaft and a bolt on the inside. These bolts were pulling in opposite directions stretching it out, keeping the shaft straight with no wobbling in any direction. Then we took the round housing and mounted a base plate inside, which was bolted down to form the receiver with a spinning action. A cosmetic plate with holes in it is slid over the barrels to plug up the end. You turn the gun over to insert loaded Ruger 10/22 ten round magazines. There’s a pistol grip that goes on the top with a button to spin the action. It’s actually a Ford Fiesta starter motor to spin the barrels, but this does not fire them. When you pull the trigger, there is a cable that runs up to the front and pulls a firing tang back and forth. So as you pull the trigger, the tang contacts the triggers as the action spins. The BATF has classified this as a Title 1 long gun because there are six individual receivers that are still all semi auto, and are still being fired by one pull of the trigger. This is the same concept as the trigger cranks that are available to rapidly fire other semiautomatic rifles. The electric motor does not fire the gun, but rather the tang trips the trigger to fire it. You can spin it by hand, and still fire the gun or you can spin the motors and not fire it at all. A real Minigun fires because of the motor spinning the barrels, while mine does not. We currently have a provisionary approval from the BATF, but still have to take the gun to the Tech Branch in D.C. for a final classification. They wanted me to register it as a machinegun and send it to them, but I want to be standing right there in person when they evaluate the gun. I now need to find two weeks time to take the gun in person and finalize their evaluation. If anyone is interested in one, they may be purchased for $7000, and I will make the time to visit the Tech Branch.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: Is it true you are involved in the binary exploding target business?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> Yes, I am helping my friend Scott Hall market binary explosives that he has developed. These are produced by SDH Manufacturing and I sell them through TL Guns. These are of extremely high quality when compared to others on the market. A starter kit is available which is comprised of two eight ounce and five two ounce targets, a funnel, mixing bowl, measuring spoon and a stir stick for mixing the two products together. SDH Manufacturing has included pre-measured activator packets for a precise mixture. Targets can also be purchased individually or by the case. We are currently looking for dealers and distributors across the country. The targets must be engaged by a .223 or larger caliber weapon to function. Individuals should check out their local laws and regulations prior to purchase.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: What’s in the future or on the drawing board for TL guns?</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> I have a dual Browning 1919 mount that I’ve recently brought out. These cost $1000. There is a base mount with an upper portion where the two guns mount, as well as two ammunition can mounts built into the assembly. My design utilizes a single trigger to fire two automatic weapons or there is a different bar that you can put a crank on for semiautomatic Brownings. I also have a quad 1919 mount in the works that is similar to the quad fifty where you sit behind the four guns to fire them simultaneously. It’s all pneumatic, the whole thing rotates 360 degrees, and the guns move up and down. I have the base plate done and I’m currently working on the mount. I will use solenoids to fire the guns while the pneumatic piston moves the gun up and down. There is a hydraulic motor with a rubber tire on it that runs on the shield to impart motion. I am also working on two shot burst cams for the M16 to retrofit three shot cams. These run $50. Another new item is an integrally suppressed upper for M11/9’s or MAC 10’s. I also offer an adapter to allow the use of an MP5 stock on the MAC’s. A Weaver rail will also be a part of the suppressed MAC uppers. Another option will be a pop up peep rear sight similar to those available for AR-15’s. Something I really would like to perfect is an American 180 upper for M11/9’s or MAC 10’s. This would allow you to fire the large .22 LR drums on your registered MAC or even a semiautomatic MAC. I have had some discussions with Val Cooper at E&amp;L Manufacturing about this project. I am working on a new .50 caliber suppressor for Jason Hinkle’s Alaskan .50 rifle. I couldn’t believe it, he sent the rifle to me wrapped in used boxer shorts. I used pliers to remove them just in case (laughs). I welcome a challenge in this business and will take on just about any project.<br><br><strong><em>SAR: Ty, it has been a pleasure talking with you. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with our readers.</em></strong><br><br><strong><em>Ty:</em></strong> You’re welcome Matt.<br><br><strong>TL Guns &amp; Manufacturing<br>SDH Technologies &amp; MFG</strong><br>1298 N. Douglas Avenue</p>



<p>Cottage Grove, OR 97424</p>



<p>Phone (541) 942-8703</p>



<p>Fax (541) 942-6137</p>



<p>Website:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.tlguns.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://www.tlguns.com</a></p>



<p>E-mail: <a href="mailto:tlguns@tlguns.com">tlguns@tlguns.com</a></p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>THE THOMPSON SUBMACHINE GUN ID GUIDE, PART IV: THE SAVAGE ARMS THOMPSON</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/the-thompson-submachine-gun-id-guide-part-iv-the-savage-arms-thompson/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 23:19:48 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1928]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Auto-Ordnance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frank Iannamico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thompson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tommy Gun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2553</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Frank Iannamico It took the Auto-Ordnance Corporation nearly twenty years to sell off all of the original 15,000 Thompsons that had been manufactured by Colt. However, in 1939, the German invasion of Poland touched off an unprecedented worldwide demand for weapons, particularly small arms. In the years following the initial run of the Colt [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Frank Iannamico</strong><br><br>It took the Auto-Ordnance Corporation nearly twenty years to sell off all of the original 15,000 Thompsons that had been manufactured by Colt. However, in 1939, the German invasion of Poland touched off an unprecedented worldwide demand for weapons, particularly small arms.<br><br>In the years following the initial run of the Colt made Thompson, the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, with lagging sales and deeply in debt, fell into the hands of Russell Maguire. In the late 1930’s Maguire had anticipated a major war in Europe, and a demand for weapons. When Maguire obtained the assets of Auto-Ordnance there wasn’t much except for some drawings, prints and a few unsold guns. Maguire at first tried to interest Colt in another production run of the Thompson, but they were already committed to manufacturing other military weapons, and were not interested. Maguire eventually negotiated with the Savage Arms Corporation of Utica, New York to manufacture the Thompson for Auto-Ordnance. In April of 1940, after a twenty-year hiatus, the first Model of 1928 Thompsons were rolling off Savage’s assembly line. The first contract for the new guns was from France, followed by several orders from Great Britain.</p>



<p>These early Savage Thompsons were very much like the Colt 1928 Navy model, featuring a finned barrel fitted with a Cutts compensator, as well as a finely checkered actuator knob, safety and rocker levers. The early Savage guns also featured a vertical foregrip. As per their contracts with A-O, Savage was not permitted to place their name on the Thompsons that they manufactured. The only way to identify a Savage manufactured 1928 or 1928A1 Thompson is by the S prefix on the serial number. All parts manufactured by Savage were also marked with a letter S. Parts manufactured by Savage’s sister plant, J. Stevens, were marked with a block style letter S. Savage and Stevens manufactured virtually every part for the gun except for various screws and springs. All WWII Savage guns were originally assembled at the factory with Savage (S) or Stevens (S) marked parts.<br><br>While the Colt Thompsons were blued, the Savage guns were finished by a process called Du-Lite which was a black oxide type III finish. When this finish was applied to a sandblasted surface it had a flat-black appearance. When applied to other surfaces that have not been sandblasted, it had a low luster blue appearance. The outside surfaces of the trigger frames and receivers were sandblasted on Savage Thompsons prior to the Du-Lite finish being applied, resulting in a flat black color. The inside of these components will appear a dull blue color as will the barrel and all other steel parts and components.<br><br><strong>The British Contract Savage Model of 1928</strong><br><br>The early 1928 Thompson guns manufactured for the British contracts were marked with a very small British inspector’s stamp placed on the receiver and/or the barrel. The guns were purchased directly from the Auto-Ordnance Corporation. The British contract guns were all fitted with the Lyman adjustable rear sight, and a vertical foregrip. The early one-piece flat-machined ejector was fitted to the early guns as well as the early style (2nd design) Cutts compensator. Thompsons fitted with a vertical foregrip came from the factory with only one sling swivel. This swivel was located on the bottom of the buttstock. British armorer’s often relocated the sling swivel to the top of the stock and added a swivel to the side of the foregrip. There were no U.S. or A1 markings on British contract guns. The British purchased 108,000 Thompsons and a large number of spare parts before the enactment of the U.S. Lend-Lease program. In the first contract the British paid $175.00 for each Thompson they purchased, the price was lowered in subsequent contracts. The very early Savage 1928 models shipped to the British had Auto-Ordnance’s New York, NY address roll marked on the left side of the receiver at the rear.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="217" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-21.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7837" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-21.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-21-300x93.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The early 1928 Model Thompsons produced by Savage for the British contracts were fitted with a vertical foregrip, finned barrel and Lyman rear sight. (Collection of Lawrence Heiskell, MD)</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong>The Savage Commercial Model of 1928</strong><br><br>During Savage’s production of the Thompson, the Auto-Ordnance Corporation sold some of the early 1928 model guns to law enforcement agencies. These Thompsons were exactly the same as the British guns described previously, except there were no British (or U.S.) military proofs or markings. It has been a common belief among many collectors, that the Savage “Commercial” guns were equipped with Colt “nickel” internal parts. A close study of these guns reveals that most of them were actually fitted with blued Savage internals. Most of these guns went to police departments where they saw rather limited use. When encountered, the police guns are generally in much better condition than the weapons that saw military service. Most of the “Commercial” model’s receivers were marked with Auto-Ordnance’s New York address. These guns did not have the cross-bolt added to the stock, as that was strictly a military upgrade.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="323" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-39.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7840" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-39.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-39-300x138.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The Savage “Commercial” model had the same features as the early Thompsons made for the British contract, but had no British (or US) markings on them.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong>The Savage Model of US 1928A1 (Early Production)</strong><br><br>The letter “U.S.” began to appear on the receivers of 1928 model Thompsons after the Lend-Lease Act was passed in 1941. A provision of the act required that all weapons supplied to the allies through the program be U.S. marked. The Thompsons furnished through Lend-Lease were the same as those issued to U.S. forces.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="335" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-41.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7839" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-41.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-41-300x144.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The early Savage Thompsons had Auto-Ordnance’s New York address roll marked on the right rear side of the receiver.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The first U.S. 1928A1 model Thompsons accepted by the United States Ordnance Department were equipped with a Lyman adjustable rear sight and finned barrel. Virtually all military contract Thompsons destined for U.S. service were equipped with horizontal foregrips, although a few of the earlier “Limited Procurement” weapons were equipped with vertical foregrips. All M1928A1 model Thompsons were fitted with the milled front grip mount. Although a few early military Thompsons had the one-piece machined ejectors, most of the U.S. contract guns were equipped with the new three-piece riveted style. The military wood stocks and foregrips on the weapons were of a slightly lesser quality than had been seen on Colt and early Savage “Commercial” guns. Most of the early manufacture U.S. military contract Thompsons had the checkered actuator, safety and rocker levers. Subsequent production saw the elimination of the checkering on the rocker pivot levers, and eventually the safety lever, but the uncheckered actuators did not appear until later in the production run. The milled sling swivels were fitted on these guns.<br><br>A few early Savage military contract Thompsons were fitted with the rare 3rd design muzzle compensator that had the Thompson “Bullet” logo stamped on top of the device, and was not marked with the Auto-Ordnance name. Later manufacture Savage M1928A1 Models used the common “military” (4th design) Cutts compensator that featured the “Bullet” logo on the left side and the Auto-Ordnance name roll marked on the top of the unit.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large is-resized"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-34.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7841" width="580" height="208" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-34.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-34-300x108.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 580px) 100vw, 580px" /><figcaption><strong><em>A few Savage made 1928 Thompson Submachine Guns had the phrase “TOMMY GUN” roll marked on the top of their receivers. “Tommy Gun” was one of many nicknames given to the weapon.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Virtually all U.S. military contract M1928A1 models will have the Auto-Ordnance Bridgeport, Connecticut address roll marked on the right side of the receiver near the center. The patent numbers were marked on the right side at the rear of the receiver. Also stamped on the receivers of Savage Thompsons was the Army Inspector of Ordnance’s initials, as well as the Ordnance Department “flaming bomb” acceptance stamp. Savage guns also were marked with the initials GEG, of George E. Goll, Auto-Ordnance’s chief inspector.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="369" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-30.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7842" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-30.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-30-300x158.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Receiver markings on a US 1928A1. Note the RLB stamp of Army Inspector of Ordnance Ray L. Bowlin, the GEG mark of Auto-Ordnance’s George E. Goll, and the Ordnance Department’s “flaming bomb”. The letter S preceding the serial number indicates that Savage Arms Co. manufactured this weapon.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong>The U.S. 1928A1 (2nd Variation)</strong><br><br>The second variation of the M1928A1 Thompsons was fitted with the rudimentary fixed “L” type sight and finned barrel. The fixed “L” aperture style sight was first installed on the M1928A1s manufactured by Savage during contract number G-14 dated 24 February 1942. The contract was for 400,000 weapons. All subsequent M1928A1s were fitted with the “L” sight. The Ordnance Department felt that the M1928A1 Thompson needed a rugged military style sight with a large aperture for rapid target acquisition. Many of the aforementioned guns generally were equipped with the uncheckered safety and rocker levers, but will often have checkered actuators.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="331" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-21.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7844" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-21.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-21-300x142.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Most of the military 1928 model Thompsons were marked with Auto-Ordnance’s Bridgeport address at the center of the receiver’s right side. The address change from New York to Bridgeport on the receivers occurred at the S-80,000 serial number range.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong>The “L” Sight</strong><br><br>At an Ordnance Committee meeting held in December of 1941, it was suggested that a much simpler “L” type of sight replace the complicated Lyman adjustable rear sight on the Thompson. The new sight was better suited for a military application, and would help expedite production of the Thompson. The fixed “L” sight had a .125 inch aperture sighted for a 100-yard range, a second notch was cut into the top of the sight leaf for a 250-yard range. The new “L” aperture style sight was riveted to the receiver in the same manner as the early adjustable model. Lyman also manufactured many of the “L” type sights for Auto-Ordnance and were so marked. The same style of sight was used on early M1 models. The unprotected sight proved to be very easily damaged or bent and would often snag on brush and clothing. A later design provided side ears on the sight for protection of the vertical leaf. The “L” style sight began to appear on the Savage manufactured M1928A1’s at approximately the S-400,000 serial number range.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="281" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-19.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7843" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-19.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-19-300x120.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The rudimentary “L” style rear sight replaced the earlier, complex Lyman adjustable model. The military felt that the weapon needed a simpler sight that could provide rapid target acquisition. The “L” sight was also used on early M1 Thompsons.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong>The U.S. 1928 A1 (Late Production)</strong><br><br>The Auto-Ordnance Corporation and Savage had a difficult time keeping up with the ever-increasing demand for the Thompson. To increase production they had to either procure more machine tools and increase the work force, or simplify the parts where possible, for easier manufacture.<br><br>There were still a few amenities on the 1928 Thompson that could be eliminated in order to expedite the weapon’s production. After the complex Lyman rear sight, the next elaborate feature of the Thompson to be eliminated for the sake of production was the finned barrel. The U.S. Ordnance Department felt that the open bolt feature of the Thompson design provided enough cooling effect to prevent most premature “cook-off” of cartridges, and felt the barrel’s radial cooling fins were not needed. The smooth barrels began to appear on Savage M1928A1’s at approximately serial number S-500,000.<br><br>Late manufacture M1928A1 Thompsons were still equipped with the uncheckered, paddle style safety and rocker levers. The checkering feature was eliminated from the actuators on the late M1928A1 models. Many of the late guns were still fitted with milled style sling swivels.<br><br>Although most military 1928 Thompsons encountered today will have a reinforcing cross-bolt in the buttstock, the bolt was added after the gun left the factory. The purpose of the cross-bolt upgrade was to prevent the stocks from cracking. The cross-bolt upgrade campaign began after production of the 1928 model had ended.<br><br>The first Thompson M1928A1 models were sold to the U.S. government for “$225.00 minus 10%” which calculates to $202.50 per weapon. An additional $2.50 was added for greasing and packing costs. The price paid by the U.S. Government varied from contract to contract but steadily declined from 1941 until the end of production. The price paid by the U.S. Government for a M1928A1 had been reduced to only $70.00 when the new M1 model was introduced in July of 1942. A spare parts kit for the M1928A1 weapon was priced at $15.43.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="354" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-13.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7845" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-13.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-13-300x152.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>While the 1920’s Colt Thompson had patent dates marked on them the military 1928 Thompsons had patent numbers on them. The numbers were marked at the center of the receiver’s right side on New York address guns. The Bridgeport address guns had them marked on the rear of the receiver’s right side. The patent numbers were eliminated on the M1 and M1A1 model.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The last 2,000 Savage U.S. M1928A1 Thompsons were manufactured in September of 1942. Thereafter Savage only manufactured the M1 and M1A1 models. Savage manufactured an estimated total of 746,932 model 1928 and M1928A1 Thompsons from April 1940, until October of 1942.<br><br>This article is condensed from the book The Military Thompson Submachine Gun, available from Moose Lake Publishing LLC. 207-683-2959 <a href="http://www.smallarmsreview.com">http://www.smallarmsreview.com</a></p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>F.I.R.E.’ing Armalite’s AR-10A4</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/f-i-r-e-ing-armalites-ar-10a4/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 02:50:27 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AR-10A4]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Armalite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Q. Cutshaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EOTech Inc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GG&G]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2494</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Charles Q. Cutshaw According to Mark Westrom, CEO of Armalite, the company’s AR-10A4 is the most popular model of the resurrected and modernized 7.62x51mm (.308 Winchester) rifle, predecessor of the ubiquitous AR-15. Certainly the AR-10A4 offers great versatility, with flat top receiver and gas block coupled with a lower price than Armalite’s AR-10(T) precision [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Charles Q. Cutshaw</strong><br><br>According to Mark Westrom, CEO of Armalite, the company’s AR-10A4 is the most popular model of the resurrected and modernized 7.62x51mm (.308 Winchester) rifle, predecessor of the ubiquitous AR-15. Certainly the AR-10A4 offers great versatility, with flat top receiver and gas block coupled with a lower price than Armalite’s AR-10(T) precision rifle. Although not a match rifle, the AR-10A4 offers good accuracy and reliability in a field grade rifle. Our personal AR-10A4 is one of the early versions of the rifle and it has given faithful service for many years. The big AR, however, almost begs to be adapted as a semiautomatic “scout” rifle following the concept originated by Jeff Cooper. The AR-10A4 is relatively lightweight and compact, especially in its carbine configuration. The handiness of the carbine version, however, is offset to a degree by increased felt recoil and a palpable muzzle blast.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="461" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-38.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7801" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-38.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-38-300x198.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Closeup of GG&amp;G F.I.R.E. rail, M.A.D folding rear sight and HoloSight.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Our AR-10A4 has always delivered approximately minute of angle accuracy, so our focus will be on the conversion into scout rifle configuration. The notion of AR-10A4 as scout rifle did not originate with this author. Indeed, Tom Newhall of GG&amp;G proposed the idea some time ago and it was manifested in his AR-10 F.I.R.E System modification of the rail mounting system already in use by some units of the U.S. Marine Corps on their M-4 carbines. The F.I.R.E. acronym stands for “Fully Integrated Rifle Enhancement System” and consists of several components that enhance the utility of the AR-10A4 as a scout rifle. These include a scout length rail that projects approximately three inches forward of the receiver to allow mounting a long-relief optical sight, GG&amp;G’s MAD (Multiple Aperture Device) backup rear sight, and flip up front sight. These components enable the owner to convert his AR-10A4 into a true scout rifle configuration.<br><br>The GG&amp;G F.I.R.E. rail mount is a MIL-STD-1913 design made of aircraft grade aluminum. The rail that we installed is the standard mount for shooting out to 500 meters, or for the long-range shooter, a rail with 15 minutes of angle built in is available. The GG&amp;G rail is hard anodized in gray that exactly matched the finish of our AR-10A4. Attaching the rail to the receiver of the AR-10A4 was as simple as placing it properly so as to mount the backup M.A.D. iron sight and obtain the proper relationship of the cantilevered scout mount with the rifle’s receiver. The rail is retained with hex-head screws that are threaded into stainless steel inserts so as to avoid stripping threads in the aluminum. The necessary wrench for installation is included with the rail kit. To ensure that the rail stays in place, we used “Gun Tite” on the threads. This is a low strength Lock Tight that ensures that screws do not loosen, but can be easily broken loose with a screwdriver or wrench without damage.<br><br>The MAD backup rear sight fits flush with the rail mount at the rear of the receiver and the sight itself folds flush with the rail’s top surface so that it does not interfere with the scout optics. This unit’s mounting block is of aircraft grade aluminum with stainless thread inserts, while the sight and aperture disc are of steel. The sight is also hard anodized with steel components phosphated. The steel components are a slightly lighter gray than the AR-10’s receiver. The MAD’s apertures are dimensionally identical to those of the M16A2, but unlike the M16’s, which flip back and forth between two apertures, the MAD has four alternating large and small apertures in a rotating disc that we found more convenient than the usual system. The edges of the disc are knurled for positive grip. The MAD sight is adjustable for windage, but not for elevation, which must be accomplished using the front sight. This was the original AR system and is acceptable in a backup sight, and although elevation adjustments can be accomplished using a bullet tip, the task is easier using a specialized tool.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="600" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-36.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7802" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-36.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-36-300x257.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Top: M.A.D. rear sight in “up” position. Note knurling on sight disc. M.A.D. rear sight in folded position on bottom.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The folding front sight simply clamps onto the gas block. Unlike the rear sight and rail, the front sight is of all steel construction. The front sight guard is serrated on its outer surface to provide a gripping surface. Having the front sight folded out of the way is a decided advantage when using optical sights because it does not interfere with the shooter’s line of vision, yet is instantly available when required. The optical sight is probably the most critical element of a scout rifle system. Typically, scout rifles use optics ranging from 1x to 2.5x. This is to ensure the speed of target acquisition and accuracy inherent in the scout concept. While any number of sights would have sufficed for our purposes, we installed one of EO Tech’s 1x second generation HoloSights on our AR-10A4. The HoloSight is one of the premier electronic optics available today. It is actually a hologram projected by a laser onto a piece of hardened glass. The HoloSight incorporates a 1 MOA center red dot surrounded by a 65 MOA circle. When used properly, i.e. with both eyes open and looking at the target, the 65 MOA circle automatically brings the center red dot onto the target as the rifle is brought up to a firing position. Unlike other red dots, that of the HoloSight does not obscure the target, nor does it seem to grow larger as intensity is increased to compensate for bright sunlight. The latest military and law enforcement versions of the HoloSight have ten levels of night vision built in, as compared to only two levels in competitive units. The current HoloSight is waterproof to only ten feet, but since we do not plan on using our rifle for deep-water swimmer deliveries, that is more than adequate. We understand that new versions of the HoloSight, to be introduced in the near future will be waterproof to 33 feet.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="461" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-32.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7803" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-32.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-32-300x198.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>F.I.R.E system with Mag-Cinch and HolSight.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The final element of our FIRE’d AR-10A4 was one of Buffer Technologies’ Mag-Cinch dual magazine mounting systems. The Mag-Cinch is the only such system that locks a rifle’s magazines together in a virtually inseparable bond that gives, in the case of the AR-10, 40 rounds of instantly accessible ammunition “on the gun.” In everyday use, the added weight of a second magazine of 20 rounds of 7.62mm cartridges ready for instant insertion into the rifle’s magazine well is almost certainly overkill and probably unnecessary. On the other hand, having such “overkill” available just as certainly drives the likes of “Barbara Fineslime,” the “Violence Propaganda Center” and their ilk to distraction. For that reason alone, it is worth doing!</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="326" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-28.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7804" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-28.jpg 326w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-28-140x300.jpg 140w" sizes="(max-width: 326px) 100vw, 326px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Above: GG&amp;G AR-10 front sight, raised. Below: GG&amp;G AR-10 front sight, folded.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>While the AR-10A4 is a fine rifle in its standard configuration, the enhanced scout configuration that GG&amp;G’s F.I.R.E. system affords makes a good rifle even better. The components are manufactured to a high quality standard and fit the rifle perfectly. The added eye relief that GG&amp;G’s F.I.R.E. system adds to the AR-10’s rail is ideal for a low power, long eye relief telescopic sight, or for a 1x optic such as the HoloSight. It is an accessory that we find particularly useful and we recommend it to those who wish to enhance the versatility of their AR-10A4 or AR-10(T) rifles.<br><br><strong>Armalite</strong><br>PO Box 299<br>Geneseo, IL 61254<br>Tel: 309-944-6939<br>Fax: 309-944-6949<br><a href="https://www.armalite.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.armalite.com</a><br>email: <a href="mailto:info@armalite.com">info@armalite.com</a><br><br><strong>Buffer Technologies</strong><br>(Mag-Cinch)<br>PO Box 104903<br>Jefferson City, MO 65110<br>Tel: 573-634-8529<br>Fax: 573-634-8522<br><a href="https://1022racerifle.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.buffertech.com</a><br><br><strong>EOTech, Inc.</strong><br>3600 Green Court, Suite 400<br>Ann Arbor, MI 48105<br>Tel: 734-741-8868<br>Fax: 734-741-8221<br><a href="https://www.eotechinc.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.eotech-inc.com</a><br><br><strong>GG&amp;G</strong><br>3602 E. 42 Stravenue<br>Tucson, AZ 85763<br>Tel: 520-748-7167<br>Fax: 520—748-7583<br><a href="https://www.gggaz.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.GGGAZ.com</a><br>email: <a href="mailto:GGGAZ@aol.com">GGGAZ@aol.com</a></p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Russian Military Adopts New Service Pistol</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/russian-military-adopts-new-service-pistol/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 02:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Q. Cutshaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pistolet Yarygin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PYa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2491</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Charles Q. Cutshaw The Pistolet Makaravoka, (PM) known in the West simply as the Makarov, has served the Soviet Union and Russian military since 1951, but the Russian government recently announced that the small blowback operated pistol, similar in design to the Walther PP, will be replaced by a new pistol &#8211; the Pistolet [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Charles Q. Cutshaw</strong><br><br>The Pistolet Makaravoka, (PM) known in the West simply as the Makarov, has served the Soviet Union and Russian military since 1951, but the Russian government recently announced that the small blowback operated pistol, similar in design to the Walther PP, will be replaced by a new pistol &#8211; the Pistolet Yarygin, or Pya. Before examining the new service pistol, a brief history of recent Russian handguns is in order.<br><br>The PM is chambered for the 9x18mm cartridge, similar in concept to the 9mm Ultra of German origin. It is slightly more powerful that the 9x17mm cartridge used in many small compact pistols, but notably less powerful that the standard NATO 9x19mm round. By the late 1980s, the Soviet military realized that the PM was becoming obsolete due to the increasing use of body armor by the world’s military forces. The PM was also limited by its magazine capacity of eight rounds. A stopgap 9x18mm pistol, the Pistolet Makaravoka Modernizirovanniyi (PMM) was developed in the 1980’s to rectify the shortcomings of the PM, and although the author has seen nothing in Russian publications to indicate the fact, the PMM cannot have been very successful. The primary reason for this is the fact that the PMM was chambered for a new high-velocity 9x18mm cartridge that developed significantly higher chamber pressures than its predecessor. The high velocity cartridge placed the PMM’s ballistics squarely into the 9x19mm class, but the new cartridge could be identified only by the conical shape of its bullet and it could be chambered and fired in older PM pistols. The PMM operates by delayed blowback, rather than direct blowback. This was accomplished via a spiral groove cut into the pistol’s chamber. While the conical shaped PMM bullet was probably effective in defeating body armor, firing the new round in a PM pistol would almost certainly result in a catastrophic failure, potentially harmful to the shooter. The new PMM also featured a 12 round magazine, but again, the pistol could not be considered to be more than a stopgap measure. Clearly, a new pistol chambered for a more powerful cartridge was required.<br><br>The Soviet military announced a traditional competition for a new pistol, similar to the Abakan program that resulted in the development of the new Russian AN-94 assault rifle. The pistol competition was designated Grach (Rook). A number of pistols were developed in response to the Grach Competition, but the eventual winner was the Grach-2 designed by Vladimir Yarygin of Izhmash, JSC, Izhevsk.<br><br>Just as important as the new pistol itself was its ammunition. Because of its ability to penetrate body armor, the Russians considered chambering the Grach to fire the 7.62x25mm Tokarev cartridge. The 9x21mm RG-052 cartridge fired by the Gurza and other weapons was also considered for the new pistol. The Russians also considered a modular pistol that could fire any standard Russian cartridge by exchanging barrel and recoil spring. In the final analysis, however, the Russian developers settled on their version of the 91x19mm NATO pistol cartridge, designated 7N21. The 7N21 bullet is very similar, if not identical, to that used in the 9x21mm RG-052 and probably accounts for the armor piercing capability of the 7N21 round. Russian publications claim that this cartridge has enhanced penetrating capability in comparison to other 9x19mm rounds. Another reason behind the adoption of the 9x19mm cartridge was the hope of obtaining foreign sales of the new pistol.<br><br>The PYa is a modern, but thoroughly conventional design. The frame is steel, rather than polymer, because the Russian designers believed that a steel frame would enhance reliability. This all-steel construction results in a relatively heavy pistol that weighs almost exactly two pounds (33.5oz). A polymer-framed version of the PYa was also developed, but was not considered sufficiently reliable for harsh military service. In the words of one Russian publication, the PYa is a “traditional” design. In this context, the operating system is the modified Browning short recoil method used on most modern semiautomatic pistols. This consists of a block that locks into the ejection port with the barrel being moved out of battery by the interaction of a cam on its lower surface with a pin in the frame as the slide and barrel move to the rear under recoil forces. As with most other semiautomatic pistols, the pin is part of the slide stop and passes through both sides of the frame. PYa disassembly is similar to the US M1911A1 or Browning High-Power. Feeding is from a “double stack” 17 round magazine. The Pya’s grip is plastic and is “U” shaped to wrap around the pistol’s backstrap and act as a recoil cushion. The PYa’s extractor also serves as a loaded chamber indicator, protruding above the surface of the slide when the pistol is loaded. The PYa is almost completely ambidextrous; the safety can be manipulated by either thumb, although left handed shooters cannot readily manipulate the slide release and thus must pull the slide itself to reload after inserting a new magazine. The magazine release, however, can be moved to the right side of the frame for use by left-handed shooters.<br><br>The PYa’s safety blocks the hammer whether it is cocked or released, denoting the ability to carry the PYa in either a “cocked and locked” configuration for single action on the first shot after releasing the safety or double action first shot, single action (DA/SA) thereafter. The Russian designers deliberately built in the capability to carry the PYa “cocked and locked” because this is the fastest and most accurate method of firing the first round. When engaged, the safety blocks not only the hammer, but also the trigger, sear and slide.<br><br>All in all, the PYa marks a major transition for the Russian military; it marks the first time in Soviet or Russian history that the military has adopted a pistol cartridge that was not uniquely Russian. Despite the fact that past cartridges have been derived from foreign designs, they were modified in the transition to Russian military service. The PYa is, as mentioned, a conventional pistol design, unlike the AN-94 service rifle, which is highly innovative and unusual. Regardless, the PYa will probably serve the Russian military for at least the next 50 years and will almost certainly be offered for foreign commercial sale.<br><br><strong>PYa Specifications</strong><br><br>Caliber: 9x19mm<br>Operation: Short recoil<br>Length: 7.7 in (196mm)<br>Barrel Length: 4.4 in (112.5 mm)<br>Width: 1.5 in (38 mm)<br>Height: 5.5 in (140 mm)<br>Empty Weight: 33.5 oz (0.95 kg)</p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>SITREP: FEBRUARY 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/sitrep-february-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:26:09 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dan Shea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SITREP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2587</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Dan Shea Preparedness is more than just putting water into jugs, buying MREs and taking the Boy Scout Oath. Lately, “Preparedness” has been somewhat co-opted by what is referred to as the “Survivalist” school, and that is an unfortunate development- and not because a survivalist attitude is a bad thing. Being prepared is important [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Dan Shea</strong><br><br>Preparedness is more than just putting water into jugs, buying MREs and taking the Boy Scout Oath. Lately, “Preparedness” has been somewhat co-opted by what is referred to as the “Survivalist” school, and that is an unfortunate development- and not because a survivalist attitude is a bad thing. Being prepared is important and shouldn’t be relegated to one group of people and ignored by the rest. All of us need to be prepared for emergencies, and for many of us, just to do our jobs.<br><br>Specifically, “Preparedness” for law enforcement and military personnel means that you have the training time put in, and the inventory of needed items stocked up and maintained. In SAR we tend to emphasize training, whether it be martial discipline, rounds put downrange, or time on the workbench. We also spend a lot of time bringing sources of supply to our readers, so we cover the bases pretty well.<br><br>There is a third leg to that “Preparedness” stool- it is the Research &amp; Development (R&amp;D) performed within our industrial base as a country. It is necessary for R&amp;D to be going on, for the industry to grow and keep our military strength in a state of the art condition. Many times we at SAR bring innovative and interesting people to the fore, in interviews and product reviews, sometimes by following the development of an historical weapon system.<br><br>I wanted to weigh in on something to do with R&amp;D, and that is the fact that in the United States, it is increasingly difficult to accomplish anything in small arms design. We are not alone, many other countries have similar problems, or worse. To those who are trying to stop the supply of small arms to criminal regimes or terrorist groups, many times stopping all small arms production is seen as the solution.<br><br>If you consider that we could exist in a Utopian place, with no enemies, no “bad guys”, no threats to our homes, our families, our countries, then perhaps stopping “The proliferation of small arms” is a good idea. Since that is not only unrealistic, it is totally impossible, we are left with the need for defensive and offensive arms. Restrictions are not at discussion here- the fact that we need modern weapons is.<br><br>We cannot compete in a world where we are left with old technology, and our potential enemies are free to grow and experiment, free to obtain weapons for study, free to do R&amp;D.<br><br>In the current situation in the United States, it is virtually impossible for an inventor or scientist to obtain firearms to do his research. There are few places in the world that will let the student of small arms in to view their collections, and fewer still that will allow hands on disassembly or firing of these items. Inventors may obtain a Class 3 Manufacturer’s FFL and SOT, but purchasing transferable firearms with their artificially inflated values, albeit market driven, is out of the loop for most inventors and the potential dissection or destructive testing they need to do.<br><br>I am not sure of the solution to this- I do know that almost every great leap forward in small arms has come from the private workshops- from the innovations of our first muskets to John Browning, to Stoner’s genesis of the M16 series. The list of our small arms that came from an inventor’s workshop and then went into the larger production facilities would be a fairly complete listing of the US Military’s TO&amp;E.<br><br>How much are we missing out on? How many frustrated inventors have pointed their creative energies towards working on new carburetors, new vegematics, or better mousetraps, after facing the situation in the United States and how difficult it is to work on small arms? Have we missed the next step? Is it possible that the newest innovations will only come out of the big government contracted shops? Or have we lost many opportunities due to our over regulation of Title II firearms?<br><br>These are questions that we should be considering when we watch the innovations of other countries, questions we should be asking when we listen to people demanding more regulation. While we generally concentrate on views of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the United States, perhaps it is worth considering how we may be weakening our country in the long term, by regulating new innovations out of existence.<br><br>&#8211; Dan</p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>



<p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>INDUSTRY NEWS: FEBRUARY 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/industry-news-february-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:25:12 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industry News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert M.Hausman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2584</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Robert M. Hausman Judges Rule Federal Machine Gun Ban Constitutional The 1986 federal machine gun ban (which prohibited registration and transfer of full-auto firearms made after May 9, 1986) violates neither the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, nor the Interstate Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, a three-judge panel ruled in late [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Robert M. Hausman</strong><br><br><strong>Judges Rule Federal Machine Gun Ban Constitutional</strong><br><br>The 1986 federal machine gun ban (which prohibited registration and transfer of full-auto firearms made after May 9, 1986) violates neither the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, nor the Interstate Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, a three-judge panel ruled in late August.<br><br>In a published opinion of the US Court of Appeals for the tenth circuit, Circuit Judges Ebel, Anderson and Murphy rejected an appeal filed by defendant/appellant John Lee Haney, while citing controlling Tenth Circuit precedent. Haney was convicted of possessing two unregistered machine guns. The defendant had apparently decided to challenge the federal machine gun ban on his own.<br><br>The case began when Haney walked into a police station, engaged an officer in conversation, and told him that he owned semi-automatic and fully automatic firearms. He stated that they were not licensed and that the federal government lacks authority to require him to get a license. Through a combination of Haney’s consent and a warrant, two fully-automatic guns were found in Haney’s car and house. Haney also had literature on how to convert a semi-automatic gun to fire full-auto. Haney had converted one of the guns himself and had constructed the other out of parts. He also admitted possessing them.<br><br>Haney was indicted for possessing two machineguns in violation of federal law. He proceeded to a jury trial, was found guilty, and sentenced to thirty-three months’ of imprisonment. On his appeal, he asserted the federal machine gun ban violates the Second Amendment and the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution.<br><br>The part of federal law under which Haney was convicted is Section 922(o) of Title 18 of the US Code that states:<br><br>•1. Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun.<br><br>•2. This subsection does not apply with respect to-<br>        •1. a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a state, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or<br><br>        •2. any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before May 19, 1986.<br><br>The Second Amendment reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”<br><br>In rejecting Haney’s argument on appeal, the Tenth Circuit justices held that a federal criminal gun-control law does not violate the Second Amendment unless it impairs the state’s ability to maintain a well-regulated militia. Thus, in effect, the court said there is no individual right to keep and bear arms.<br><br><strong>Cited Cases</strong><br><br>In reaching its decision, the appeals court cited two twentieth century Supreme Court cases as justification. In US v. Miller (1939) the court held that “in the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.”<br><br>Author Hausman’s note: In his comprehensive guide to book, Firearms Law Deskbook, attorney Stephen Halbrook says that in the Miller decision, the Supreme Court avoided determining whether a short-barreled shotgun may be taxed and subjected to stringent registration requirements under the National Firearms Act consistent with the Second Amendment. In fact, he writes the lower district court had declared the Act unconstitutional on its face as in violation of the Second Amendment, and thus no evidence was in the record that such shotgun was an ordinary military arm.<br><br>“The Miller court did not suggest that the possessor must be a member of the militia or National Guard, asking only whether the arms could have militia use. The private, individual character of the right protected by the Second Amendment went unquestioned,” Halbrook writes.<br><br>The Haney appeals court also mentioned Lewis v. US (1980), where it said, “the court held that the laws prohibiting a felon from possessing a firearm do not violate the Due Process Clause” (the constitutional provision that prohibits the government from unfairly or arbitrarily depriving a person of life, liberty or property). The court noted the laws “are neither based upon constitutionally suspect criteria, nor do they trench upon any constitutionally protected liberties.” The Haney appeals court added the Supreme Court cited the Miller decision, which it characterized as holding that “the Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.”<br><br>The appeals court also cited two of its Tenth Circuit opinions. In US v. Oakes, (1977) a Second Amendment challenge to the federal law criminalizing possession of an unregistered machinegun was rejected. The court in that case, found no evidence that the firearm in question was connected with a militia, even though the defendant was nominally a member of the Kansas militia and the “Posse Comitatus,” a militia-type organization registered with the state. Since the defendant and his firearm were connected with a non-state militia, the court concluded the prosecution did not violate the Second Amendment.<br><br>The Tenth Circuit also noted its most recent pronouncement on the Second Amendment was in US v. Baer (2000) in which the court rejected a “time worn” Second Amendment challenge to the federal felon-in-possession law, noting “the circuits have consistently upheld the constitutionality of federal weapons regulations like (this one) absent evidence that they in any way affect the maintenance of a well regulated militia.”<br><br><strong>Militia Membership</strong><br><br>Claiming it is doing, “simply a straightforward reading of the text of the Second Amendment,” the tenth circuit justices held, “a federal criminal gun-control law does not violate the Second Amendment unless it impairs the state’s ability to maintain a well-regulated militia.”<br><br>The appeals court further said it is clear that § 922(o), the provision under which Haney was convicted, “is factually constitutional.” The provisions of that section set forth a specific exemption for possession of a machinegun “under the authority of” a state. “Haney does not contend that his possession of the machineguns at issue in this case was under the authority of Oklahoma” (his home state), the court said.<br><br>“Nor has Haney proven several facts logically necessary to establish a Second Amendment violation. He must show (1) he is part of a state militia; (2) the militia, and his participation therein, is “well-regulated” by the state; (3) machineguns are used by that militia; and (4) his possession of the machinegun was reasonably connected to his militia service. None of these are established,” the court ruled.<br><br>“The militia of the Second Amendment is a governmental organization,” the appeals court continued. “Haney is not part of the ‘well regulated’ militia, that is, a ‘militia actively maintained and trained by the states.’ At best, Haney claims to be a member of the ‘unorganized’ (and therefore not a ‘well regulated’ state” militia.”<br><br>While mentioning that Title 44, §41 of the Oklahoma Statutes divide the population of able-bodied persons between the ages of seventeen and seventy into the National Guard, the Oklahoma State Guard, and the “Unorganized Militia,” Haney did not claim to be a member of the National Guard or the Oklahoma State Guard, and he “has submitted no evidence that the Oklahoma unorganized militia and his participation therein are well regulated by the State of Oklahoma. Nor has Haney submitted any evidence that machineguns of the sort he possessed are used by the militia, or that his possession was connected to any sort of militia service,” the court decided.<br><br><strong>Commerce Clause Challenge</strong><br><br>In respect to Haney’s Commerce Clause challenge, the court said that under the Commerce Clause, Congress may regulate three broad categories of activities: First, Congress may regulate the use of the channels of interstate commerce. Second Congress is empowered to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or persons or things in interstate commerce, even though the threat may only come from intrastate activities. Finally, Congress’ commerce authority includes the power to regulate those activities having a substantial relation to interstate commerce, i.e., those activities that substantially affect interstate commerce.<br><br>Haney had argued that § 922(o) exceeds Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause by regulating purely intrastate activity. But the appeals court said “that all of the courts of appeals that have addressed this issue have upheld § 922(o) as a valid enactment under the Commerce Clause.<br><br>Further, the court said, that banning possession of post-1986 machineguns “is an essential part of the federal scheme to regulate interstate commerce in dangerous weapons. Congress has found that ‘firearms and ammunition move easily in interstate commerce,’ and has therefore taken numerous steps to regulate these transactions. Machineguns legally possessed may not be transferred in commerce, without approval from the Secretary of the Treasury, and a substantial tax must be paid. Thus, there is a general regulatory scheme to regulate interstate commerce in firearms, particularly including machineguns.<br><br>“But focusing on weapons only as they move in interstate commerce has not been effective to curb the interstate flow of these weapons. Rather, Congress has found it necessary also to regulate intrastate activities as a way of addressing the interstate market in machineguns. Similar statues regulate intrastate possession of other extremely dangerous devices such as biological weapons, nuclear material and ‘semi-automatic assault weapons.’ There is no question that the market in firearms generally is heavily interstate-indeed, international-in character.<br><br>“Even purely intrastate possession and transfers of machineguns have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. Congress has concluded that regulating intrastate possession and transfers is necessary to control the interstate market in these weapons. Moreover, Congress has found that the interstate market itself is significant. It follows that intrastate possession and transfers have a substantial effect on interstate commerce,” the court wrote.<br><br>Though it found no legislative history explaining § 922(o), under which Haney was charged, the court found rationality for its conclusions in another section of federal law, specifically § 922(v), which bans manufacturing, transferring or possessing certain ‘semi-automatic assault weapons.’ “To restrict interstate commerce in ‘semi-automatic assault weapons,’ particularly into states that prohibit them, Congress imposed criminal liability for those activities which fuel the supply and demand for such weapons,” the court explained. “The ban on possession is a measure intended to reduce the demand. After surveying the extensive congressional testimony on how common it was for individuals to purchase ‘semi-automatic assault weapons’ in one state and bring them to another, the court concluded (in a challenge brought by gun manufacturer Navegar, Inc. to the 1994 federal ban on manufacture and sale of so-called “semi-automatic assault weapons” to the general public) ‘Congress was well aware that there was significant interstate traffic in semi-automatic assault weapons’ and that state laws and existing federal firearms regulation were inadequate to control the flow of these weapons across state lines.’ It likewise is rational for Congress to conclude that intrastate machinegun possession substantially affects interstate commerce in those weapons.”<br><br>In conclusion, the court held that the federal machinegun ban is constitutional and does not violate either the Second Amendment or the Commerce Clause, and therefore affirmed Haney’s conviction. Haney was represented on the appeal by an assistant federal public defender.<br><br><em>The author publishes two of the small arms industry’s most widely read trade newsletters. The International Firearms Trade covers the world firearms scene, and The New Firearms Business covers the domestic market. Visit <a href="http://www.firearmsgroup.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.FirearmsGroup.com</a>. He may be reached at: <a href="mailto:FirearmsB@aol.com">FirearmsB@aol.com</a>.</em></p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>NEW REVIEW: FEBRUARY 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/new-review-february-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:21:42 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Advanced Armament Corporation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris A. Choat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[K-G Systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Knoxx Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leitner Wise Rifle Company]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LW 15.22]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[M9SD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Product Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sidewinder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Streamlight]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2580</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Chris A. Choat SIDEWINDER™ 10-ROUND DRUM SHOTGUN MAGAZINE KIT Designed for easy user-installation, the Knoxx Industries Sidewinder™ 10-round drum magazine system is perfect for law enforcement, home defense and competitive sporting applications. Also available with a 6-round box magazine, the Knoxx system makes reloading as simple as pushing the magazine release button and swapping [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Chris A. Choat</strong><br><br><strong>SIDEWINDER™ 10-ROUND DRUM SHOTGUN MAGAZINE KIT</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="196" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-25.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7883" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-25.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-25-300x84.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The Sidewinder™ by Knoxx Industries</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Designed for easy user-installation, the Knoxx Industries Sidewinder™ 10-round drum magazine system is perfect for law enforcement, home defense and competitive sporting applications. Also available with a 6-round box magazine, the Knoxx system makes reloading as simple as pushing the magazine release button and swapping magazines. Changing back and forth between buckshot, slug or non-lethal ammunition can be done quickly and positively.<br><br>This unique system, available for most Mossberg pump shotguns, is installed by simply removing the shotgun barrel and forend, unscrewing the factory magazine tube and replacing it with the Sidewinder assembly and forend. Once the barrel is reinstalled, the gun is ready for use. The magazine is ambidextrous and can be loaded with the offset drum on either the left or right side. The drum magazine slips easily into the magazine well and racking the slide delivers the first of ten 12-gauge shells into the chamber. Empty magazines drop free with the push of a button, allowing for a quick 10-round reload in just seconds. No permanent changes are made to the shotgun.<br><br>The Sidewinder is ideal for SWAT or Special Team entry shotguns, non-lethal applications and for IDPA Three Gun Match competitors. Anywhere extended capacity and quick reloads are required, the Sidewinder is the perfect solution. Teamed up with the Knoxx COPstock recoil-reducing folding stock and a short barrel, the Sidewinder-equipped shotgun can be the ultimate entry or defense weapon.<br><br>The Knoxx Sidewinder will be available as a complete kit with either a 10-round drum or 6-round box magazine. Drum and box magazines will also be available separately. Suggested retail price has not been set but kit pricing is expected to be less than $250, with drum magazine under $100 and box magazines under $65. Special pricing for law enforcement agencies and officers is planned. Distributor and Dealer inquiries are invited. Please contact Knoxx Industries, at Dept SAR, P.O. Box 2848, Paso Robles, CA 93447. Call them at (805) 227-4099 or by email at info@knoxx.com.<br><br><strong>STREAMLIGHT SURVIVOR LAW ENFORCEMENT FLASHLIGHT</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="516" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-46.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7884" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-46.jpg 516w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-46-221x300.jpg 221w" sizes="(max-width: 516px) 100vw, 516px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Surviver® Flashlight</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Streamlight, Inc., a leading manufacturer of high performance lighting equipment for the law enforcement market, has announced the introduction of a redesigned Survivor® rechargeable flashlight. The new Survivor, with an extended run time of 1.7 continuous hours, is available with Streamlight’s new PiggyBack™ charging system which enables simultaneous charging of the light and a spare battery. To further reduce the likelihood of being caught with a spent battery, a new steel hinged door and latch allow for quick , accessible battery replacement in the field. A new spring-loaded clip and built-in attachment ring conveniently latch to a belt or harness for hands-free operation or storage. Featuring the company’s exclusive Smoke Cutter® optics, the new Survivor is fitted with a “black dot” xenon bulb that penetrates smoke, fog and mist with up tp 25,000 candlepower to give a superior level of visibility. Rechargeable up to 1000 times, the light operates on a nickel-cadmium battery that can be recharged in one hour using an optional “Fast Charge” unit. The unbreakable Lexan® lens features an anti-scratch coating that can withstand harsh environmental conditions. The Survivor’s lightweight rugged nylon case is O-ring sealed for water resistance, and its non-incendive rotary switch provides easy operation, even while wearing gloves. Weighting less than one pound, Survivor is available in either yellow or orange. The new Survivor flashlight retails for $149.95 and includes a limited lifetime warranty on the body and switch. For more information contact Streamlight, Inc., Dept. SAR, 1030 West Germantown Pike, Norristown, PA 19403. Phone: 1-610-631-0600. Fax: 1-610-631-0712. Web site: www.streamlight.com.<br><br><strong>K-G SYSTEMS GUN KOTE LUBRICANT</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="355" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-37.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7885" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-37.jpg 355w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-37-152x300.jpg 152w" sizes="(max-width: 355px) 100vw, 355px" /><figcaption><strong><em>K-G SYSTEMS GUN KOTE LUBRICANT</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Firearms-like engines-are often subjected to their own worst enemies: elements like heat, corrosion and even salt-water spray. While you could keep your firearms locked away in an airtight box, wouldn’t it be better to get to use them, knowing that they’ve got the maximum protection against the elements? Now you can, thanks to KG Systems Gun-Kote from KG Industries. KG Systems Gun-Kote is unique Moly or Teflon lubricating based coating that can be applied to a ferrous or nonferrous metal (it can even be applied to some plastics). Once applied, it forms a thin yet powerful shield that is designed to meet the rigorous demands of the military. KG Systems Gun-Kote was first developed for and used by the Navy Seal teams to help military weapons endure adverse conditions. It is outstanding for treating the exterior of all types of weapons (including magazines), ranging from handguns to G5 and G6 heavy artillery. This incredible product also helps dissipate heat better than bare metal. Treatment with KG Systems Gun-Kote increases heat dissipation by eight to ten percent. And since it can withstand a temperature range of minus-350? F to 500? F, not only is it ideal for firearms, but it’s found its home in such diverse applications as engine blocks, radiators, motorcycles and brake calipers. For more information on this and other unique lubricating products contact KG Industries, Dept. SAR, 537 Louis Drive, Newbury Park, CA. Phone: 1-800-348-9558. Web site: www.kgproducts.net.<br><br><strong>LEITNER WISE RIFLE COMPANY INTRODUCES LW 15.22™ RIFLE</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="525" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-32.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7886" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-32.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-32-300x225.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>LEITNER WISE RIFLE COMPANY INTRODUCES LW 15.22™ RIFLE</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The LW 15.22™ is a highly accurate and reliable, purpose built, semi-automatic or select-fire .22 rimfire rifle. Based on the AR15/M-16 .223 caliber centerfire rifles, the sub-caliber LW 15.22 rifle at last provides the user with the reliability and ease of use of its centerfire cousins. Duplicating the weight and feel exactly, the new rifle can be a superior training aid when electronic or air/gas powered systems can’t provide the levels of realism required. The LW 15.22 enables the user to practice longer, developing or honing true marksmanship skills with far less expense by using low cost rimfire ammo. Available in .22 LR and soon in .22 WMR caliber, the LW 15.22 will operate equally well with subsonic, standard or high velocity ammunition. The LW 15.22 can be purchased as a complete rifle or a complete top-end assembly. The LW 15.22 is precision engineered with forged, hard anodized upper and lower receivers, dedicated rimfire bolt and barrel assembly, A-2 sights and a magazine capacity of 10 rounds with 25-round mags available as an option. The rifle will be available in four configurations; M4 or A2, carry handle upper or flat top, all with permanently fitted flash hiders. For more information contact Leitner-Wise Rifle Company, Dept SAR, 1033 North Fairfax Street, Suite 402, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. Phone: 1-703-837-9390. Fax: 1-703-837-9686. E-mail: <a href="mailto:info@leitner-wise.com">info@leitner-wise.com</a>.<br><br><strong>M9SD SUPPRESSOR FROM ADVANCED ARMAMENT CORPORATION</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="360" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-44.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7887" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-44.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-44-300x154.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>M9SD SUPPRESSOR FROM ADVANCED ARMAMENT CORPORATION</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Designed for deployment on the Beretta M9/92F 9mm semi-automatic pistol, the M9-SD from Advanced Armament Corp. represents the state of the art in fast attach silencer technology. Constructed of anodized aerospace quality aluminum and stainless steel, the M9-SD delivers unparalleled performance in a physically small, lightweight package. The 1.25” OD by 7.1” silencer features integral front and rear sights, with an optional front night sight for enhanced target acquisition in low-light environments. The wipeless baffle stack minimizes first round pop, and delivers 32+dB dry and 40+dB wet sound reduction. The fast-attach mount allows coupling to a factory Beretta barrel, modified with a mil-spec 17-4 PH stainless steel extension, in less than two seconds. Also shown in the photo is the London Bridge Trading Company M-9 holster that Advanced Armament sells. For more information contact Advanced Armament Corp., Dept. SAR, 3100 Five Ticks Trickum Road, Suite 201, Lilburn, GA 30047. Phone: 1-770-985-3109. Fax: 1-770-985-3110. Web site: <a href="http://www.advanced-armament.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.advanced-armament.com</a>.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-table is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>



<p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>SMALL ARMS DATA BY WIRE (SADW): FEBRUARY 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/small-arms-data-by-wire-sadw-february-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nick Steadman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SADW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2577</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[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 [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Nick Steadman</strong><br><br><em>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. Here is a small sampling of a few of the July 2002 SADW articles. You can contact Nick at the email above, and make arrangements with him to obtain the full service sent directly to your email address. In order to receive SADW your e-mail system must be capable of receiving attached files, and the e-mail software system or settings do not reject files as large as 400kb. Each issue is full of insight and information for those with an interest in Small Arms, as well as his observations on world travel.</em><br><br>Issue No 54 &#8211; November 2001<br>An Electronic Publication from:<br>NICK STEADMAN FEATURES<br>Tel : 01273-773362,<br>International +44-1273-773362<br>Fax: 01273-822078,<br>International +44-1273-822078<br>SADW@compuserve.com<br><br>UK PRESS HAIL 22 SAS ‘WUNDERWAFFEN’: British newspapers went bonkers in October about the new ‘ultimate weapon’ carried by SAS troopers, but readers will be disappointed to learn that all they’d seen were the Regiment’s Diemaco C-series rifles with optical sights, laser aiming pointers and 40mm M203 grenade launchers, which have replaced their older M16s. However, the price quoted per system was indeed quite exciting &#8211; £5,500, which &#8211; if correct &#8211; strikes us as pretty darned expensive.<br><br>McBROS HAS NEW US NAVY .50 EVALUATION CONTRACT: the McBros .50 semi-automatic rifle (designed by Ralf Dieckmann), an initial run of about five of which is now to be produced, has also attracted the eye of the US Navy procurement boys at Crane, who are to receive a sample for evaluation early in 2002. The design is much as per our earlier coverage in SADW, but for the Navy gun McBros will be switching to stainless steel for many of the components and making every effort to reduce the weight.<br><br>The Navy is believed to be looking for as compact and light a design as possible, and while the McBros rifle could technically, its claimed, be bullpupped without any major changes to the operating mechanism, this would inevitably delay things, so the weapon the Navy is to test will, in the first instance, be conventionally configured.<br><br>BERETTA VERTEC PISTOL: the following is the 27 Oct 2001 press release issued by Beretta USA Inc on its Vertec pistol launch:<br><br>‘The Vertec (which was called the “Evolution” internally during development) began at a Beretta Law Enforcement division meeting late in 2000. At that time, an unofficial committee was formed to produce the specifications for a new version of the Beretta 90-series pistol which would address the evolving needs of American law enforcement and military personnel. The group determined that certain features of the now famous Beretta Elite-series pistols, along with innovative new changes to the existing design, would best meet those needs without a significant change in manufacturing cost (and thus price).<br><br>The group identified two specific areas which needed to be addressed as priorities:<br><br>Trigger reach. With the increasing number of small-handed police officers, military personnel, and private firearms enthusiasts, the long trigger reach on the Beretta pistol was seen as a hindrance. In response, Beretta’s Production department created a prototype pistol with a completely straight (“vertical”) backstrap. With the addition of a short-reach trigger and innovative grip, this prototype pistol was tested by people of all hand sizes. Experienced Beretta shooters such as Ernest Langdon and Todd Louis Green tested the modified backstrap to guarantee that the natural pointing characteristics of the pistol would not be affected adversely.<br><br>Accessory rail. A common request of both law enforcement and military operators, the Beretta Vertec uses a newly engineered frame design complete with integral accessory rails. These allow the user to attach a wide variety of popular white-, IR-, and laser-light modules to the gun. Rather than create a new proprietary mounting system, the Beretta Vertec uses the same rail dimensions as the popular “Glock” handguns and is therefore compatible with the same flashlight and laser attachments from such companies as SureFire and Insight Technology.<br><br>In addition to these two major modifications, the Beretta Vertec also offers these features:<br><br>Removable front sight. Using the standard 90-series slide, Beretta USA has redesigned the front sight area to allow a drift-adjustable, removable front sight. This will allow end users to replace the factory configuration sight with any number of tritium “night sights” and other specialty devices.<br><br>Flush-fitting stainless barrel. Decreasing the overall length of the pistol and providing a cleaner look, the Vertec follows the tradition of the Elite-series pistols by using a 4.7” flush-fitting stainless steel barrel. Standard Vertec pistols will come with a black (Bruniton coated) stainless barrel, while Inox versions of the pistol will of course be produced without the black coating.<br><br>Beveled magazine well. First seen on the Beretta Elite, this feature will now be standard for all Vertec pistols. The beveled magazine well allows operators to perform faster, smoother reloads under stress.<br><br>No lanyard loop. The standard Vertec pistol will not have a lanyard loop. However, special limited runs of the pistol may be produced with lanyard loops to accommodate specific mission profiles of military and law enforcement units.<br><br>Dual-textured thin polymer grips. Designed by a team of experienced pistol shooters, the innovative new grip panels on the Beretta Vertec have two different style gripping surfaces. Checkered at maximum friction points and pebbled exactly in those places where you need some freedom of movement, this revolutionary design improves both controllability and comfort.<br><br>The 92FS and 96F versions of the Vertec are expected to be available within 30-60 days (as well as ‘D’ and ‘G’ configuration pistols for law enforcement and military customers). Inox versions will follow in 2002. Pricing has not been set as of yet, but is not expected to be considerably greater than current 92FS and 96F base model pistols.’<br><br>BARRETT .50 DEVELOPMENTS: Barrett says that last year the USMC turned in all its .50 M82A1A semi-automatic rifles, which date back to Desert Storm, in exchange for the Barrett M82A3, which is an update of the M82A1A with high, full-length Picatinny scope rail, a redesigned buttstock affording a better grip to the left hand, spiked bipod feet, a detachable muzzle brake and a butt-spike, which is useful for keeping the weapon roughly aligned between engagements, while allowing the user to do other things such as topping up his magazines.<br><br>The A3 rifle is several pounds heavier, mainly due to the long rail, but the Marines are evidently quite happy with this, since it allows them a wider range of sighting options.<br><br>Readers will also remember that the US army has still to finalize its main .50 rifle procurement, which &#8211; we recall &#8211; was planned to be on a scale of one per 7.62mm M24 SWS. This XM107 project initially focused on Barrett’s M95M, a militarized version of the company’s bolt-action M95 bullpup, but after experimenting with this model for some time, the army decided that &#8211; while they liked the modest weight and handiness of the bullpup, as well as its accuracy, it did not offer the repeat-shot capability the military needed &#8211; in particular the recoil meant the shooter would not be able to stay on target while manipulating the bolt.<br><br>Feedback from specialist army units had shown that, due to battlefield variables and the long ranges involved, first round hits might often not be possible, and they needed the ability to make quick adjustments to the aim and to get second or third shots off as quickly as possible. Furthermore, they wanted to take advantage of the dynamic terminal effects of .50 ammunition by using a weapon which could rapidly place multiple rounds on target. A semi-automatic was thus the only real choice.<br><br>With all these points in mind, the army has now decided, instead of the M95M, to take the Barrett M82A1M self-loader, which has a long Picatinny scope rail like the USMC’s M82A3, but not as high, plus the other modifications adopted by the Marines (see above), but is a good deal lighter. The army procurement is proceeding, and after adoption Barrett will remain ready to respond to any additional product improvement requests, which could include further weight reduction, though one has to say there are limits to how far one can take this with a cartridge as powerful as the .50 Browning.<br><br>However, as we’ve said before in these pages, though the big .50 rifles may seem rather heavy to cart around all day by comparison with the pipsqueak M16A2, in fact they’re no heavier than a typical 7.62mm GPMG with basic ammunition load, which is considered a one-man carry in every army of the world, including the US.<br><br>It could be that troops today are simply getting weedier &#8211; the Israelis already ditched the MAG-58 for foot patrols in favour of the 5.56mm Negev, though if you stick to our personal rule of thumb, the more pain involved in humping the thing, the more grief you’ll most likely be able to inflict on the target when you finally pull that trigger. There’s no such thing as a free lunch &#8211; you can pepper that strongpoint all day with 5.56mm and merely frighten the pigeons, but go up a calibre or two and you’ll really start to see the chips fly.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>BOOK REVIEWS: FEBRUARY 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/book-reviews-february-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:20:35 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5 (Feb 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Book Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael McDaniel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N5]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2573</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Michael McDaniel Rapid Fire: The Development of Automatic Cannon, Heavy Machine Guns and Their Ammunition for Armies, Navies and Air ForcesBy Anthony G. WilliamsAirlife Publishing Ltd.101 Longden Rd,Shrewsbury, SY3 9EB, Englandwww.airlifebooks.comAvailable in the United States through Amazon.comISBN 1-84037-122-6297 Pages$39.95 For the civilian Class 3 owner, any belt-fed machine gun is heavy ordnance, while a [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Michael McDaniel</strong></p>



<p><strong>Rapid Fire: The Development of Automatic Cannon, Heavy Machine Guns and Their Ammunition for Armies, Navies and Air Forces</strong><br>By Anthony G. Williams<br>Airlife Publishing Ltd.<br>101 Longden Rd,<br>Shrewsbury, SY3 9EB, England<br><a href="http://www.airlifebooks.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.airlifebooks.com</a><br>Available in the United States through Amazon.com<br>ISBN 1-84037-122-6<br>297 Pages<br>$39.95</p>



<p>For the civilian Class 3 owner, any belt-fed machine gun is heavy ordnance, while a .50 BMG or a 40mm grenade launcher represents extraordinary firepower. To the modern military, however, these represent rather minor examples of real weapons &#8211; the automatic cannon that arm aircraft, armored fighting vehicles short of tanks, and many warships, weaponry that shoot not bullets, but beer-can sized explosive shells that will take the fight out of a multi-ton vehicle with one or two hits.</p>



<p>Until now, the development of these truly heavy automatic weapons has had little documentation. This has been changed with the publication of Anthony Williams’ Rapid Fire, which covers the entire subject of vehicle-mounted ordnance from the earliest days of the Gatling and Nordenfelt guns to the latest developments in armament systems.</p>



<p>Rapid Fire features chapters on ammunition design, gun design, land weapons, naval weapons, and air weapons. Each is lavishly illustrated with both photographs and line drawings that clearly show both the outward appearance and inward workings of the hardware. There are also 27 pages of color photographs, scale drawings showing the comparative sizes of various cannon, and tables with technical data.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="556" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/001-3.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-2575" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/001-3.jpg 556w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/001-3-238x300.jpg 238w" sizes="(max-width: 556px) 100vw, 556px" /></figure>



<p>The greatest strength of Rapid Fire, though, is the completeness of Williams’ research. Most authors would content themselves with covering World War II armament, and maybe the first generation of post-war arms from the United States and perhaps Britain. Williams covers everything from the Gatling and Nordenfelt guns developed in the 1880’s up to the modified Mauser BK-27 cannon planned for the Joint Strike Fighter. Better still, he covers the field with exceptional depth.</p>



<p>The chapter on ammunition for example, discusses fuzes, percussion and electric ignition systems, case design and projectiles. But, where most authors would content themselves with describing armor piercing and high explosive ammunition, Williams covers both relative rarities such as discarding sabot ammunition and the truly bizarre &#8211; like flare and chaff ammunition available for Russian aircraft cannon.</p>



<p>Likewise, the chapter on gun designs does not content itself with the usual short-recoil, rotary, and revolver guns, but covers rarities such as the Gast design. Even prototype hardware is covered &#8211; particularly Russian equipment, which have been poorly documented in unclassified sources until recently.<br><br>This depth is carried on throughout the book. The chapter on land cannon covers not only the 25 and 30mm weapons currently arming reconnaissance and infantry fighting vehicles, but the 35-40mm arms planned for the future. The section on navel guns does not content itself with discussing on the Phalanx point-defense system, but also its rivals. The chapter on air armaments devotes just as much space to Soviet and European designs as it does to the more-famous Vulcan cannon.<br><br>There are a few shortcomings in Rapid Fire. In particular, the tactical debates that led various nations to adopt different designs and especially different calibers are not well explored. For example, the United States has retained 20mm as its standard fighter gun caliber to this day, arguing that the superior rate of fire available from a smaller round offsets any lack of destructive force. The rest of the world disagrees, and has adopted cannon of 17 to 30mm. This is an important debate, but Williams failed to cover this.<br><br>Nevertheless, the shortcomings of Rapid Fire are more than offset by its strengths. This book is a tour-de-force of scholarship that fills in a long-neglected gap. Anyone with an interest in heavy automatic weapons, or fighting vehicles of any type, would do well to add Rapid Fire to their library.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-table aligncenter is-style-stripes"><table><tbody><tr><td class="has-text-align-center" data-align="center"><em>This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V5N5 (February 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
