<?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>V5N6 (Mar 2002) &#8211; Small Arms Review</title>
	<atom:link href="https://smallarmsreview.com/category/articles/articles-by-issue-articles/v5/v5n6/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 06:14:21 +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>SITREP: MARCH 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/sitrep-march-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:36:11 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dan Shea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SITREP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2617</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Dan Shea On my way back from the incredible SAR 2001 Show and I am very, very happy. Truthfully, I had planned to spend most of my time at LMO’s tables, but I ended up leaving and spending almost the whole show running around in one or the other of our two buildings. I [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Dan Shea</strong><br><br>On my way back from the incredible SAR 2001 Show and I am very, very happy. Truthfully, I had planned to spend most of my time at LMO’s tables, but I ended up leaving and spending almost the whole show running around in one or the other of our two buildings. I can’t begin to tell you how exhilarating it was to see that many of the Class 3 community in one place at one time. It was a real, honest to goodness gun show, with guns of all types everywhere you looked, parts, tripods, pieces, accessories, displays, and wall-to-wall people walking around talking guns and buying and selling. Thank God for the Free State of Arizona.<br><br>I heard so many conversations where people were exchanging knowledge about firearms history and technology, so many people planning upcoming shoots, shows, projects, new products. It was amazing. If you missed this show, you missed something that was worth being at.<br><br>We are doing another one in Phoenix next December. The show promoter &#8211; Bob Templeton of Crossroads of the West, told me this was the biggest show to every hit the SouthWest- excluding the now apparently defunct “Great Western”. We had over 1600 tables in five buildings. Regarding the Great Western Show at Pomona, SAR has always been a cheerleader for that show, and if they start up again, you will read about it here. Unfortunately, the California climate towards firearms ownership is tightening more and more, and the shows there are losing a lot of support from local government. What a great feeling it was for people to come to the Free State of Arizona, and see a good, old fashioned gun show with a Class 3 presence.<br><br>I dare say I haven’t seen a setup like the one we just had, other than at the Knob Creek Shoot. We didn’t have a machine gun shoot, but we didn’t have any dust or crushed stone under foot either, no rain, and you could talk with people and be heard. Knob Creek will always be The ‘Creek, but our show certainly had its own alluring points.<br><br>The SAR 2002 show will be held on December 6-8 at the Arizona State Fairgrounds, in conjunction with the regular Crossroads of the West Phoenix Show. From the initial reports, we are planning on an even bigger show next year, with many more activities- rumors of a machine gun shoot out in the desert are circulating, and we are also discussing making this a three day show- dealer setup on Thursday, and open on Friday at Noon till 6 for the public, then our regular Saturday and Sunday hours. There are also discussions of more outside entertainment, a larger contingent of military vehicle and cannon displays, and more class 3 dealers coming in from around the US.<br><br>I want to take a moment to thank all of those who worked hard to put this show together. It went smoothly, and we had a great time meeting our readers.<br><br>For our readers overseas, in the military or not, we hope you can make it to the next SAR show as well. The Brotherhood of Arms was definitely in evidence at our show, veterans from WWII on were there, and many great conversations were had.<br><br>We have been asked to do the show twice a year- but we have declined. We would like to keep our show special to the Southwest, a yearly event that won’t get too old and tired. The promoter is considering juicing up his April show with Cowboy Action Shooting, to make another “Mega show” happen in the Spring. If he does it, I will go, as will a lot of the other SAR readers who have a crossover interest.<br><br>We might consider an SAR East show, if we can find a suitable show and location to tie it to- without conflicting with the Spring Knob Creek or the HMHS show- we want to be supportive of other events.<br><br>It was great seeing you all, out there, and I hope to see you all again at SAR 2002!<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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>INDUSTRY NEWS: MARCH 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/industry-news-march-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industry News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert M.Hausman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2614</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Robert M. Hausman Federal Court Reaffirms Second Amendment Rights In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans recently held that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. The court rejected the arguments of the Clinton Administration’s Justice Department [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Robert M. Hausman</strong><br><br><strong>Federal Court Reaffirms Second Amendment Rights</strong><br><br>In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans recently held that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. The court rejected the arguments of the Clinton Administration’s Justice Department that the Second Amendment does not apply to individuals but merely recognizes the right of the states to arm its militias.<br><br>The case, United States v. Emerson, arose out of a Texas divorce suit in which a restraining order had been issued against the husband, Dr. Timothy Joe Emerson, who was subsequently charged with violating a federal law that prohibits the possession of firearms while under such a court order. The trial court dismissed the charges against Emerson saying the statute’s ban on possession of a firearm while a restraining order was in place, violated, among other rights, the doctor’s Second Amendment rights.<br><br>The Janet Reno Justice Department appealed. While the appeals court ultimately upheld the validity of the federal law -[§922(g)(8)] criminalizing gun possession by the subject of a domestic restraining order- finding that §922(g)(8) is constitutional as applied to Dr. Emerson, saying that the individual right to arms may be subjected to “limited, narrowly tailored specific exceptions or restrictions for particular cases that are reasonable and not inconsistent with the right of Americans generally to individually keep and bear their private arms as historically understood in this country.”<br><br>The decision is considered the strongest ruling to date interpreting the Second Amendment. The court said the words, “the right of the people” in the Second Amendment had the same meaning as when used in the First and Fourth Amendments, and, like those amendments in the Bill of Rights, secures an individual or personal right, not a collective or states’ right.<br><br>The court rejected “the collective rights” model (holding that the Second Amendment does not apply to individuals, but recognizes the right of a state to arm its militia). It also rejected the “sophisticated collective rights” argument (holding that the Second Amendment rights of ‘individuals’ to keep and bear arms only applies to members of an organized state militia while participating in militia activities if the federal or state governments fail to provide the firearms necessary for such militia service) for interpreting the Second Amendment. “We hold&#8230; that (the Second Amendment) protects the rights of individuals, including those not then actually a member of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to privately possess and bear their own firearms, such as the pistol involved here, that are suitable as personal individual weapons&#8230;,” the court said.<br><br>The Emerson opinion was written by Chief Judge William Ganwood and supported by Judge Harold DeMoss. The justices noted how the Clinton-Reno Justice Department steadfastly maintained that the Supreme Court’s decision in U.S. v. Miller (decided in 1939) mandated the court’s rejection of the individual right interpretation of the Second Amendment. “We disagree,” Judge Ganwood wrote, saying the Miller decision did not resolve the individual versus collective right issue, but “to the extent that Miller sheds light on the matter, it cuts against the Clinton-Reno position.”<br><br>In the Miller case, defendants were charged with transporting in interstate commerce (from Oklahoma to Arkansas) an unregistered Stevens double-barrel shotgun having barrels less than 18-inches in length without having the required stamped written order (from the federal government permitting the gun’s transportation), contrary to the National Firearms Act. The defendants challenged the validity of the indictment on Second Amendment grounds and ultimately quashed the indictment. The government, however, appealed to the Supreme Court. The defendants neither filed any brief nor made an appearance before the high court however.<br><br>The Supreme Court decided the Miller case on the basis of one of the government’s arguments which went, “that the Second Amendment has relation only to the right of the people to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes and does not conceivably relate to weapons of the type referred to in the National Firearms Act cannot be doubted. Sawed-off shotguns, sawed-off rifles and machine guns are clearly weapons which can have no legitimate use in the hands of private individuals.”<br><br>The Supreme Court in Miller held, “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 at this time 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>The Miller court also defined the term “militia,” stating in part: “The signification attributed to the term militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense&#8230;ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.” Had the Miller defendants appeared and possibly asserted militia membership, the Supreme Court may have ruled differently.<br><br>Back to the Emerson case, “We turn, therefore, to an analysis of history and wording of the Second Amendment for guidance,” the Fifth Circuit court continued. In undertaking this analysis, we are mindful that almost all of our sister circuits have rejected any individual rights view of the Second Amendment. However, it respectfully appears to us that all or almost all of these opinions seem to have done so either on the erroneous assumption that Miller resolved that issue or without sufficient articulated examination of the history and text of the Second Amendment.”<br><br>To correct that deficiency, the court produced its own meticulous 84-page historical examination, concluding:<br><br>•“We have found no historical evidence that the Second Amendment was intended to convey militia power to the states, limit the federal government’s power to maintain a standing army, or applies only to members of a select militia while on active duty. All of the evidence indicates that the Second Amendment, like other parts of the Bill of Rights, applies to and protects individual Americans.”<br><br>•“We find that the history of the Second Amendment reinforces the plain meaning of its text, namely that it protects individual Americans in their right to keep and bear arms whether or not they are a member of a select militia or performing active military service or training.”<br><br>The ruling, which George Mason University law professor Nelson Lund called. “The most important and favorable Second Amendment judicial decision in American history,” echoes U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft in recognizing the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. “It is unlikely the Supreme Court will agree to review the case. The Fifth Circuit’s decision marked a very sharp break with precedent in the other courts of appeals, and the Supreme court will probably want to see whether or not other lower courts adopt the Fifth Circuit’s approach,” Lund concluded.<br><br>“The court’s decision is a very thorough and scholarly analysis of the actual text, history and jurisprudence of the Second Amendment. It reaffirms that the Second Amendment is a cherished civil liberty of equal importance to our nation as the First and Fourth Amendments,” said Robert T. Delfay, president and chief executive officer of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the industry’s major trade organization. “Every American, not just firearms owners, should applaud this reaffirmation of the principles and beliefs of our founding fathers.”<br><br>National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action executive director, James Jay Baker, hailed the ruling, stating, “This is clear corroboration of what reputable historians and constitutional scholars have said consistently; that the Second Amendment, like other rights, is an individual right designed to protect rights of the people, not to expand the powers of government.” Baker went on to say, “Our client-the Second Amendment-has had its day in court. And the Second Amendment has emerged victorious.”<br><br>The deeper political meaning of the decision was summed up by NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, who said: “This decision should be read by every American interested in knowing the true meaning of the Second Amendment. The court said in no uncertain terms that it’s an individual right. The court also cut through the political fog and media hype and the ruling exposes the real aims of those who advocate that the right to keep and bear arms applies to only government and not the people.<br><br>“In its opinion, the court clearly saw the dangers to individual liberty, when it defined the Janet Reno Justice Department’s position as being based on a model where the Second Amendment poses no obstacle to the wholesale disarmament of the American people. In totally rejecting that position, the court exposed the end game of those who would deny Second Amendment rights to individual Americans,” LaPierre pointed out.<br><br>The Brady Center for the Prevention of Handgun Violence had filed a “friend of the court” brief supporting the Janet Reno Justice Department’s misguided interpretation of the Second Amendment.<br><br><strong>Anti’s Relaunch Assault On .50 Caliber Rifles</strong><br><br>Using last fall’s terrorist attacks on the U.S. as a cover, the anti-gun Violence Policy Center (VPC) has relaunched an effort to get .50 caliber rifles outlawed. A similar effort launched in 1999 failed to gain much public notice, but the group is hoping its second attempt will be more successful with the war on terrorism in the news. Claiming that the “U.S. gun industry” sold at least twenty-five .50 caliber rifles to Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden’s terror network, the VPC issued a lengthy report “Voting From the Rooftops,” focusing on .50 caliber rifles.<br><br>“We can be shocked, but not surprised that the gun industry would sell these dangerous military weapons to Al Qaeda,” said the study’s author, Tom Diaz, VPC’s senior policy analyst. “These .50 caliber sniper rifles are ideal tools for terror and assassination.”<br><br>Stating that the .50 BMG round “can slice through body armor like a knife through warm butter, knock down hovering helicopters, rip up armored limousines, destroy radar dishes, and ignite bulk fuel tanks-all at the length of 10 football fields,” a summary of the round’s merits are quoted from an “enthusiastic essayist in the authoritative journal” Small Arms Review.<br><br>“The fifty caliber’s ability to be deployed by one individual and give that person the capability of discretely engaging a target at ranges of over one mile away are definitely alluring from a tactical standpoint. While the .50 cal. can sometimes seem to be exaggerated, it is hard to imagine a round that at ranges over a mile and a half away, has more kinetic energy than a .44 Magnum, and has unbeatable penetration as well.”<br><br>The report goes on, in sensationalist terms, to assert that “.50 caliber sniper rifles” can create disaster at industrial plants handling explosive, toxic or volatile chemicals; can endanger aircraft, bulk fuel tanks, fuel trucks and other airport facilities; and that .50 caliber rifles can be found in the arsenals of domestic and foreign terrorist and extremist groups, and that the American gun industry is to blame.<br><br>Noting that in most of America, a .50 cal. rifle can be bought by nearly anyone aged 18 or over, the report goes on to call for bringing .50 cal. rifles under the provisions of the National Firearms Act, making them subject to the same regulations as pertain to machine guns. “Today, .50 cal. rifles are still easier to buy than handguns; a youth of 18 years can legally buy a sniper rifle, but cannot buy a handgun until age 21,” the VPC said. VPC also called for the use of the civil justice system to hold manufacturers of such rifle accountable, and the passage by the states of legislation establishing strict liability for damages resulting from the use or misuse of such arms. While the report was mentioned in an article appearing in The New York Times, little mention seemed to be made elsewhere.<br><br><em>I want to thank Robert Hausman for bringing this up again. We all know what a load of baloney the Violence Policy Center’s junk science and sensationalistic embellishments to reality are often like, and here they are spearheading a charge against fifty cal rifles. I read the report, and misquotes and mischaracterizations abound. Funny what results you can come up with if you are trying to support a position, at all costs. Remember, oppose this type of thing wherever you see it, get a copy of that report, complain intelligently to Josh Sugarmann from the VPC, and if you know any of their donors, see if you can talk some sense into them. As always, follow the money. &#8211; Dan</em><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&nbsp;<a href="http://www.firearmsgroup.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.FirearmsGroup.com</a>. He may be reached at:&nbsp;<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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>



<p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>NEW REVIEW: MARCH 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/new-review-march-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:34:05 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris A. Choat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Product Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2611</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Chris A. Choat CLOSET VAULT FROM V-LINE As concerns over crime and gun safety rise a company called V-Line now offers consumers Security Cases and Cabinets to secure household valuables and lock guns out of the reach of children. V-Line Industries Closet Vault was designed to install in between the wall studs with the [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Chris A. Choat</strong><br><br><strong>CLOSET VAULT FROM V-LINE</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" width="277" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-48.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7906" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-48.jpg 277w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-48-119x300.jpg 119w" sizes="(max-width: 277px) 100vw, 277px" /><figcaption><strong><em>CLOSET VAULT FROM V-LINE</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>As concerns over crime and gun safety rise a company called V-Line now offers consumers Security Cases and Cabinets to secure household valuables and lock guns out of the reach of children. V-Line Industries Closet Vault was designed to install in between the wall studs with the door and frame protruding just 1 inch to provide extra internal depth. Measuring 53” X 16 3/4” X 4 3/4” the Closet Vault is large enough to accommodate small household valuables such as jewelry, cash, cameras and firearms without taking up floor space. The Closet Vault can be easily hidden in a closet or behind a door for best concealment. The door fits flush into the frame of the Closet Vault to protect against a prying attack. The Simplex push button lock is mechanical and features a programmable combination. Two “Ace” key locks have been added to the top and bottom for additional security when quick access is not required. Several shelving accessories are available to customize the Closet Vault to best meet individual needs. There are also several other options available for customizing the interior of the Closet Vault which include full and half shelves, pistol caddies and a pegboard door panel to best utilize all available storage space. For more information on this and other innovative security case and cabinets contact V-Line Industries, Dept SAR 370 Easy Street, Simi Valley, CA 93065. Phone: 1-805-520-4987. Fax: 1-805-520-6470. Web Site: <a href="http://www.vlineind.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.vlineind.com</a>.<br><br><strong>NEW M4 CARBINE FROM BUSHMASTER</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img decoding="async" width="700" height="231" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-27.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7907" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-27.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-27-300x99.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>NEW M4 CARBINE FROM BUSHMASTER</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>A new model from Bushmaster, the XM15 E2S M4 Post-Ban Carbine features a lightweight 14.5” barrel machined in the distinctive M4 profile with a permanently attached Mini Y Comp muzzle brake. This configuration yields a total barrel length of 16” to comply with Post-Ban regulations. A BATF approved fixed tele-style buttstock is added to complete the military look of this new carbine. The 14.5” barrel is chrome lined in both bore and chamber for maximum longevity and ease of maintenance. The barrel’s button rifling, in a 1 X 9” right hand twist, will stabilize a wide range of currently available ammunition with bullet weights up to 69 grains. The new M4 Carbine features the M16A2 dual aperture rear sight system with both windage and elevation adjustments-elevation is calibrated from 300 to 800 meters. The two different apertures give a short range, quick target acquisition sight picture or a smaller “peep” aperture for long distance accuracy. The tele-stock style buttstock is pinned and fixed in an “open” position and has been BATF approved for use on Post-Ban manufactured carbines. As with all other Bushmasters, the forged 7075T6 aircraft quality aluminum receivers are finished in a non-reflective mil-spec hard anodize for durability and include all M16A2 design improvements such as a cartridge case deflector, last round bolt hold-open and raised ridges for magazine release protection. A mil-spec manganese phosphate coating insures complete protection against corrosion or rust on barrel and other exposed steel parts of the weapon. The M4-16 Carbine is shipped in a lockable, hard plastic case-complete with 10 round magazine, carrying sling and operators safety and instruction manual. The new M4 Carbine is also available with an optional V Match “flat-top” upper receiver and A3 removable carry handle. For more information contact Bushmaster Firearms, Inc., Dept SAR P.O. Box 1470, 999 Roosevelt Trail, Windham, Maine 04062. Phone: 1-800-998-SWAT. Fax: 1-207-892-8068. Web Site: <a href="https://www.remingtonoutdoorcompany.com/bushmaster-firearms" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.bushmaster.com</a>.<br><br><strong>SPEC-OPS T.H.E. WALLET FROM BEST MADE DESIGNS LLC</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img decoding="async" width="607" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-46.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7908" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-46.jpg 607w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-46-260x300.jpg 260w" sizes="(max-width: 607px) 100vw, 607px" /><figcaption><strong><em>SPEC-OPS T.H.E. WALLET FROM BEST MADE DESIGNS LLC</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Best Made Designs has added yet another multi-functional product to their ever growing line. The new item is called the T.H.E. (Tactical Holds Everything) Wallet. This thing is the “Swiss Army Knife” of wallets. The wallet can be carried in a back pocket, it can be worn around your neck on a lanyard or it can be worn belt-mounted. The wallet features Best Made Designs innovative “Shark Bite” closure system. It has no Velcro, buckles or snaps to wear out or to make noise and it is ultra-secure. Also this new closure will last forever. In fact the entire wallet is guaranteed for life! Other features include a large document slot for passports, 8 credit card slots and inside and outside ID windows (with non-glare finish). There is also a zippered pocket for spare change, keys or whatever. It also includes divided full-length compartments for cash, receipts and airline tickets. This can even be zipped shut to form a hidden pocket! T.H.E. Wallet is made from Cordura and nylon pack cloth, double stitched and bar tacked at critical stress points to make it super durable. It is available in black, olive drab and woodland camo. This is the ULTIMATE Military/Law Enforcement wallet. For more information on this any their other “Made In The USA” products contact Best Made Designs LLC, Dept SAR P.O. Box 475, Monahans, TX 79756. Phone: 1-915-943-4888. Fax: 1-915-943-5565. Web Site: <a href="https://specops.us/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.specopsbrand.com</a>.<br><br><strong>PEPPER ESCORT</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="396" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-33.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7909" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-33.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-33-300x170.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>PEPPER ESCORT</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The Pepper Escort was designed by McClarin Manufacturing, Inc., as a personal defense alternative to a firearm. This new device combines a powerful light, an emergency whistle and pepper spray with UV dye marker all into one small package. Shaped like a handgun the Pepper Escort has a trigger that releases the pepper spray. The trigger is locked in the safe position by a pin “safety” connected to a whistle. Pulling the whistle away from the device also pulls out the pin safety readying the Pepper Escort to fire the pepper spray. The spray is 10% oleoresin capsicum which also contains a ultra violet dye which can aid in police identification. Pepper Escort features a 3-ounce canister of the pepper spray which is good for approximately ten one-second bursts. It also comes with a smaller 1.5 ounce canister which is good for five one-second bursts. Spray canisters are easily and quickly replaced in the handle. The spray stream is very high volume and reaches about 20 feet. On the top of the Pepper Escort is a “Tuff Lite(r)” Krypton flashlight. The super bright Tuff Lite(r) is weather and shock proof and is operated by a convenient thumb switch. The light has a pre-focused light beam that blinds the attacker and also serves as an aiming point for the pepper stream. The Pepper Escort is the ideal protection while jogging, traveling, in the home dormitory or at work. For more information or to place an order contact McClarin Manufacturing, Inc., Dept SAR 31 Bonito Blvd., P.O. Box 250, La Luz, NM 88337. Phone: 1-505-437-5542. Fax: 1-505-437-5771. Web Site: www.pepperescort.com.<br><br><strong>BLACK HILLS ADDS .40 S&amp;W LOADS</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="436" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-38.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7910" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-38.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-38-300x187.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>BLACK HILLS ADDS .40 S&amp;W LOADS</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Black Hills Ammunition has added two .40 caliber loads to its already extensive line of fine ammunition. For self defense and police duty use, they now offer a 165 grain Gold Dot bullet loaded to 1150 fps/ 483 ft lbs of energy. This is probably the most powerful .40 caliber load available within the industry pressure standards. As a companion training/practice round they offer a 165 grain FMJ at 1100 fps in their “blue box” remanufactured line. The 165 grain loadings have become increasingly popular, offering a good balance of velocity and bullet weight. For more information contact Black Hills Ammunition, Dept SAR P.O. Box 3090, Rapid City, SD 57709-3090. Phone: 1-605-348-5150. Fax: 1-605-348-9827.</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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>SMALL ARMS DATA BY WIRE (SADW): MARCH 2002</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/small-arms-data-by-wire-sadw-march-2002/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:33:14 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nick Steadman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SADW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2608</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><strong>Issue No 55 &#8211; December 2001</strong><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>40mm Mk19 GRENADE LAUNCHER &#8211; NEW GD CONTRACT TRANCHE: the US DoD notified the following contract payment on 12 Dec 01:<br><br>‘General Dynamics Armament Systems, Inc., Burlington, Vt., is being awarded $13,743,118.40 as part of a $48,234,275 firm-fixed-price with two option periods contract for 880 MK19 Grenade Machine Guns. Work will be performed in by General Dynamic Armament Systems/Saco Operations, Saco, Maine and is expected to be completed by July 30, 2003. One bid was solicited on Nov. 6, 2000 and one bid was received. The contracting activity is the Tank and Automotive Command, Rock Island, Ill. (DAAE20-01-C-0090).’<br><br>Once all the US requirements for this launcher are completed, and given the new emphasis on the MAG58 rather than the Saco M60 GPMG &#8211; plus the appearance during the past decade of quite a number of foreign rivals to the now rather dated Mk19 &#8211; we assume the Saco GD activity will then be looking hard for new small arms contracts.<br><br>No news yet on where the lightweight Striker grenade launcher fits into all this &#8211; clearly the US forces are still content with the standard Mk19 for general applications, though we imagine the Striker and its programmable ammunition &#8211; though much more expensive &#8211; will continue to attract some interest from special forces.<br><br>HOME-MADE PALESTINIAN FIREARMS: a Reuters photo run by The Asian Age (5 Dec 2001) showed what were described as two ‘masked Palestinian gunmen’ in Nablus both armed with what appeared to be home-made SMGs. One weapon had a cut-down M16 buttstock, the other (a pig-ugly design with a very deep wooden stock, possibly adapted from a match air rifle) a buttstock probably taken from a Galil, together with a rudimentary M16-style carrying-handle.<br><br>Both had rear pistol grips and were fed from stick magazines (probably taken from 9mm Uzis) through the forward grip. The second gun looked quite businesslike, with a conventional wooden SMG stock, though the buttstock appeared to have been attached with duct tape.<br><br>Weapons seen with Middle-Eastern groups, particularly those waved by kids at protest rallies, are sometimes replicas or toys, but cocking handles, mainsprings and ejection slots were clearly visible in both cases, and we have no reason to believe these SMGs were non-functional mock-ups.<br><br>‘Cheap &amp; cheerful’ jury-rigged SMGs would be relatively simple to make, but this is the first pictorial evidence we’ve ever seen that the Palestinians have built any. Even if these home-made designs are not sophisticated enough to guarantee burstfire, single-shot capability is better than nothing.<br><br>During the Eoka campaign in Cyprus, the Greeks made their own 9mm Sten Guns, using lead pipe for barrels. They worked, but burstfire was impractical, since it would have melted the barrels. However, when the chips are down, anything that will fire a bullet is a bonus.<br><br>X-TREME GLOCKALIKES FROM SPRINGFIELD ARMORY: new from Springfield Armory for 2002 is the company’s X-Treme Duty range of striker-fired, polymer-framed pistols, which in appearance resemble a Sigarms P229 slide mounted on a Glock frame, right down to the sub-trigger safety mechanism pioneered by Glock.<br><br>However, in addition there’s an M1911-style grip safety, something we must confess we’ve never much liked. Trigger pull is 5.5 to 7.7 pounds. These weapons are being offered in 9x19mm, .40 S&amp;W and .357 SIG calibres, all with 4” barrels, and will cost $489. You can even order online.<br><br>The forged slides sport cocking grooves front &amp; rear, dual recoil springs are used, frames incorporate an accessory rail on the forward underside, the steel sights are fixed (but dovetailed) and two ‘easyglide’ magazines (10-rounds for private sales, 12-15-rounds for official purchasers) are supplied.<br><br>Magazine release buttons are ambidextrous and there are both loaded chamber and cocking indicators. Weight is around 23 ounces. Fully-adjustable and tritium night sights are on the way.<br><br>Do we assume Glock’s patents &amp; trademarks have now expired? We ask since Glock went ballistic on the legal front some years ago when Smith &amp; Wesson introduced its Sigma series pistols, but since then there have been a number of other Glockalikes, including the Australian Felk and the Steyr polymer-framed pistols which were actually designed by a former Glock engineer.<br><br>Glock has certainly made its mark on pistol thinking in the USA, and they do say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but the cloners always have the advantage, since they can incorporate useful extra features lacking in the original designs. <a href="https://www.springfield-armory.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://www.springfieldarmory.com</a>/<br><br>IDF ORDERS MORE NEGEV LMGs: a JDW short on 5 Dec 2001 said that the Israel Defence Force had ordered 5.56mm Negev LMGs from IMI, to the value of $8 million, to equip all its infantry &amp; armoured units. However, we assume this is actually a follow-on contract, since Israeli sources suggest full-scale deployment of the Negev actually began in 1997. Presumably the order will be welcome news though for IMI’s small arms plant, which was previously under threat of imminent closure.<br><br>WINCHESTER .50 SNIPER ROUND: for years after the .50 Barrett rifle had become commonplace in military circles we used to check once a year to see whether Olin had yet come up with a sniper-grade cartridge in this calibre. Always the answer was the same &#8211; the likely market is probably too small.<br><br>Evidently not anymore. A year or so ago Olin finally announced a specialist .50 cartridge designated LRSA (Long Range Sniper Ammunition), but the new round is still only being offered to military customers at this time. It’s loaded with a special ‘open tip’ 750gr solid brass BT projectile turned on Swiss screw machines. Its central portion rides the bore, while larger diameter sections at the base and shoulder engage the rifling, like driving bands. The deep nose cavity helps shift the C of G towards the rear of the bullet.<br><br>The .50 LRSA is claimed to only a third the price of the Mk211 MP round (made under licence from Raufoss), but has a trajectory closely. matched to the Norwegian cartridge. As we recall, MP costs more than eight dollars a shot.<br><br>Average extreme spread claimed for LRSA at 600 yards from a 36” test barrel is 7.58”, compared to 12.3” for MP. And at 100 yards it’s claimed sub-MOA five-shot groups have been obtained with the LRSA cartridge.</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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>AFGHANISTAN INFANTRY WEAPONS</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/afghanistan-infantry-weapons/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:30:39 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rob Krott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2602</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Rob Krott Editor’s note: Rob has written extensively on Afghan de-mining operations. He made two trips into Afghanistan to observe various demining operations in 1998. During that time also he observed a Taliban lashkar fighting on the Bagram front. There have been a lot of “experts” on television lately, expounding on the Taliban. Most [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Rob Krott</strong><br><br><em>Editor’s note: Rob has written extensively on Afghan de-mining operations. He made two trips into Afghanistan to observe various demining operations in 1998. During that time also he observed a Taliban lashkar fighting on the Bagram front.<br><br>There have been a lot of “experts” on television lately, expounding on the Taliban. Most have never set foot in Afghanistan. Erroneous reports have appeared in such diverse publications as Jane’s Defence Weekly, The Ottawa Citizen, and The Belgrade Daily. Here is SAR’s best guess at what the Taliban and the Northern Alliance have to fight with&#8230;</em><br><br>During a recent Independence Day parade in Kabul, Defense Minister Obaidullah Khan inspected an honor guard led by a goose-stepping soldier and then saluted as ranks of some 600 soldiers in camouflage uniforms paraded by. Some 50 pickup trucks followed, loaded with Taliban fighters wearing civilian clothes and black turbans and carrying rifles and machine guns. At least three Taliban fighters carried U.S.-made Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, and a Scud medium-range missile was shown off on a truck&#8230;<br><br>The Taliban are basically a militia / guerrilla force with limited tactical flexibility. Collective (unit) and individual training is nearly non-existent. Taliban recruits receive basic training on weapons and very little else of military value. Their overall standard of marksmanship is low due to: 1)lack of training; 2)lack of practice ammunition; and 3)an arrogant cultural trait &#8211; they believe they’re great natural marksmen. Training of company size forces is very limited and training and formation of battalion-sized conventional infantry units is believed to be non-existent. However, if U.S. forces become involved in ground combat operations in Afghanistan they should not underestimate the Taliban’s tenaciousness at the small unit level, especially regards purely guerrilla warfare tactics and capabilities. An examination of the Soviet experience fighting the mujahideen is all that is required to prove this point.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="479" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-49.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7916" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-49.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-49-300x205.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><em><strong>Taliban gunners sight in DsHk 12.7mm heavy machine gun.</strong></em></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong>Arms Proliferation</strong><br><br>The Taliban had been unable to purchase arms legally, due to a UN arms embargo (UN Security Council Resolution 1076 of 22 October 1996. But prior to 1991 the country was flooded with military equipment and arms. The Soviet-Afghan War served as a testing ground for a wide array of new weaponry, including the BTR-80, BMP-2, AGS-17 grenade launcher, Vasilek 82mm automatic mortar, 9P140 Uragan multiple rocket launcher, several models of the Mi-24 Hind helicopter gunship, and the Su-25 Frogfoot attack aircraft. During the Soviet involvement/occupation (1986-90) the Soviet Union equipped Afghanistan with $5.7 billion worth of arms while the United States underwrote the Mujahideen to the tune of $5 billion during roughly the same period. Most equipment is of former Soviet origin. When the Soviets pulled out, their records indicated that the Afghan government forces equipment inventory included 1,568 tanks, 828 infantry fighting vehicles, more than 4,880 artillery pieces, 126 combat aircraft and 14 combat helicopters, 12 R-300 (Scud) missile launchers and 10 Luna-M (Frog) missile launchers.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="461" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-47.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7917" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-47.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-47-300x198.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Bunkers were rarely built as fighting positions. DShK 12.7mm heavy machine gun sits out in open behind rock sangar</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Chinese equipment was supplied to the mujahideen during the 1980s as U.S. aid via Pakistan. Russian estimates (1991) of the mujahideen capabilities indicated 200,000 active guerrillas, 97 tanks, 60 BMPs, 100 APCs, over 5,000 anti-aircraft heavy machine guns, 3,500 mortars 2,000 recoilless rifles, and over 11,000 antitank weapons (RPGs). Some of these arms eventually became Taliban property while some were retained by independent groups after the Soviet withdrawal while some stocks were kept by the retreating government army after the Taliban captured Kabul. And some more recent supplies have come from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="461" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-39.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7918" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-39.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-39-300x198.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Recoilless rifles are Taliban unit’s anti-tank weapons</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large is-resized"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-34.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7919" width="580" height="381" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-34.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-34-300x198.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 580px) 100vw, 580px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Another of many recoilless rifle.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p><strong>Small Arms</strong><br><br>The average Taliban fighter is lightly equipped by Western standards. Load bearing equipment is minimal and is usually limited to Chinese type ammunition pouches worn on the chest and the occasional canteen and rucksack. Leather bandoleers are still used by some fighters, especially older Pakhtuns and tribal volunteers from Pakistan where these are widely used. The typical Taliban “uniform” is shalwar kameez and kurta (the traditional long cotton shirt and pajama pants), a black cotton turban, and in colder weather, foreign copies of the U.S. Army M65 pattern field jacket (which Bin Laden himself favored), civilian coats, civilian sweaters, and pukhoor wool blankets. The pakool or puhtee, a flat Chitrali wool cap is rarely if ever worn. Although popular with the mujahideen in the 1980s, it is now identified with the Northern Alliance and was favored by its commander, Shah Ahmad Masood. Helmets are rarely if ever seen, though Northern Alliance troops have paraded wearing helmets. Footgear is most commonly chapati sandals and sometimes tennis shoes. Boots are in short supply. However these are hardy men with, in many cases, years of experience fighting conventional military forces (the Soviets, the DRA Army, and the Northern Alliance) in the harsh terrain and climate of Afghanistan.<br><br>Besides the Kalashnikov assault rifle, which is the standard infantry weapon on both sides, there is no standardization of combat equipment. Taliban small arms include nearly everything in the pre-1990 Soviet armory. Of course the most common weapon is the Kalashnikov. Large stocks of these weapons were left behind by the Soviets and the DRA Army was equipped with them as well. The U.S. supplied Chinese made AKMs (Type 56 rifle) to the mujahideen and the Taliban has received military aid from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia in the form of money and weapons shipments, mostly Chinese made arms. Large quantities of Soviet PPSh-41 submachine guns were dumped on the pro-government militias by the Soviets. Although a distant second choice to the Kalashnikov they can be found all over Afghanistan and could be used by militia forces and guerrillas. Limited numbers of the Soviet AK-74 firing the smaller caliber 5.45x39mm cartridge are found. The AKR or short-barreled AKSU versions of the Kalashnikov are extremely popular (and probably more so now that Bin Laden is always seen with one). The AKS-74U 5.45mm paratrooper carbine is closer to a submachine gun than a rifle. Good for close in work, it’s not the best weapon for the long range fighting found in Afghanistan’s mountains and plains. Although significant numbers of the AK-74, including those mounting the BG-15 40mm grenade launcher, were fielded in Afghanistan by Soviet troops before the withdrawal, ammunition supply is not reliable. Copies of the weapon and its ammunition are produced by Pakistan’s cottage weapons industry although specimens I examined were marked as .222 caliber.<br><br>As many as 60,000 Pakistani volunteers have already served with the Taliban. Pakistanis, especially Pakhtun or Pathan tribesmen from northwest Pakistan with strong links to the largely Pakhtun Taliban, may volunteer in large numbers. They can be easily equipped from their tribal weapons factories in the autonomous Pushtun tribal enclave of the old North West Frontier Province. 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. Authentic Kalashnikovs can be had for as little as $300. Weapons —everything from a British Sten gun chambered for 7.62 x 39mm and fitted with a Kalashnikov magazine to Webley .32 and .38 caliber revolvers to Mauser 98Ks or 8mm Kalashnikovs — can be made to order in the back alley gun shops of Darra Adam Khel and Sakhahot Malakand. Given enough time they can turn out copies of SVDs, PKMs, RPDs, Soviet anti-tank mines, grenades, small mortars, anti-aircraft guns, and heavy machine guns.<br><br><strong>Machineguns and Anti-tank Weapons</strong><br><br>The RPD, RPK, and PKM light and general-purpose machineguns are commonly found in Afghanistan. The DShK 12.7mm and KPV 14.5mm (known in Afghanistan as Dashika and Ziqriat) are in widespread use. Many of these heavier weapons are aging and harsh field use is showing. Barrels are worn on many machineguns. Given a protracted ground campaign without re-supply or replacement, these weapons will eventually succumb to the rigors of Afghan warfare. AGS-17 30mm automatic grenade launcher &#8211; a fearsome weapon for ground combat, although their use would depend upon the availability of spare parts and adequate stocks of ammunition. These weapons, first fielded in Afghanistan, are over ten years old. RPG-7s are prevalent and a favored Taliban weapon supplied from Soviet, Chinese, and Pakistani sources. Volley fire against armored targets or even helicopters can be expected. It is rumored that Bin Laden sent specially trained teams to Mogadishu to assist Aideed’s forces in shooting down American helicopters using this technique.<br><br>More effective for anti-tank use (especially versus Western armor) would be recoilless rifles. I had an opportunity to examine examples of recoilless rifles in use by Taliban troops. The SPG-9 75mm anti-tank gun and the obsolete B-10 (RG82) 82mm anti-tank gun that it replaced are the most common. While these weapons were serviceable, mounts were improvised, sights were damaged, and ammunition supplies were limited. How widespread this situation is can only be guessed at.<br><br><strong>Mortars, Artillery, and Rocket Launchers</strong><br><br>The only mortars I saw were 82mm M-1937 Soviet mortars. Other Soviet and Chinese produced mortars are certainly in the Taliban inventory. I saw a few D-30 122-mm Towed Howitzers with their unique three-trail carriage. A truck (Ural-375 or ZIL-131) or armored tractor is needed to tow it. One of the guns I saw sat in the open, without a transporter, crew or ammunition. This is the most common type of artillery available to the Taliban. Unless the Taliban has recently organizes and safeguarded these weapons, they exist only as solitary weapons pieced out to various commanders. The M-46 130-mm Towed Field Gun may pose a threat as at least two chemical projectiles have been fielded for this weapon. The 130 mm Sarin (nerve gas) projectile weighs 33.4 kg of which 1.6 kg comprises the Sarin CW agent that is dispersed by a TNT bursting charge. The other is a VX projectile weighing 33.4 kg of which 1.4 kg is the VX CW agent. It can’t be confirmed whether the Taliban have access to any of these munitions. The D-20 152-mm Towed Gun-Howitzer fires the following case-type, variable-charge, separate loading ammunition: FRAG-HE, CP, AP-T. Other types of ammunition include chemical, HE/RAP (range of 24000 m), HEAT, illuminating (S-540), smoke (D-540) and tactical nuclear (0.2 kT). The same types of chemical munitions used in the M-46 are available for the D-20.<br><br>Rocket Launchers: the BM-21 122-mm Multiple Rocket Launcher (40-round), the BM-27 9P144 Uragan (Hurricane) 220-mm Multiple Rocket Launcher (16 launching barrels firing range of up to 40 km) and the 9A52 300-mm Smerch Multiple Rocket Launcher are all used by the Taliban. Their disposition is the same as the Taliban artillery.<br><br><strong>Wheeled Vehicles as Gun Mounts</strong><br><br>Quickly impressed by the cross-country performance and versatility of Japanese pickup trucks in the war against the Soviets (nicknamed Ahu — the deer, pickup trucks were widely used in mujahideen operations in Kandahar, Helmand, Farah, and Nimroz provinces), the Taliban favor pickup trucks as an all-purpose vehicle for both combat and combat support roles. Equipped with large numbers of Toyota Hilux pickup trucks purchased in Dubai by Osama bin Laden, the Taliban militia can operate as motorized light infantry (or pickup truck cavalry) armed with machineguns, mortars, recoilless rifles, and light multiple rocket launchers (MRLs). With this mobility the Taliban respond quickly to offensive military action. Equipped with heavy machineguns and handheld RPGs that can be fired on the move, it is the Taliban’s principle troop carrier.<br><br>Taliban and Northern Alliance forces mount single-barrel and multi-barrel rocket launchers (BM-1, BM-12, Saqar-20, and Saqar-30) and DShK and ZGU-1 heavy machine guns on wheeled and tracked vehicles. Both combatants also have enhanced the firepower of light trucks and BMP-1 infantry fighting vehicles by fitting them with 32-shot 57mm rocket pods salvaged from combat helicopters (Mi-24 and Mi-25). Because of their combined mobility and firepower (each of the six blocks of rocket launchers takes 32 rockets and the impact area covers 500 square meters) they have been extremely effective in recent fighting.<br><br><strong>Anti-Aircraft Guns</strong><br><br>Defending Afghanistan on the ground it will be the ZSU 23-4, an anti-aircraft weapon mounting four 23mm cannons and a “Gun Dish” radar for fire control. The radars are probably not operational. The Taliban also have what appear to be ZPU 14-1s anti-aircraft cannon. Using heavy machine guns and ground-to-air missiles the mujahideen inflicted a heavy toll on Soviet helicopter gunships, but mostly in daytime attacks. The Soviets lost over 100 fixed wing aircraft and over 700 helicopters (35% of which were Hinds) from ground fire. Sophisticated U.S. helicopters like the Apache are expected to support any U.S. ground operations. It and the special operations Pave Low, can operate at night with pilots trained to fly with night vision goggles.<br><br><strong>The Northern Alliance and its Military Organization</strong><br><br>The anti-Taliban forces are a loose grouping known as the Northern Alliance. Also known as the United Front, its leaders ruled Afghanistan before the Taliban took control in 1996. The Northern Alliance has been fighting the Taliban since then. The alliance, under ousted President Burhanuddin Rabbani, is a mish-mash of the major political and ethnic groups in Afghanistan. Other groups, some without names and many small and inconsequential, who don’t want to be part of the Northern Alliance also fight against the Taliban.<br><br>The Iranian-Tajik clans in the eastern the provinces of Badakhshan, Takhar, Parvan, Kapisa, and, partly Kabul) and also in Herat and Ghowr provinces to the west are the traditional enemies of the mostly Pashtun Taliban. Tajiks make up about 20 percent of the Afghan population and occupy a similar proportion of territory. Nearly 75% of Northern Alliance troops are Tajik and in great part due to Masood’s long reign of military leadership are the most combat-capable. The Northern Alliance main forces are concentrated in the east of the Afghanistan on two fronts — the Panjshir Valley front and the Takhor front (along the Panj river).<br><br>The Northern Alliance’s military strength has been estimated as high as 50,000, but more realistic assessments (Jane’s World Armies) give the number at 20,000 or less. Like the Taliban, the size of Northern Alliance forces is subject to exaggeration. Troop strength fluctuates with the situation changes. It can’t afford to maintain a large standing force and like the Taliban it recruits additional fighters for large offensive operations.<br><br>The Northern Alliance is not a modern army. It doesn’t have well-organized, well-trained, and well-armed units capable of successfully conducting large-scale offensive operations. Northern Alliance forces are a hodge-podge assortment of armed groups, combining semi-professional leftovers of the old regime, tribal militias, former mujahideen groups, and ethnic-regional forces into a loosely unified opposition. In small groups, its forces are active all over the country and are in firm control of all or portions of six provinces in the northeast, about ten percent of Afghanistan. This territory includes old Soviet airfields that could be used as forward bases by U.S. aircraft or commando units. The Northern Alliance is eager to help the American effort. It already has been receiving military equipment from Russia, via Moscow’s close ally Tajikistan. The U.S. and Russia are arranging to provide the Afghan rebels with more. The apparent hope is that, in concert with U.S. aerial assaults and possible covert and special operations actions, the Northern Alliance might serve as the lever to topple the Taliban regime and make way for the installation of a more moderate and less anti-American government in Kabul.<br><br>Despite extensive combat experience most Northern Alliance leaders lack the skills and experience to command large combined arms (infantry, tank, artillery) units in tactical operations. Most Northern Alliance military leaders gained their war fighting experience during the protracted guerrilla warfare against the Soviet Army. The mujahideen usually operated in small groups of platoon strength (20-50 men) armed with small arms. When the situation required several of these “platoons” were combined in company sized units of 150-200 men or more. Larger mujahideen units were rare.<br><br><strong>Weapons and Equipment</strong><br><br>Before the Taliban took Kabul in 1996, Defense Minister Shah Ahmad Masood transferred a great number of heavy weapons and vehicles to his base in the Panjsher Valley. Many, including a largely inactive “artillery division” reportedly remain in storage because of fuel and ammunition shortages. When asked about Soviet weapons in use by the National Alliance, Zabed Naim, 43, a mujahideen veteran of the war against the Soviets and now a National Alliance troop leader, replied: “They are all past their lifespan. We need modern weapons. We need everything. If the Americans don’t help us we will still fight the Taliban with everything we have &#8230; if we don’t have guns, we will fight them with sticks.” Reports have filtered back from National Alliance that Russian units are equipping their fighters: everything from combat fatigues to BMP armored personnel carriers.<br><br>Russia has expressed its readiness to arm the Northern Alliance. Most weaponry in Afghanistan is already stamped “Made in USSR.” Warfare in Afghanistan’s mountainous terrain requires special tactics and equipment, fire support means, and methods of conducting combat operations. The Russians are already equipping the Northern Alliance: recent videos and photos from northern Afghanistan show Afghan soldiers in Russian camouflage fatigues, new rucksacks, and awkwardly wearing oversized Soviet Army helmets while attempting to march in step.<br><br>Russian Military-technical assistance to the “Northern Alliance” is put at $40-45 million. It’s expected that the Pentagon will pay for the Russian tanks and guns supplied to the Afghans. Besides large stocks of tactical field radios, spare parts, military rations, tools, fuel, combat load bearing equipment, and footwear, the Russian General Staff has decided to deliver the following:<br><br><strong>Small Arms</strong><br><br>Kalashnikov assault rifles (models and calibers unspecified), light and company (general purpose) machineguns, grenade launchers, SVD rifles (Dragunov sniper rifle) and SKS carbines (Simonov Self-loading Carbine). Because of the extreme ranges of many infantry-on-infantry engagements the Dragunov sniper rifle (SVD) and the DShK 12.7mm machine gun (in service since World War II) are still considered the most popular weapons in Afghanistan. Small arms, such as assault rifles, obsolete submachine guns, machine guns, and sniper rifles, can also be supplied in mass amounts as large quantities of un-issued and still serviceable small arms have been stored in arsenals since World War II. This is an opportunity for the Russians to dump old ordnance and gain hard currency from the US in exchange. The Northern Alliance Army lacks ammunition for all weapons so aging surplus Soviet Army stocks can be expended before their “sell by date” is reached. Not mentioned but probably included in the weapons aid will be Shmel rocket-flamethrowers. They proved very effective in Afghanistan in the past and would be of use in the Taliban’s cave redoubts.<br><br><strong>Vehicles and Heavy Weapons</strong><br><br>The Northern Alliance, a conglomeration of poorly equipped light infantry and irregular guerrillas, desperately needs troop transporters (trucks), jeeps , and armored vehicles. Soviet infantry fighting vehicles are adequate for mountainous terrain. T-55 and T-62 tanks, BTR-60 armored personnel carriers (essentially armored taxis for infantry squads), and BMP-1 and BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicles (IFV). Some may be veterans of combat in Afghanistan, 1979-89. The BMP-1 is a fully armored Amphibious Infantry Fighting Vehicle. Its low-silhouetted hull has a sharp, sloping front with a conspicuously ridged surface. It mounts a 73mm smoothbore gun (firing a rocket-assisted, fin-stabilized HEAT projectile) and a 7.62mm coaxial machine-gun. A launching rail for an AT-3 Sagger antitank guided missile attaches above the gun. These vehicles are considered obsolete for front line Russian Army use, but are ideally suited to Afghanistan. The more modern BMP-3 IFVs are equipped with a 100mm launcher-cannon, a 30mm automatic cannon, and three 7.62mm machine guns. These first echelon combat vehicles are in short supply in the Russian Army and will not be sent as aid. However, it’s possible that the new BTR-80 armored personnel carrier, (equipped with the KaMAZ engine) will be given to the Northern Alliance. Minimal training is needed for crews as some Afghan fighters will be familiar with the vehicles. The Northern Alliance is scheduled to receive 50 tanks and 80 IFVs by December 1, 2001.<br><br>Russia will also contribute forty 23mm ZSU-23-4 self-propelled anti-aircraft guns, two batteries of 100mm antitank guns, six batteries of 122mm D-30 howitzers, four batteries of 120mm 2B11 mortars, and three batteries of 82mm 2B9 automatic mortars. The Russians may supply ten 122mm 9K51 Grad multiple rocket launchers, Grad-P portable launchers, and Malyutka and Fagot antitank missile systems as well as six Mi-24 Hind helicopters six Mi-8 transport helicopters. The BM-21 Grad and BM-27 Uragan multiple rocket launchers are serious support weapons. A salvo from one Uragan launcher’s sixteen 220mm barrels covers a 42 hectares at a range of 10-35 km. Company and battalion mortars ( 60mm and 82 mm) will round out the indirect fire support.<br><br><strong>Afghanistan</strong><br><br>Afghanistan’s mountains, desert, and plains are home to nearly 27 million people from more than thirty different ethnic groups. The annual per capita gross domestic product is US$800. Average life expectancy for an Afghan male: 47 years; and for a woman: 45 years. Adult literacy is only 32 percent. There is one telephone for every 925 people. Afghanistan, which is about the size of Texas, has only 1,700 miles of paved road (and speaking from experience most of that is badly potholed and rutted).<br><br>Ultra-religious, unsophisticated, and culturally isolated the Taliban was initially welcomed as a unifying and stabilizing force in Afghanistan but its religion-based cruelty and suppression of basic human rights has made it very unpopular with a significant percentage of the population. Their power base is rooted in the Pahktun or Pushtun people &#8211; a Pashto-speaking tribal group numbering about 10 million in Afghanistan (40% of the population) and another 5 million in Pakistan.<br><br>As everyone now knows Afghanistan’s terrain and weather are impediments to any military action. Geographically and climatically, Afghanistan is very brutal territory. Rugged and isolated, full of mountains and caves where Taliban troops and terrorists may hide, it is an extremely hostile environment. Afghanistan is one of the most densely mined countries in the world and landmines and unexploded ordnance from over twenty years of war will present hazards. The Taliban has extended the network of underground bunkers and caves used by the mujahideen during the Soviet occupation. Impending winter with its freezing temperatures, heavy snow fall, and high winds will impede special operations forces seeking bin Laden and his men in the mountains and passes. There will be virtually no local supplies and the attendant logistical problems will mirror those encountered during Operation Restore Hope (Somalia).<br><br><strong>Recommended Reading:</strong><br><br>The Bear Went Over the Mountain: Soviet Combat Tactics in Afghanistan. Lester W. Grau and David M. Glantz, trans. Washington: NDU Press, 1996. (Also released with minor changes under the same title, London and Portland, Ore.: Frank Cass, 1998.)<br><br>The Other Side of the Mountain: Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War. Jalali, Ali Ahmad, and Lester W. Grau Quantico, Va.: US Marine Corps Combat Development Command, 1998 (SCN: DM-980701). A limited-distribution study provided to university and service school libraries.<br><br>Russia’s War in Afghanistan, David Isby, London: Osprey Publishing, 1986.<br><br>Many of LTC Grau’s and COL Jalali’s (Afghan Army) articles on combat in Afghanistan can be found on the internet at: <a href="http://www.angelfire.com/sd/tajikistanupdate/artorg.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://www.angelfire.com/sd/tajikistanupdate/artorg.html</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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>YUGOSLAV M48: A NEW M98 MAUSER</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/yugoslav-m48-a-new-m98-mauser/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Q. Cutshaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[M48]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mauser M98]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2605</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Charles Q. Cutshaw The classic Mauser M98 defined bolt action military rifles during the first half of the 20th Century, having been adopted by over 40 nations in one form or another, including the United States, which paid Mauser a $200,000 licensing fee to produce the venerable M1903 rifle. The M1903 design was little [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Charles Q. Cutshaw</strong><br><br>The classic Mauser M98 defined bolt action military rifles during the first half of the 20th Century, having been adopted by over 40 nations in one form or another, including the United States, which paid Mauser a $200,000 licensing fee to produce the venerable M1903 rifle. The M1903 design was little more than a M98 with magazine cutoff and a few other minor modifications to suit US Ordnance. The Model 98 originally was adopted by Germany as the G98 and later as the K98k, which was the mainstay of the German Army during World War II. Most M98s were produced in 7.92x57mm caliber, although it was manufactured in other calibers, as well. Not only did many nations adopt the M98 or one of its variants, most of those who did produced their own versions of it, including Serbia/Yugoslavia.<br><br>Variations of Mauser rifles had been produced at the Kragujevac Arsenal since the 1920s, contrary to some advertising press that claims that the M48 rifles were produced on captured or Nazi-provided German machinery. In fact, Mauser 98 variants had been in production at Kragujevac on machinery purchased from FN for many years prior to 1948. These rifles were essentially copies of the Czech/FN Vz24 rifle, short rifle or the Czech Vz 12/33 Carbine. In fact, the M48 that we received more closely resembles these rifles than a German K98k. For example, the handguard of the M48 begins at the receiver ring rather than at the rear sight as is the case with the K98k. There are even more differences, between the M48 and K98k, however.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="371" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-50.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7927" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-50.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-50-300x159.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>M48 receiver ring showing Yugoslav Crest. Note that rear handguard begins at forward edge of receiver ring.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The buyer of an M48 may be misled by advertising to believe that he is purchasing a K98k “clone” that will accept all Mauser 98 components and can be “sporterized” using hardware designed for M98 rifles. This is not the case, as there are significant dimensional differences between the Yugoslav M48 and the German 98 series rifles. The most significant difference is the M48’s receiver, which is approximately 1/4 inch shorter than that of a K98k. The center to center measurement of the floorplate screws of the two rifles differs by some 5/16 inch, making it virtually impossible to install a M48 action into a stock intended for an M98. The M48’s bolt is almost exactly 1/4 inch shorter than the bolt of the 1943 German (Mauser) manufactured K98k we used for comparison. The M48 lacks the K98k’s stock cutout for access to the bent bolt handle, as well. The M48’s bolt handle is flattened on the bottom, which serves the same purpose as the K98k’s stock cutout. M48 sights are also placed and graduated differently than the K98. There are other detail differences as well, but the receiver dimensions are the most significant. We verified these differences by direct comparison and measurement between our M48 and a 1943 production Mauser K98k owned by a friend.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="417" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-48.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7928" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-48.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-48-300x179.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Bottom view of bolt handle showing flattened area that M48 uses instead of stock cutout.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Regardless of the differences between the M48 and the true K98k, the Kragujevac rifles are, in fact, legitimate M98 variants. They simply are not exact K98k replicas. That said, these rifles are well made, if somewhat rough in certain areas, and should stand up to a lifetime of civilian service for the collector of military arms and military shooting enthusiast.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="349" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-40.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7929" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-40.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-40-300x150.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>M48 rear sight.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The rifle we received was new production, not one of the used or reconditioned M48 rifles that are also available at lower prices. Although new and unissued, our rifle had been in storage for approximately 50 years and was literally soaked in cosmoline! The heavy preservative grease had permeated every nook and cranny of the rifle. We had to detail strip the rifle to its least common denominator and put the metal components into a parts bath to get into all the interior crevices. Even then, there was residue that we had to work at with pipe cleaners and small brushes soaked in cleaning solvent. It was a time-consuming and messy job! The stock was likewise permeated with cosmoline and had to be treated, lest the stuff get into our clothes on the range. Needless to say, there was no rust on the rifle.<br><br>Besides being soaked in cosmoline, the M48’s stock apparently had never been sanded. We can only surmise that final finish was to be the responsibility of the soldier to whom the rifle would ultimately be issued. The stock on our rifle was the roughest this writer has ever seen. Although some advertising states that the stocks are made of teak, we question this. Our rifle’s stock was a dark blonde colored wood that did not appear like any teak that we have ever seen, but we have limited knowledge of wood. The stock was so rough that it actually had splinters in several places and the rough spots just aft of the forward band were so deep that we never could completely eliminate them without sanding recesses into the stock. In addition to having the rifle’s serial number stamped into it, the stock also had a penciled-in serial number that we wished to retain, so we did not sand the stock entirely smooth — just enough to remove the splinters and the worst of the rough spots. Interestingly, once we had sanded the stock and rubbed it with linseed oil, we found it to be virtually the same texture as the World War II vintage German stock on the K98k that we used for comparison. The overall result of our efforts on the stock were pleasing to us, giving the old M48 a patina of use despite the fact that it was a “new” rifle.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="284" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-35.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7930" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-35.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-35-300x122.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>M48 middle and forward bands. Note rough edges along retaining clip. These rough areas actually were lengthy splinters prior to sanding.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Other than the Cosmoline and rough stock, our M48 was fairly well finished &#8211; about as can be expected of a military rifle. The bluing was on generally on a par with wartime German K98k’s, although there were a few light spots. The overall fit of parts was good — again as good as other military issue rifle of the era. There were light machining marks on some of the components. All major parts are serially numbered in the European tradition. The M48’s action was not the “butter smooth” that one associates with commercial Mauser 98 rifles and well-worn World War II rifles, but then this rifle had never been fired, except in testing, until we received it. When we compared the action to that of the K98k, there was only a slight difference in “feel,” so we suspect that the action will improve with use, although it isn’t bad, as is. When the bolt is opened and the rifle is vertical with the butt down, the bolt will fall to the fully retracted position under its own weight, although there is some roughness. The M48’s trigger pull is two-stage military, with the first stage seven pounds and the second stage a whopping 9.5 pounds! The trigger pull is so heavy that it made the M48 difficult to shoot with any accuracy. If our rifle was truly representative of all M48s, any owner who wishes to shoot the rifle on a regular basis will have the trigger pull lightened.<br><br>The M48 is shipped with a number of accessories, including bayonet, cleaning kit, front sight guard, muzzle protector, oil/solvent bottle, leather ammunition pouches and sling. The leather sling we received, however, was so oil soaked and stretched that we simply threw it away and ordered a reproduction K98k sling. Otherwise, the accessories were all usable. Like the rifle, the M48’s bayonet was soaked in cosmoline and had to be thoroughly cleaned. The leather ammunition pouches were filthy and moldy, but turned out to be serviceable after having been cleaned and treated with neatsfoot oil.<br><br>Shooting the M48 brought no surprises. The rifle shot 3.5 inch groups at 100 yards at point of aim using surplus Ecuadorian ammunition. We believe that accuracy could be improved by lightening the trigger pull and using commercial ammunition. Although advertised as non-corrosive, the surplus ammunition we used proved to be mildly corrosive, if the rust that appeared in the bore of our M48 about three days after cleaning is any indication. We have been advised that there is no truly non-corrosive military 7.92x57mm ammunition available, so the shooter should be advised to clean his rifle on three consecutive days after shooting military surplus ammunition. All in all, the M48’s accuracy is satisfactory for a military rifle, despite the abysmal trigger pull. As stated, a lighter trigger and better ammunition should improve accuracy, as should continued shooting to break in the new rifle.<br><br>All in all, we consider the M48 Kragujevac Arsenal rifles to be a reasonable buy for the collector and shooter who desires a military Mauser bolt action rifle. Ammunition is plentiful and cheap, although most surplus ammunition is at least mildly corrosive. There are so many of these rifles available that the M48 probably has little potential for increasing in value, however. On the other hand, the rifles are relatively inexpensive and are sturdy and well made, except as noted above. The M48 is a true M98 Mauser variant, but we should reemphasize that it is most definitely NOT a K98k replica as is represented in much advertising. Moreover, as the reader can surmise by our comments, the M48 is most definitely not as well finished as an original German Mauser. In the final analysis, though, we believe that the M48 is an interesting M98 variant that can be fired and enjoyed strictly for what it is &#8211; a solid military rifle that represents one of the last production versions of the legendary Mauser 98.<br><br>Following is a list of sources for M48 Mauser rifles compiled from Shotgun News and several periodicals. We have made every effort to search out as many sources of M48 rifles as possible, but cannot guarantee that the following list represents all sources of M48 Mausers. The potential M48 purchaser should also be aware that while new M48s with accessories and all matching numbers are reasonably priced and probably most desirable, used rifles are available in very good to excellent condition, although most do not have all the accessories of the unissued rifles. Some used M48s are available with all matching numbers. The latter rifles are significantly less expensive than the new ones and may well be an alternative for the shooter who wishes to own an M48, but who does not wish to expend the cash for an unissued rifle.<br><br><strong>Kragujevac Arsenal M48 Rifle Specifications *</strong><br><br>Caliber 7.92x57mm (8mm)<br>Length 43.5 inches<br>Barrel length 23.25 inches<br>Weight 10.0 lbs.<br>Rifling 4 groove, rh twist<br>Feed 5 round magazine<br>Sights Tangent leaf, graduated to 2,000 meters<br><br><em>*Source: Ball, R.W.D., Mauser Military Rifles of the World.</em><br><br><strong>M48 Kragujevac Mauser Sources<br>(New and used)<br><br>AIM (used)</strong><br>PO Box 556<br>Springboro, OH 45066<br>Tel: 513-424-9960<br>Fax: 513-424-9970<br>www.aimsurplus.com<br><br><strong>Classic Arms (used)</strong><br>PO Box 125<br>Indian Trail, NC 28079<br>Tel: &amp;04-238-1222<br>Fax: 704-238-9121<br>www.classicarms.org<br><br><strong>J&amp;G Sales (used)</strong><br>PO Box 10400<br>Prescott Valley, AZ 86304<br>Tel: (928) 445-9650<br>Fax: (928) 445-9658<br>Email: <a href="mailto:jgsales@qwest.net">jgsales@qwest.net</a><br><br><strong>Mitchell’s Mausers (new)</strong><br>PO Box 9295<br>Fountain Valley, CA 92728-9295<br>Tel: 714-899-3660<br>Fax: 714-899-8611<br>www.mitchellsales.com<br><br><strong>SOG International (used)</strong><br>PO Box 590<br>Lebanon, OH 45036<br>Tel: 800-944-4867<br>Fax: 513-932-8928<br>Email: <a href="mailto:soginc@go-concepts.com">soginc@go-concepts.com</a><br><br><strong>Wholesale Guns &amp; Ammo, Inc</strong><br>(New &amp; used)<br>232 Blydenburgh Rd<br>Central Islip, NY 11722<br>Tel: 631-234-7676<br>Fax: 631-234-7408<br>www.gunsnammo.com</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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>WET OPS GUN GEAR</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/wet-ops-gun-gear/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:29:48 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gun Gear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Timothy Kast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WET OPS]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2599</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Timothy Kast The ill effects of the Clinton Administration, residual or otherwise, are beginning to manifest themselves in the most unusual ways. One of these stories begins with Special Operations personnel during the mid-Nineties, where disenchanted and disgusted, SEAL and Special Forces cadre left at an astonishing rate. Tasked with cleaning up clandestine boondoggles [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Timothy Kast</strong><br><br>The ill effects of the Clinton Administration, residual or otherwise, are beginning to manifest themselves in the most unusual ways. One of these stories begins with Special Operations personnel during the mid-Nineties, where disenchanted and disgusted, SEAL and Special Forces cadre left at an astonishing rate. Tasked with cleaning up clandestine boondoggles of a Commander In Chief they virtually loathed, the Teams lost many personnel, many officers. A major factor in this is also the civilian market for these highly motivated personnel. The upshot of this, (there’s an Upside to this?) is that these men joined the civilian workforce with very strong, impressive credentials. As a SOCOM general explained, these former Spec Ops folks will become teachers, private detectives, pilots, instructors and cops. Law enforcement in many cities will be enhanced by the capabilities of these young men who bring their qualifications with them to comprise some of the toughest SWAT shooters in history. Many metropolitan areas bordered by marine environments are realizing the need for SRT operators trained in wet ops. The specialized gear, once the peculiar domain of Special Operations only, is now being required by the Special Response Team members trained originally by our military. They are familiar with this maritime tactical equipment from their training and are able to pass along their experience to conventional law enforcement personnel. There has been a major demand explosion for quality equipment manufacturers who understand that their gear’s performance often relates to a team’s longevity.<br><br>I spoke at length with Steven Bronson from Tactical Watreborne Operations about the dry bags on display at the USIA booth (Undersea Institute of Aqua Technology) during the S.H.O.T. Show this year. He stated that water damaged weapons and ammunition can often compromise a mission. Keeping the gear as dry as possible for as long as possible is becoming a distinct priority. The often overlooked “Murphy” factor inherent in many elaborate operations is reduced to a minimum. USIA waterproof bags are all custom made allowing for a variety of weapons and carry styles. Equipped with a unique oral inflator they can be stuffed with the necessary guns and magazines, then inflated after being zipped closed. Chief Bronson (former Navy man) sent me several bags to examine and test for Small Arms Review, knowing that SAR is becoming the cutting edge journal for military and law enforcement alike.<br><br>The first thing you will notice that sets these bags apart are the zippers. Massive YKK dry suit zippers that seal the opening as they are being zipped shut grace the edges. Looking inside, you can see the painstaking work on the sealed seams over all of the sewn and glued borders. The oral inflators also add to the business-like appearance of these bags, not to mention the ability to float a weapon into the area of operation. The volume of air can be adjusted to the individual mission to either float the bag above or just below the surface. Made of 420-denier junior ballistic urethane-coated pac-cloth they are glued, sewn, and double heat vulcanized. Each bag is made to military specifications, and is finally tested to guarantee air, gas and water tightness.<br><br>Steven included a Sniper Rifle Bag, a large Weapons Bag, a Violin Case Bag (that is suspiciously similar in shape and size to an M60 barrel bag), a Small Weapons Bag and two different styles of gas mask bags. The Sniper Rifle Bag was engineered to accommodate an Eagle or Blackhawk Drag Bag inside to be used in a wet ops role for the tactical sniper. The Large Weapons Bag can handle anything from an M16 to an M60 with relative ease, but the truly innovative case is the Small Weapons Bag, otherwise known as a Shoot Through Bag. This item carries an H&amp;K MP5, a CAR-15, or like-sized weapon. Inside the case is a sewn-in rubber glove intended to grip the sub-gun with. The bag is carried in a wet water op into the area of operation with the operator’s trigger finger on the ‘button’. If the mission’s element of surprise is compromised, the warrior simply shoots his weapon to maintain the integrity of the operation. The resulting hole from the shot can later be patched at a more opportune moment. These are genuinely products for professionals, by professionals.<br><br>The Violin Case bag is another ingenuous item obviously thought up by a firearms enthusiast. Shaped like an oversized M60 barrel bag, its originally intended cargo was probably a Spec Ops spare M60 barrel or two. Just about any Knob Creek veteran knows the wisdom of using M60 barrel bags to house their errant Swedish K or full-sized Uzi. Some of the rain-soaked episodes that I’ve seen at the Knob Creek Range could benefit from an inflatable violin case bag like this.<br><br>The smaller gas mask bags are really an excellent sized case for a length of belted machinegun ammo, pistols or a Mac-10. Many special operations units are noted for using Ingram subguns along with a plethora of law enforcement agencies, so this would be a handy bag for a mission specific piece of equipment. They are, of course, good for carrying gas masks too.<br><br>The second style gas mask bag was a drop-leg pattern bag made famous initially by the British SAS. Available of recent in Desert Tan, it comes replete with a drawstring cover to protect the exterior and the zipper from sand. USIA recommends that you avoid beeswax based zipper lubricants in favor of a good paraffin lubricant. The detrimental effects of sand become clearly obvious once you observe the design of the heavy-duty zippers; the granules would become meshed into the zipper and rubber. However, the size and quality of zippers outweigh any rough usage these bags might be subjected to. They are designed with a velcro secured cover over the zipper as well. All of the hardware, including the oversized nickel-plated D-rings are overbuilt anticipating that these products will receive a steady diet of inclement weather and abuse.<br><br>The revelation among law enforcement agencies that criminals are not restricted to dark alleys and low rent districts, has brought training and equipment into the computer era. These simply keep pace with the law breakers, who have discovered the benefits of high-tech weaponry and gear. Even obscure townships have had to face the fact that modern day outlaws can often be interested in rural areas when it befits the scope of their crime. This demands that law enforcement retains the edge to do the job.<br><br>I did a bit of research and found out that the SEALs were using rubber gear bags as early as 1964 in Vietnam. These bags however, employed a roll-up opening held shut by metal buckles still found on some of the outdoor sports bags available through various outfitters. These bags are usually meant to preserve the materials inside from moisture and spray, not an immersion case like the USAI bags.<br><br>As a basis for my tests, I chose the muddy French Broad River in the mountains of Western North Carolina during the raw, crappy weather days of late March. The French Broad has mud, sand, rocks, broken glass and choppy, quick currents. It is also the subject of frequent inspections and searches due in part to its deceiving, unpredictable nature. As a former handler on the North Carolina Search and Rescue Dog Team, I have assisted in several missing persons searches in conjunction with the local law enforcement agencies. The hard value of a dry gear bag at a riverine environment in mountainous terrain becomes readily apparent for the many involved in a full-scale search and rescue effort. Depending on the type of search and the weather, a variety of water sensitive equipment can be required. Weapons, cameras, and medical supplies are usually very expensive, hence the need for extra precautions in a no compromise, no give situation. Protection seems to be the sure-fire, if you will, treatment to rely on.<br><br>This is the emerging tactical evolution of today’s well-equipped warrior. Sure, many weapons are unaffected by moisture, but I think it is a universal conclusion that it doesn’t do them any good either. When your job is strategic planning, it makes sense to eliminate that possibility from happening in your war planning.<br><br>While I was evaluating these USIA dry bags, I was examining Durability, Mission Requirements, and Construction. Looking at the ‘What If’ factors helps a purchasing agent, or operator to fully comprehend what a piece of gear is being asked to do. A component’s durability is often a lead-in to how that particular part will function under pressure. Categorizing the stress that piece will undergo in operational use complements the actual mission requirements; or what does the mission scenario demand? Finally, the construction of the gear provides the essential information to make your decision.<br><br>These things are built tough. Once inflated with a bit of air their durability becomes enhanced along with their more obvious ability to float. They brushed off brambles, driftwood and a winter’s worth of flotsam scuttling about the eddies at riverside. Most weapons of war are a utilitarian thing of beauty to begin with. Wrap them in dry suit material and a puff of air and their ability to function properly exceeds your expectations. Vehicle beds, concrete, and mud didn’t really phase the urethane much at all. The water aids somewhat, making them more slippery and harder to gaff or puncture. All in all, short of bullet exit holes, durability shouldn’t be that much of a problem. If indeed you have bullet holes in your equipment, your conundrum might not simply end with spoiled gear.<br><br>Everyone’s mission requirements may differ, but some key elements remain the same. You have a difficult, thorny task to complete in what is usually a compact time frame under the worst circumstances and weather. Face it, no one calls SOCOM or ERT for a milk run, right? The aforementioned equipment has to fall out of helicopters, get knocked around in fast attack boats and get dragged back home on the cleated deck of an evac truck. Regardless if you are doing sorties for Uncle Sugar, drug raids in Dade, or Search and Rescue in the Smokies, the gear has to survive along with the people. You should also keep a sharp eye as to the cost of the item inside the bag instead of the price of the bag. Perceived high cost is the biggest reasons Law Enforcement and Fire Departments fail to procure proper gear. As Americans and taxpayers we lose on a grand scale, if we fail to understand the special skills necessary and equip our warriors with the tools to do their jobs. SOCOM’s evaluation report reads, “The USIA Dry-Bags are recommended as the future bags for SOF procurements.” This evaluation of waterproof bags for Special Operations Forces was officially prepared and sponsored by Michael Miller, Army Science Advisor to USSOCOM; Project Officer, Mr. John Stryker, U.S. Army Special Operations Command; Testing Officer, Mr. Terry Adams, Naval Coastal Systems Command.<br><br>I was pleased to observe that USIA has a repair kit prepared as an extra cost accessory should you need one. The emphasis again on paraffin lubricants for the zippers can be added to your Maintenance /Repair Kit should your operation be more on a military level. A complete field repair video is also available to guide you through the process.<br><br>I found the overall construction of these bags to be robust and very capable of handling whatever comes their way. The only snag I had was adjusting to the extra effort required to close the heavy-duty zippers. USIA recommends that you always close the zipper all the way or leave it open all the way. This prevents the dry-suit zippers from taking a ‘set’; reacting to a kink or fold in the bag. It is also a good idea to insist on the Velcro zipper cover being pulled tightly over to protect the zipper from extraneous trash.<br><br>I think anyone wishing to transport sometimes irreplaceable equipment in a wet weather or a maritime environment should look into one of these bags for the job.<br><br>For more information contact Chief Bronson at:<br><br><strong>Tactical Watreborne Operations</strong><br>5386 Kemps River Drive<br>Suite 107-#2<br>Virginia Beach, VA 23464<br>(877) DRY-GEAR<br>www.watreborne.com</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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>SAR SHOW 2001</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/sar-show-2001-2/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff W. Zimba]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SAR Show]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2596</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Jeff W. Zimba The show we had December 8-9, 2001 at the Arizona State Fairgrounds in Phoenix was one of the most exciting experiences I have been through in the Class 3 world. As I write this article I have been back in the office from the show for less than 24 hours and [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Jeff W. Zimba</strong><br><br>The show we had December 8-9, 2001 at the Arizona State Fairgrounds in Phoenix was one of the most exciting experiences I have been through in the Class 3 world. As I write this article I have been back in the office from the show for less than 24 hours and the “high” of such a successful event has still yet to wear off.<br><br>I should start by saying how much fun it was to meet so many of the readers this year. There were subscribers, contributors and advertisers in attendance from all corners of the country, indeed from all over the world. The crowd was huge, the displays and the inventories were bursting at the seams, and the only thing that was in short supply was spare time to see everything.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="451" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-28.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7936" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-28.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-28-300x193.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Several military vehicles were on display courtesy of the Arizona Military Vehicle Owners Club.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>This year’s total gun show was in excess of 1600 tables and there were over 250 tables and booths dedicated solely to Class III firearms and related items. If I had a dollar for every time I heard “I have never been to a show with so many guns like this before”, I could probably add that nice Model 96 Expeditionary Rifle that has been calling my name to the old gun collection with no money of my own. As a matter of fact, there were so many dealers this year that Small Arms Review had to add an extra building to the show that had never been open before! The attendance at the show was reputed to be the largest at any in the Southwest in many years- preliminary numbers were around 15,000 attendees- but we don’t have the final count yet. The most popular questions asked were if we would be back next year to do it again, and would it be possible to do two shows instead of only one there each year. As of this writing we are already in the preliminary planning stages of SAR Show 2002 in Phoenix on December 6-8, but have no intentions of making it a bi-annual event at this time. It is our feeling that we need to keep the December SAR show in Phoenix as an extraordinarily special event that people really look forward to all year. The promoter, Crossroads of the West Gunshows, is considering making their April show in Phoenix into a Cowboy Action and Old West show, but they have not committed at press time. We will be sure to show up for that if they do- there is a large crossover from Class 3 to Cowboy Action- just ask “Poison Pete”. We are considering doing an East Coast show in the Spring or early Summer if we find a show promoter who wants to tie our show to his in a Class 3 friendly state, and we can keep it from conflicting with the other Class 3 shows. We like to be supportive of other shows.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="451" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-51.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7937" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-51.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-51-300x193.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Machine guns, both current and vintage were abundant.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The list of tables and booths at the show looked more like a Who’s Who of the Firearms Industry than the floor-plan of a trade show. Those in attendance included Kent &amp; Kathy Lomont, Ohio Ordnance, Gemtech, Dillon Precision, Gun Parts Corporation, DS Arms, Armalite, Buffer Technology, J&amp;T Distributing, Sherluk, StG Supply, Long Mountain Outfitters, Great Lakes Arsenal, Glock Tactical Stocks, Arms &amp; Ordnance, Fifty Caliber Shooters Association, Surplus International LLC and several others. Outside the Small Arms Review buildings there were military vehicles of all types on display. They were brought by members of the Arizona Military Vehicle Collectors Club, who spent the weekend fielding questions from curious spectators and generally having a good time.<br><br>There was a dedicated booth beside the Small Arms Review display set up as an area for The Usual Suspects to gather and it was packed with people all weekend. Several of our regular contributors were in attendance to sign books and articles and just chat with our readers and each other. Some of those spending time at the booth were Frank Iannamico and Robert Segel.<br><br>The SAR-BQ was even bigger and better than last year. This year we had over 150 in attendance for a huge spread of ribs and boneless chicken breasts with lots of fixin’s and side dishes. The smell of BBQ started wafting through the show buildings about 90 minutes before the feed started so attendees were well aware that 5:00 was getting closer.<br><br>As we did last year, the show hosted a display contest for those in attendance to vote on. The display contest gives individuals a chance to display their collection and educate some attendees at the same time. Winners of the display contest were: 1st Place &#8211; Jeff Miller of JDM, 2nd Place &#8211; Idan Greenberg, and 3rd Place &#8211; Captain Jack McCarl. 1st Place received a check for $200 and a nice plaque, 2nd Place received $100 and a plaque and 3rd Place received $50.00 and a plaque. Congratulations guys!</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="570" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-49.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7938" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-49.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-49-300x244.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>There were several water-cooled machine guns at the show.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Participants and visitors at SAR Show 2001 had the opportunity to see a few new products being introduced on the market. I’ll give you an overview of some of the great stuff I had the chance to handle while there.<br><br>One of the neatest products I had the opportunity to check out was a new magazine loader introduced by Arms &amp; Ordnance Research, Inc. This particular model was for the Ruger® MKII Pistol magazine and it operates nothing short of amazing. The device holds up to 50 rounds of .22lr and loads the magazine far faster than I have ever emptied one. To use it you simply dump the ammo in the reservoir, close the cover and shake the device side to side to correctly align the ammo into the feed chute. Once the ammo is aligned in the chute simply insert the magazine into the loader he same way you would insert it into the pistol, and it is loaded before you have time to see what is going on. This is one impressive magazine loader and I have been informed that some other popular magazine models are “in the works”. Keep your eyes here for an update as they become available. Retail pricing for the MKII Loader is $39.95 plus shipping. Arms &amp; Research, Inc. P.O. Box 441, Warrendale, PA 15086 E-mail: ultimateloader@arms-ordnance.com.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="247" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-41.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7939" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-41.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-41-300x106.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>New Ruger® MKII magazine loader from Arms and Ordnance Research, Inc.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Denny Foutch was there with Glock Tactical Stock, LLC displaying his new carbine kit for Glock pistols. There was a steady flow of people in front of his display handling this new kit. It consists of a tactical shoulder stock which holds two spare magazines, and an Impulse 16.25” barrel. There are no tools required to install this kit and no modifications to the gun. There is also no BATF paperwork required to purchase and install the kit as it meets all length requirements. It is available for the Glock 17 in 9mm and .357 SIG but he is working on other models and calibers as you read this. This carbine kit is extremely comfortable to shoulder and seemed very well balanced. I did not get the opportunity to fire one as there were no range facilities available but I did my fair share of “fondling” and I think it is a real winner. The stock can also be installed with a standard length barrel as long as the pistol is registered as a Short Barreled Rifle first. The stock will also enhance the Glock 18 machine pistol. Pricing for the carbine kit is $399.95 delivered. Glock Tactical Stocks, c/o Denny’s Guns, 2001 Clay Street, North Kansas City, MO 64116. (816)221-9117 ext. 11 E-mail: info@glocksbr.com<br><br>C.J. Weapons Accessories had a few new products that could be of benefit to the AR-15/M-16 owner, and judging by the crowd I think they were in the right place. The first is called the Bore Stay™ and it is a bore guide for cleaning your rifle. It locks into the chamber using the locking lugs that lock the bolt during firing. It will not pull out when you are changing the tip or the brush unless you turn it to unlock it from the lugs. It has a solvent hole at the top for you to add solvent without having to remove the rod and has an O-ring to prevent solvent from leaking into the receiver. Retail pricing for the Bore Stay™ is $24.95. C.J. Weapons other new product is called the Chamber Maid™ and is a flexible rod kit for cleaning the firearms chamber. The kit I tested is also for the AR-15/M-16 however it is being manufactured for several other rifles and shotguns. It consists of a flexible cleaning rod, which is a very heavy-duty coated cable, a rugged T-handle and a bore brush. This kit makes bore cleaning easy and allows you to get to those important locking lugs to keep them clean with ease. The Chamber Maid™ retails for $13.25. C.J. Weapons Accessories, 23196 Lena St., Moreno Vally, CA 92553. (909)653-3098.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="571" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-36.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7940" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-36.jpg 571w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-36-245x300.jpg 245w" sizes="(max-width: 571px) 100vw, 571px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Chamber Maid™ and Bore Stay™ by C.J. Weapons Accessories.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Lauer Custom Weaponry had a nice booth introducing their line of firearm finishes and it was their Camo-Coat™ finish that immediately caught my attention. They had several firearms on display sporting this finish in several colors and styles. This finish and patterning is as nice as any I have ever handled and incorporates an amazing durability. While they have eleven standard camo finishes it was brought to my attention that they also do custom camo finishes and even showed me some examples of their custom work. In one particular example a customer sent them a sampling of the local foliage he wanted to blend with and they duplicated the colors, shading and patterning to an amazing accuracy. It is no joke when I say that the customer should never set his gun down in the field and take his eyes off it for fear of losing it. Lauer offers a wide variety of finishing as well as gunsmithing services and I would encourage you to call them for additional product information as well as pricing. Lauer Custom Weaponry, 3601 129th Street, Chippewa Falls, WI 54729. (800)830-6677. Website: www.lauerweaponry.com.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="370" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-23.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7941" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-23.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-23-300x159.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Lauer Custom Weaponry had their Camo-Coat™ finish on display.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>David Fisher of Fisher Enterprises, a local Title II Manufacturer based in Tempe was there displaying a few of his new integral M-16 suppressor designs. He had examples in both .223 and 9mm. He was preparing to test for sound reduction in the coming weeks and we will make sure to get a little more in-depth with his newest designs at a later date. Workmanship seemed very nice and the aesthetics were great. Fisher Enterprises, P.O. Box 7486, Tempe AZ 85281-7486. (602)615-7777</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="635" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-15.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7943" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-15.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-15-300x272.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>New Integral suppressor designs by David Fisher.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Theresa at J&amp;T Distributing introduced me to the newest addition in their line of AR-15/M-16 upper receivers. They are so new, that they have not even been named yet. They are ultra lightweight with fluted barrels and are manufactured to both pre-ban and post-ban specifications. They are 11.2oz lighter than the standard heavy barreled uppers. J&amp;T Distributing, Box 430, Winchester, KY 40391. (859)-745-1757. Website: www.jtdistributing.com.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="385" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-21.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7942" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-21.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-21-300x165.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /></figure>



<p>Scott at Buffer Technologies had a new soft-side ammo pouch being custom manufactured for him by Eagle. They are currently manufacturing it for the military but have never made them for the civilian market. The pouch is well padded and has a hard insert with a divider made to hold two 100 round belts of 7.62&#215;51 NATO ammunition. They appear to have the ability to attach to web gear and allow the operator to feed the belts directly to the gun. At press time Scott was not sure of the retail price. Buffer Technologies, P.O. Box 104903, Jefferson City, MO 65110. (573)634-8529. Website: www.buffertech.com</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="457" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/009-10.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7944" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/009-10.jpg 457w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/009-10-196x300.jpg 196w" sizes="(max-width: 457px) 100vw, 457px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Buffer Technologies new soft-side feed box.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>If you were not at the show this year, I am sorry you missed it. We will let everyone know as soon as we solidify the dates for next year so you won’t have to miss it again. There is nothing like good company, great guns and some hot BBQ to help you prepare for the holidays and have fresh in your mind as you prepare to ring in the new year. Do yourself a favor and make plans to attend SAR Show 2002. I am looking foreword to seeing you there! We will be running another story on our show later this year, covering some of the more amazing machine guns that were displayed there.</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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>THE THOMPSON SUBMACHINE GUN ID GUIDE, PART V: THE AUTO-ORDNANCE, BRIDGEPORT U.S. 1928A1 THOMPSON SUBMACHINE GUN</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/the-thompson-submachine-gun-id-guide-part-v-the-auto-ordnance-bridgeport-u-s-1928a1-thompson-submachine-gun/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ID Guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1928A1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Auto-Ordnance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bridgeport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frank Iannamico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thompson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tommy Gun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2593</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Frank Iannamico During WWII there was an overwhelming demand for the Thompson Submachine Gun, to supply both U.S. and Allied armies. In 1939, Savage Arms was contracted by Auto-Ordnance to manufacture the weapon. Due to the complex construction of the Thompson, Savage had a difficult time keeping up with the ever-increasing demand. As a [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Frank Iannamico</strong><br><br>During WWII there was an overwhelming demand for the Thompson Submachine Gun, to supply both U.S. and Allied armies. In 1939, Savage Arms was contracted by Auto-Ordnance to manufacture the weapon. Due to the complex construction of the Thompson, Savage had a difficult time keeping up with the ever-increasing demand. As a result, the Auto-Ordnance Corporation opened their own factory in 1941 to help fill the Ordnance Department’s requirements for the weapon.<br><br>The 1928A1 Thompson Submachine Guns being produced at Auto-Ordnance’s Bridgeport plant were identical mechanically and in appearance to those being made by Savage in Utica, New York. The letters AO preceding the weapon’s serial number on the left side of the M1928A1 model’s receiver will easily identify an M1928A1 Thompson that was produced in the Auto-Ordnance’s Bridgeport, Connecticut plant. A similar AO prefix serial number was applied to the rear of the trigger frame.<br><br>The early manufacture Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport guns, like their Savage counterparts, were fitted with the finned barrel and the adjustable Lyman rear sight. There were many Savage and other subcontractor manufactured parts used to assemble the guns produced at the Auto-Ordnance plant. The parts that were manufactured in house by Auto-Ordnance were stamped with the letters AO or AOC.<br><br>As production continued the Auto-Ordnance Thompsons, like the Savage manufactured guns, also began to be fitted with the simple stamped fixed “L” style aperture rear sight. On the Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport produced Thompsons the “L” style rear sight began to appear on guns at approximately the 80,000 serial number range. However, there was no defining line where the use of the Lyman adjustable sight was discontinued, as they continued to appear sporadically throughout the entire range of serial numbers.<br><br>In early production the finned barrel was still fitted on the Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport guns, but was eventually replaced by the easier to manufacture, smooth barrel that began to appear at the 85,000 serial number range. As with the rear sights there was no defining line on the type of barrel that was installed on any particular serial number range on Auto-Ordnance Thompsons. Even after the smooth barrels began to be fitted, the finned style barrels continued to sporadically appear through the entire serial number range until the end of production.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="179" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-29.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7948" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-29.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/001-29-300x77.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>This “L” drum equipped 1928 is an AO manufactured weapon is fitted with a vertical foregrip, Lyman rear sight and finned barrel. The wood on this gun has PD markings. (Courtesy David Tengdin, photo by Tim Fahs)</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Note; while the “L” sight and smooth barrel began to appear on mid-range serial number Savage 1928’s they appeared on lower numbered Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport guns. The reason is that the Savage factory began manufacturing the guns approximately eighteen months before Auto-Ordnance. Thus, a low numbered Auto-Ordnance 1928 model was manufactured at the same time period a mid-range number Savage gun.<br><br>The Cutts compensator was retained on all military A-O 1928A1 models throughout production. Most of the Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport Thompsons were fitted with the late (4th) style compensator that has the Thompson bullet logo on the left side, and the Auto-Ordnance name roll marked across the top of the leading edge. All M1928A1 model Thompsons made at the Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport plant were originally fitted with the horizontal style foregrips.<br><br>The Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport plant was under the jurisdiction of the Springfield Ordnance District in 1941. Thompson Guns were inspected and proofed by on site Springfield ordnance inspectors. The initials of the chief executive officer of the respective Ordnance Districts, who were designated as Army Inspectors of Ordnance or AIOs, were stamped on the guns indicating that they accepted the weapons on behalf of the United States Government. Springfield District Chief executive officers during WWII Thompson production were; Waldemar Broberg and Lt. Colonel Guy H. Drewery. Subordinate ordnance officers managed the inspection process, and all of the guns were actually inspected and stamped by personnel working under their respective chief inspectors. The purpose of the government inspection was to insure that the material being manufactured was the type, quality and quantity specified in the government agreement with the provider. Great emphasis was placed on government contractors to perform their own quality inspections at their factories to avoid having material rejected by the government inspectors. This was done to avoid delays in badly needed materials and to avoid the expense of rejected goods. The quality fit and finish of the Auto-Ordnance produced guns was identical to those of Savage manufacture. Interchangeability of parts was 100% as per Ordnance Department directives.<br><br>Model of M1928A1 parts manufactured by Auto-Ordnance’s factories or subcontractors and marked AOC were; Receivers, trigger frames, Blish locks, bolts, actuators, barrels, grip mounts, butt plates, sears, sear levers, trip levers, disconnectors, safety levers and pivot plates.<br><br>Although the Remington Arms Company was subcontracted to manufacture many Thompson parts for Auto-Ordnance, in January of 1942, Auto-Ordnance acquired the machinery from Remington and moved it into their Bridgeport plant and began manufacturing the parts themselves. These parts included the actuator, bolt, extractor, ejector and disconnector.<br><br>An interesting variation of the Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport produced M1928A1 Thompson that has been observed, are those Thompsons that have had the U.S. designation ground off and the A1 mark overstamped to read AC. Many of the guns documented had been refurbished, and fitted with the smooth barrels and the “L” style fixed rear sight. Many, but certainly not all, of these guns so altered were in the 150,000 to 152,000 serial number range. A letter X was added as a suffix on the serial numbers of many of these guns. A few other examples of these “1928AC” Thompsons documented were fitted with the finned barrel and Lyman adjustable rear sight. A small number of these Thompsons had their original military horizontal foregrip replaced with the early style vertical foregrip. It is believed that these were guns that had been purchased from the government by the Auto-Ordnance Corporation and refurbished in order to be sold to law enforcement agencies after they were surplused. The Numrich Arms Corporation also removed U.S. markings from 1928 and 1928A1 model Thompsons they sold in the 1950’s.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="538" height="700" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-50.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7951" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-50.jpg 538w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-50-231x300.jpg 231w" sizes="(max-width: 538px) 100vw, 538px" /><figcaption><strong><em>A July 1942 Auto-Ordnance Corporation magazine advertisement featuring the “Indispensable” Thompson Submachine Gun.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Interestingly, some of the AO “1928AC” overstamped Thompsons did not have Army Inspector of Ordnance (AIO) acceptance stamps on them, but were stamped with the Ordnance “wheel” acceptance mark. While other examples of these guns had no government inspector or acceptance stamps at all, suggesting that they were never inspected or accepted by the U.S. Government. Perhaps these guns were contract overruns or assembled from parts that remained after the government contracts were filled. However, no documentation could be located that could prove or disprove this theory.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="386" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-52.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7950" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-52.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-52-300x165.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Receiver markings on a US 1928 A1 Thompson that was manufactured at Auto-Ordnance’s Bridgeport plant. Note the AO prefix preceding the weapon’s serial number. (Photo courtesy of Tracie Hill)</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>A Treasury Department IRS Form dated June 30, 1944 reveals that two Auto-Ordnance manufacture U.S. 1928A1 Thompsons with an X suffix added to the serial numbers were sold to a Massachusetts police department that year. The U.S. was ground off and the letter C over stamped on the 1 on both of the guns. Please note that the war didn’t end until the 15th of August 1945. All of the 1928 “AC” guns documented were originally manufactured by the Auto-Ordnance Corporation’s Bridgeport factory, and in almost every case had an AO prefixed serial numbered frame, although most of the frame/receiver numbers were mis-matched. The serial numbers located on the frames of these weapons also had the letter X added to them.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large is-resized"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-37.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7952" width="580" height="270" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-37.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-37-300x140.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 580px) 100vw, 580px" /><figcaption><strong><em>A 1928 “AC” This variation of the A-O manufactured Thompson have had their U.S. markings removed and the A1 overstamped to read AC. Note the checkered actuator and “paddle” style control levers.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Although most of the Bridgeport manufactured Thompsons documented had the very common mismatched receiver and frame numbers, I found it interesting that in almost every case of an Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport mismatched gun, the frames were also of Auto-Ordnance manufacture. Even though the Savage frames are completely interchangeable, few Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport guns were observed with Savage trigger frames. The only two serialized parts on wartime Thompsons were the receiver and the trigger frame. The only reason for this was that when the Thompsons were manufactured the lower frames and receivers were hand fitted to each other to insure a close fit between the two parts. It was purely for cosmetic purposes, and had no bearing on the reliability or functioning of the weapon.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="327" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-42.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7953" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-42.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-42-300x140.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>All 1928A1 Thompsons manufactured at the Bridgeport, Connecticut factory were fitted with the 4th style compensator. This compensator had the Thompson “bullet” logo on the left side, and the Auto-Ordnance name roll marked on the top leading edge of the device.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>As per standard Ordnance Department procedures when there was more than one contractor manufacturing the same weapon, there were separate blocks of serial numbers assigned to each contractor. This was done so that no two weapons would be produced with the same serial number. However, during the military run there were some numbers duplicated, and a few more that were only one or two numbers different, the only difference being the letter S or AO preceding the serial number. Even though there were serial numbers that were close or duplicated on Savage and Auto-Ordnance guns, the dates that those Thompsons had actually been manufactured were quite different. By the time Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport had produced their very first M1928A1 gun, Savage had shipped well over 200,000 1928 and M1928A1 model Thompsons.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="480" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-24.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7954" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-24.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/006-24-300x206.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Another example of an Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport 1928 “AC”. This particular gun is equipped with a smooth actuator and “stick” type control levers. </em></strong><br><strong><em>(Courtesy David Tengdin, photo by Tim Fahs)</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Other major variations of the Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport manufactured gun were the same as the Savage models.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="413" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-22.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7955" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-22.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/007-22-300x177.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Note the FULL AUTO markings on this trigger frame are on one line, indicating that it was manufactured by Auto-Ordnance. Thompsons manufactured by Savage had the their FULL AUTO markings on two lines. (Courtesy David Tengdin, photo by Tim Fahs)</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="463" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-16.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7956" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-16.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/008-16-300x198.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The WB on this receiver signifies that this weapon was accepted on behalf of the US Government by Waldemar Broberg. Colonel Broberg was the Army Inspector of Ordnance (AIO) for the Springfield Ordnance District, where the A-O factory was located. Also visible is the Ordnance “Flaming Bomb” mark that indicates that the weapon has met all of the Ordnance Department’s specifications.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Finned barrel, Lyman adjustable rear sight.<br>Finned barrel, “L” style rear aperture sight.<br>Smooth barrel, “L” type rear sight.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="301" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/009-11.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7957" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/009-11.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/009-11-300x129.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>A smooth “unfinned” barrel. This style barrel appeared on many late production Thompsons of both Savage and Auto-Ordnance manufacture. The machining of the barrel radial cooling fins was considered too labor intensive and was eliminated. The compensator was retained throughout the 1928A1 production.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The Auto-Ordnance Corporation manufactured several experimental prototypes of the Thompson in an attempt to get more life out of the original design. There were 1928 model variations chambered for the U.S. 30’06 caliber, as well as a few prototypes made chambered for .30 carbine cartridge. The rifle cartridges proved to be too powerful for the Thompson’s Blish lock delayed blow-back system.<br><br>On 25 April 1942, the M1928A1 Thompson was reclassified as “Limited Standard”. The M1928A1 weapons were to be replaced in service by the new M1 version of the Thompson and the M3 submachine gun that was under development by the Ordnance Department and the Guide Lamp Division of General Motors. Due to unforeseen problems the M1928A1 model continued to be manufactured until the autumn of 1942.<br><br>Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport manufactured their last U.S. M1928A1 model on 15 October 1942. Thereafter they concentrated on producing the M1 and M1A1 model. Government documents show that the Bridgeport factory manufactured a total of 323,900 M1928A1 Thompsons. The grand total of 1928 and M1928A1 Thompson Submachine Guns manufactured during WWII, by both Savage and the Auto-Ordnance facilities was an estimated 1,070,832 from 1940 to the fall of 1942 when the M1928A1 model was superseded by the M1 version.<br><br>The official end of the M1928A1 model came at an Ordnance Committee meeting held on 16 March 1944 item 23248; Memorandum for the Standards and Specification Section, Conservation Branch, Production Division, Army Service Forces. It was noted for the record that; “U.S. Army specification 52-3-30 of Gun, Submachine, Thompson, Caliber .45 M1928A1 be canceled in accordance with paragraph 30, AR 850-25”. The request was approved. </p>



<p>This article was condensed from relative information in the book <em>AMERICAN THUNDER</em>: <em>The Military Thompson Submachine Gun</em>, available from Moose Lake Publishing LLC. 207-683-2959</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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>SMALL ARMS OF THE MEXICAN MILITARY POLICE CORPS</title>
		<link>https://smallarmsreview.com/small-arms-of-the-mexican-military-police-corps/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAR Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:27:05 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search by Issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6 (Mar 2002)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volume 5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2002]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Julio A. Montes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5N6]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dev.smallarmsreview.com/?p=2590</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[By Julio A. Montes The idea of using military units for internal security and law enforcement operations is not a new one. It is natural to assume that military forces are multi-purpose agencies that can easily adapt from combat, to peace keeping, to law enforcement, and to other tasks. As flawed as this idea may [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>By <strong>Julio A. Montes</strong><br><br>The idea of using military units for internal security and law enforcement operations is not a new one. It is natural to assume that military forces are multi-purpose agencies that can easily adapt from combat, to peace keeping, to law enforcement, and to other tasks. As flawed as this idea may be, it is true that specialized military units could be adapted to certain civilian tasks; it is also true that the military is trained to respond and manage emergencies. This is particularly certain in times of crisis in order to provide a quick response in support of civilian authorities. The Mexican officials have struggled for years to establish a reliable police agency or unit able to combat the drug traffic. Under the leadership of President Vicente Fox, a new 117 element unit (Special Organized Crime Unit) has been established by the end of 2001. This unit is under the command of Jose Santiago Vasconcelos. The unit appears to have the blessings and confidence of the DEA, and has performed well-so far.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="453" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-53.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7961" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-53.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/002-53-300x194.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The Mexican Military Police also use the M2HB machine gun. Photo: Julio Montes</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Nevertheless, the Mexican government still depends heavily on military assistance. The Army’s main tasks with internal security and assistance to the civilian authority are in case of crises. The Mexican Army has determined that a soldier has the basic discipline required to build a better police officer. The Mexican Army High Command considered it was appropriate to develop the Cuerpo de Policia Militar (Military Police Corps) as a specialized unit of the Armed Forces. Therefore, the Corps is now listed as one of the elite outfits of the Mexican Armed Forces.<br><br>In June 1998, the Mexican Army established the Military Police Corps. This new body was going to be used to spearhead the fight against drug trafficking, and tasked with special operations in support of local authorities in internal security tasks. The legal bases for this elite outfit are established under Title 1, Article 1, General Missions, II &amp; III paragraphs of the Army and Air Force Organic Law. This article assigns the Army and Air Force with internal security and assistance to the general population tasks and duties. The Corps comprises the 1st, 2nd and 3rd MP Brigades, and a Special Forces Airborne Group (Grupo Aeromovil de Fuerzas Especiales).</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="437" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-51.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7962" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-51.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/003-51-300x187.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>The Mexican Army uses the 40mm Mk-19 MGL. Photo: Julio Montes</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The Corps is tasked with establishing doctrine and exerts technical, training and operational control of all three MP brigades, the Military Police Service School, the 1st and 2nd MP Battalions of the Presidential Guard, and the many MP platoons assigned to Regional (12) and Zone (44) headquarters. This jurisdiction also extends to the MP platoons assigned to the Central and South Task Forces, and sections attached to other dependencies, bases, and those MP units in charge of security of the Mexican Air Force installations.<br><br><strong>Weapons of the Military Police Battalion</strong><br><br>Each Mexican Military Police Battalion comprises a Command Secretariat (Administrative Group), a HQ Group, a HHC Company, and five Military Police Companies.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="453" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-43.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7963" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-43.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/004-43-300x194.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>Mexican Hummers used by the MPs for patrol and security. Photo: Julio Montes.</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>The uniform is the General Purpose Army Modelo-1990. This is a copy of the US BDU made of a 50/50 % cotton/polyester drill in olive green color. In fact, the uniform is a modular one. For urban and high visibility duties, the uniform is worn with colorful and florescence insignia and cords &amp; lazes. For field and combat duties, the helmet receives a cloth cover, and all colorful insignias are removed. The US M85 kevlar helmet is standard along with modified ALICE equipment. A new ALICE system of local manufacturing is also being introduced, and body armor is in the process of being general issue.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="700" height="467" src="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-38.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-7964" srcset="https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-38.jpg 700w, https://smallarmsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/005-38-300x200.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /><figcaption><strong><em>RTO and Officer from Mexican MP Corp. Photo: Julio Montes</em></strong></figcaption></figure>



<p>Until recently, MP Special Forces operators wore an US-BDU copy in “Duck Hunter” camouflaged pattern, matched to a light-green beret. This dress has been exchanged for the now standard US BDU in “Woodland” camouflage pattern, and USFF style Green Beret.<br><br>The Mexican Military Factories General Direction is in charge of the production of small arms and ammunition for both the Armed Forces and Security Forces. The Military Factory General Direction has 17 plants, one lab, and one training establishment. Within the first 6 months of 2001, these facilities produced 11,599 weapons, 34.227 million rounds of ammunition, and 335,454 grenades. By comparison, during all of year 2000, the installations produced 11,833 weapons, 28.567 million rounds of ammunitions, and 461,818 grenades. In 1999, Mexico produced 9,356 weapons. Within the last 6 months, the factories have repaired 16,000 weapons. The same number were repaired last year. The factories produce HK P7-M13S pistols, HK MP5 SMGs, HK G3s, and HK-21 MGs. It is also reported that Mexico produces 60mm and 101.6mm mortars. The ammunition produced includes 9mm, 45 acp, 38 Special, 5.56x45mm, 7.62x51mm, 12.7x99mm, and 20x102mm as well as 60mm and 101.6mm mortar grenades.<br><br>It is not surprising that the Military Police Corps is basically equipped with weapons produced locally. Most officers carry the HKP7- M13 produced in Mexico, and some operatives carry the excellent HK-P7 SPS in 9mm imported from Germany.<br><br>Mexican factories have been producing HK products since 1981. Therefore, most MP troops are equipped with the locally made G-3 rifle with retractile stock. For support, the MPs count on HK-21 machine guns. Officers prefer the MP-5 SMG, and more recently, the M4 Carbine and M9 pistol. The short M16 (M4 Carbine) has been popular in the hands of the local police.<br><br>It was not until 1998, with the first units attending Special Forces training in the U.S., that the M4 gained popularity among Army officers. The Mexican Army has relied on the HK system for its troops, so it would have been logical to adopt the HK-33 and the HK-53 models for use in the 5.56mm category. This would have simplified training and with a very reliable set of weapons. The Mexicans are familiar with the HK-33 and HK-53 models since they are common in the hands of the Federal Police. Nevertheless, more and more Army officers are now equipped with the MP5 SMG in 9mm and M4 Carbine in 5.56mm.<br><br><strong>Armor in Internal Security</strong><br><br>Some MP units have been equipped with the DNC-2 (Mexican BDX APC) armored transport. It is known that Mexico acquired almost the entire Belgian production of the BDX APC. The Timoney APC was designed in Ireland, and was built under license as the BDX by Beherman Demoen Engineering in Belgium. The 1977 Belgian order called for 43 vehicles for the Belgian Air Force, and 80 vehicles for the Belgian Gendarmerie. The Gendarmerie models included 18 examples with 81mm mortars. Those BDXs observed in Mexican service are equipped with a single machine gun ring, or a one-man turret; there is also the 81mm self-propelled mortar model. Those BDXs in the hands of the police are the Gendarmerie transport variant. The BDX is made of all-welded steel, and its armor thickness varies from 9.5 to 12.7mm. It can be equipped with a dozer blade to be used to remove obstacles.<br><br>The BDX is ideal for internal security operations, and has space for 12 men. It has been reported that these vehicles were overhauled in Belgium before delivery. Although the BDX can be equipped with the GM Detroit Diesel 4V-53T engine (180hp at 2800 rpm), those in Mexican service retain the Chrysler V-8, water-cooled, petrol engine (180 bhp/4000 rpm).<br><br>The Mexicans have not had second thoughts in using armored vehicles to quell civil disturbances. In 1957, units of the 12th Motorized Cavalry Regiment from Puebla, were dispatched to San Luis Potosi. The tanks were used to fire upon civilians and to bring order for the restoration of the official candidate for governor. The PRI representative had lost to the opposition candidate (Dr. Navas).<br><br>For many years, the Mexican armored units depended on obsolete M3 light tanks. These units had been acquired in the early 1940s to replace the elderly and inadequate CTVL and CTMS-1TBA Marnom-Herrington light tanks then in use. In 1972, the Stuarts were used again to quell civil disturbances at Puebla de los Angeles. On August 28, 1968, the twelve MAC-1s (denominated Car Mex-1 in Mexico) of the 1st Armored Reconnaissance Squadron of the Presidential Guard were unleashed from the National Palace against university students protesting in the Main National Plaza (El Zocalo).<br><br>The Military Police were later equipped with the MOWAG Roland APCs for internal security. The Rolands carried only a MAG-58 light machine gun. More recently, the Rolands have been transferred to regular Army units, and replaced with VERE units. Between 1989 and 1994, the Army Vehicle Repair Workshop assembled 3.347 GM Hummers. The Mexican Hummer VEREs (or Vehiculo de Reconocimiento y Enlace &#8211; Reconnaissance &amp; liaison vehicle), have been equipped with either an HK-21 or a MK-19 MGL.<br><br><strong>F.R.A.C.D.</strong><br><br>The National Defense Secretariat (Secretaria de Defensa y Nacional &#8211; Sedena) has established the Airborne Reaction Force for Disasters (Fuerza de Reaccion Aeromovil para Casos de Desastre &#8211; F.R.A.C.D.). These task forces comprise an air group and a land group. The air unit counts on one heavy lift team with a Mi-26 helicopter, and three immediate support teams, each equipped with one MD-530F and two MI-8 or MI-17 helicopters.<br><br>The FRACD counts on Military Police sections, which are deployed to disaster areas in support of local authorities and law enforcement agencies. FRACD teams have also been deployed to Central America in support of local authorities during the various disasters in Honduras and Nicaragua (Hurricane Mitch, 1998) and El Salvador (earthquake, Jan &amp; Feb 2001).<br><br>During Hurricane Mitch (3 to 21 November 1998), the Mexican Army deployed 812 soldiers to Nicaragua, Honduras and El Salvador. Included during these operations in Central America was a 12 rescue dog unit. The Mexican armed forces dispatched 2 Boeing 727, 4 C-130, at least 2 AN-32 (Armada) and a small flotilla of helicopters (eight MI-8/MI-17, four MD-530F, and four UH-60). These assets delivered 17,097,750 tons of assistance.<br><br>A Mexican plane was the first to land with international aid in El Salvador during the crisis in November 1998, and a Mexican plane was the first one again to land in El Salvador with international aid during the 2001 earthquakes (January 13, and February 13).<br><br><strong>Intense Preparation</strong><br><br>The use of military forces for civilian tasks in general, and law enforcement in particular, is a common occurrence outside the United States. The Mexican Army has developed its Military Corps with the task and capacity of reinforcing the Federal and State police when the need arises. By Latin American standards, the Mexican Military Police Corps appears to be well trained and equipped for the mission entrusted to it.<br><br>A soldier is trained in the handling of firearms, and discipline of fire. It is an error, however, to think that this is sufficient to transform a recruit into an effective police officer. It is also an error to believe that a police officer does not need the training in the handling of firearms and discipline of fire. It is actually imperative for the police officer to master these basic requirements since he/she must make use of firearms under strict legal guidelines-at least in theory. In essence, a former soldier COULD be a good starting point to build a good police officer.<br><br>There are considerable and important differences between a soldier and a law enforcement agent. The most classic difference between one and the other is that a police officer is limited to the “reasonable” use of force when apprehending someone. The soldier does not have that limitation when performing his normal military duties in wartime. Of course, a soldier’s behavior is restricted and subject to civilian authority during peacetime.<br><br>It is required that a Military Policeman be educated and restricted by Codes and Regulations. The Mexican Army tries to weld the differences between soldiers and policeman with an intense training program. The MP Company of the Superior War School was established on April 16, 1992, followed with the foundation of the MP Service School on December 16, 1998. After passing a battery of entrance exams, the MP candidates attend 1st Level training (10 weeks) at the 1st Military Regional HQ, at Temamatla. Upon successful completion of this 1st Level, the candidates go to the 2nd Level Training, MP Basic Course, for 5 weeks.<br><br>The Military Police Service School also provides the Basic MP Course for officers and NCOs (2 weeks), the Deactivation of Explosives Basic Course, the Second Sergeants Development Course (3 months), Canine Handlers Course (2 months), the Canine Trainers Course (6 months) and the Instructors Course. Additional training is accomplished through refresher and specialized training of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th Levels.<br><br>The MP Service School Commandant is a full Colonel (Director), with a second in command being a Lt. Colonel (Subdirector). The Candidates’ Corps is under the responsibility of a Major or a Captain. There are Academic, Pedagogic, and Administrative sections.<br><br>The Canine Production Center is also part of the MP Service School. This unique outfit is in charge of “producing” dogs for training in the various specialties required by the MPs.<br><br><strong>Missions &amp; Tasks</strong><br><br>According to the National Defense Secretariat (Sedena), the missions and tasks assigned to the Mexican Military Police can be summarized in seven points:<br><br>1. To keep order, discipline, and the enforcement of the Law, Regulations, Orders, and Dispositions in military installations and military units.<br><br>2. To provide security and protection of HQ centers, Military Installations and Military Dependencies.<br><br>3. Transit organization and direction.<br><br>4. Take custody, provide evacuation and exert control of POWs, and military personnel under detention.<br><br>5. Cooperation with special investigative tasks, and prevention and investigation of suspected spies and saboteurs.<br><br>6. Enforcement of physical security measures of individuals, information and property.<br><br>7. Protection of individuals, public property, and prevention and deployment for riot control in emergency cases, and/or in support of the Judicial Military Police.<br><br>The specific mission entrusted to the Military Police Corps is to plan, direct, and coordinate the operational and administration of subordinate units. The mission of the MP Brigade is to carry on specific tasks as ordered or established by the Mexican Army High Command. The same mission statement applies to the battalion. And at all three levels, the mission must be done under the motto: PRECAUCION, DESCONFIANZA Y REACCION (Precaution, distrust and reaction).<br><br><strong>Military Police Corps: Line Units<br><br>Grupo Aeromovil de Fuerzas Especiales &#8211; Military Police Corps</strong><br><br>1st Military Police Brigade, Temamatla<br>General HQ Group<br>HHC company<br>1st MP BN<br>2nd MP BN<br>3rd MP BN<br><br>2nd Military Police Brigade, Military Camp No.37-D Santa Lucia, Mexico DF HQ Group<br>HHC company<br>4th MP BN<br>5th MP BN<br>6th MP BN<br><br>3rd Military Police Brigade, Military Camp No.1-A Mexico DF. HQ Group<br>HHC Company<br>7th MP BN<br>9th MP BN<br>10th MP BN<br><br><strong>Guardias Presidenciales, Military Police<br>1st and 2nd MP Battalions of the Presidential Guard</strong><br><br>Immediate Reaction Force<br>3RD MP BDE.<br>1st MP BN/1st MP BDE.<br>1st Special Ops Bn.<br>2nd Special Ops Bn.<br>3rd Special Ops Bn.<br><br><strong>MP Companies Attached to the Following Territorial Forces:</strong><br><br>I REGION MILITAR &#8211; Federal District<br>1 ZM &#8211; Tacubaya, FD<br>22 ZM &#8211; Toluca, Mexico<br>23 ZM &#8211; Panotla, Tlax.<br>24 ZM &#8211; Cuernavaca, Morelia<br>37 ZM &#8211; Santa Lucia, Mexico<br><br>II REGION MILITAR &#8211; Mexicali, Baja California<br>2 ZM &#8211; Tijuana, Baja California<br>3 ZM &#8211; La Paz, Baja California<br>4 ZM &#8211; Hermosillo, Sonora<br>40 ZM &#8211; Guerrero Negro, BCS<br><br>III REGION MILITAR &#8211; Mazatlan, Sinaloa<br>9 ZM &#8211; Culiacan, Sinaloa<br>10 ZM &#8211; Durango, Dgo.<br><br>IV REGION MILITAR &#8211; Tancol, Tamperico<br>7 ZM -Escobedo, NL<br>12 ZM &#8211; San Luis Potosi, SLP<br>8 ZM &#8211; Reynosa, Tamps<br><br>V REGION MILITAR &#8211; Guadalajara, Jalisco<br>11ZM &#8211; Guadalupe, Zac<br>14 ZM &#8211; Aguas Calientes, Ags<br>15 ZM &#8211; La Morena, Jalisco<br>20 ZM &#8211; Colima, Col<br>41 ZM &#8211; Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco<br><br>VI REGION MILITAR &#8211; La Boticaria, Varacruz<br>13ZM -Tepic, Nayarit<br>18 ZM &#8211; Pachuca, Hidalgo<br>19 ZM &#8211; Tuxpan, Veracruz<br>25 ZM &#8211; Puebla, Puebla<br>26 ZM &#8211; El Lencero, Veracruz<br><br>VII REGION MILITAR &#8211; Tuxtla Gutierrez, Chiapas<br>30 ZM &#8211; Villahermosa, Tabasco<br>31 ZM &#8211; Rancho Nuevo, Hgo<br>36 ZM &#8211; Tapachula, Chiapas<br>38 ZM &#8211; Tenosique, Tabasco<br>39 ZM &#8211; Ocosingo, Chiapas<br><br>VIII REGION MILITAR &#8211; Ixtepec, Oaxaca<br>28 ZM &#8211; Ixcotel, Oaxaca<br>29 ZM &#8211; Minatitlan, Veracruz<br>44 ZM &#8211; Miahuatlan, Oaxaca<br><br>IX REGION MILITAR &#8211; Cumbres de Llano Largo, Guerrero<br>27 ZM &#8211; Ticui, Guerrero<br>35 ZM &#8211; Chilpancingo, Guerrero<br><br>X REGION MILITAR &#8211; Merida, Yucatan<br>32 ZM &#8211; Valladolid, Yucatan<br>33ZM &#8211; Campeche, Campeche<br>34ZM &#8211; Chetumal, Quintana Roo<br><br>XI REGION MILITAR &#8211; Torreon, Coah<br>5 ZM &#8211; Chihuahua, Chihuahua<br>6ZM &#8211; Saltillo, Coah<br>42 ZM &#8211; Santa Gertrudiz, Chihuahua<br><br>XII REGION MILITAR &#8211; Irapuato, Gto.<br>16 ZM &#8211; Sarabia, Gto.<br>17 ZM &#8211; Queretaro, Queretaro<br>21 ZM &#8211; Morelia, Michoacan<br>43 ZM &#8211; Apatzingan, Michoacan<br><br><strong>MP Platoons Attached to the Following Military Garrisons:</strong><br><br>BAJA CALIFORNIA:1. Military Garrison Cipres<br>2. Mil. Gar. Tecate<br>3. Mil. Gar. San Felipe<br><br>SONORA:<br>4.Mil. Gar. San Luis Colorado<br>5. Mil. Gar. Nogales<br>6. Mil. Gar. Agua Prieta<br>7. Mil. Gar. Sonoyta<br><br>CHIHUAHUA:<br>8. Mil. Gar. Ciudad Juarez<br>9. Mil. Gar. Ojinaga<br>10. Mil. Gar. Palomas<br><br>COAHLINGA:<br>11. Mil. Gar. Acuña<br>12. Mil. Gar. Piedras Negras<br><br>TAMPERICO:<br>13. Mil. Gar. Nuevo Laredo<br>14. Mil. Gar. Matamoros<br><br>COLIMA:<br>15. Mil. Gar. Manzanillo<br><br>MICHOACAN:<br>16. Mil. Gar. Lazaro Cardenas<br><br>OAXACA:<br>17. Mil. Gar. Puerto Escondido<br><br>VERACRUZ:<br>18. Mil. Gar. Coatzacoalcos<br><br>CHIAPAS:<br>19. Mil. Gar. San Cristobal de las Casas<br>20. Mil. Gar. Palenque<br>21. Mil. Gar. Comitan de Dominguez<br><br>QUINTANA ROO:<br>22. Mil. Gar. Cozumel<br>23. Mil. Gar. Cancun<br><br>JALISCO:<br>24. Mil. Gar. Melaque</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 V5N6 (March 2002)</em></td></tr></tbody></table></figure>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
