by Robert M. Hausman

Fed Bill Would Ease 1968 GCA Restrictions

Among the recently introduced federal legislation affecting the firearms business, probably the most significant proposal is H.R. 4048, the “Firearms Commerce Modernization Act” introduced by Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA). It would update federal law to take advantage of modern technology by allowing consumers to purchase handguns interstate and to allow FFL-holders to transfer firearms among one another through in-person transactions.

When the Gun Control Act of 1968 was enacted, the only way to screen criminal records or other disqualifications of potential firearms buyers was at the state level, so Congress passed a broad ban on interstate sales to allow state enforcement of various permit and license systems. Today, however, all retail gun sales through licensed dealers involve an FBI background check, either for issuance of a state permit or as an instant check at the point-of-sale. The “Firearm Commerce Modernization Act” would allow interstate handgun sales, provided all other federal or state laws (in both involved states) are abided. Congress previously removed the original 1968 Gun Control Act prohibitions against interstate purchase of long guns and ammunition years ago.

The proposed bill would also remove convoluted limits on licensed dealers, so that dealers could carry out the same transactions in person that they currently perform with one another by mail or courier, even though transactions involving the shipment of firearms create a much greater risk that guns may be lost or stolen during shipment.

Federal bill H.R. 3193. The “District of Columbia Personal Protection Act,” introduced by Reps. Mark Souder (R-IN) and Mike Ross (D-AR), already has 178 co-sponsors. This bill would restore the right of self-defense to law-abiding citizens of Washington, D.C., so that those citizens could own rifles, shotguns and handguns without the current bureaucratic registration requirements. Most importantly, notes the National Rifle Association, the bill would allow law-abiding District residents to use firearms to protect their homes and families, a right currently denied by the D.C. Code.

Similar legislation was proposed recently by Rep. Orin Hatch (R-UT) but was withdrawn after protests were voiced by the D.C. city government.

H.R. 3801, the “First Amendment Restoration Act”, introduced by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), would repeal the most offensive provision of the recent campaign finance “reform” law – the prohibition on use of non-PAC money for broadcast communications that use the name or likeness of a federal candidate. The present law allows candidates for elective office to shield their anti-gun records from the public on the eve of election.

Barr: Liability Reform Dead in Current Congress

The firearms industry missed “a golden opportunity” to enact liability reform legislation in the current Congress and “I am not at all optimistic that the opportunity will present itself again in this Congress,” former Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA) told SAR in a recent interview.

“The anti’s feel rather emboldened by their success and will attempt to stall and or load this bill down with unacceptable amendments if it comes up again,” Barr predicts.

Much of the blame for the bill’s failure, Barr feels, can be laid at the feet of the Bush Administration.

“If the Administration had gone to bat with this, that might have made all the difference. To say that they (the Administration) did not do enough to get this bill passed is an understatement. But, the President is a man who understands and sincerely believes in the Second Amendment. However, that’s not what we see happening in terms of the policies of this Administration,” Barr disclosed.

In regard to the question of whether the Clinton-era ban on so-called “assault weapons” will be renewed, Barr feels much depends on the Republican leadership of the U.S. Senate.

“If the anti-gun lobby is emboldened by their success in sinking the gun liability bill and really mounts a serious effort to pass the reauthorization of the Clinton gun ban in the Senate, that could pose a real problem as if it passes in the Senate, there would be a great deal of momentum to push the House to adopt it by possibly orchestrating a discharge petition in the House which would not require the consent of the House Republican leadership. Thus, they could force a bill directly to the floor without going through committee. That could be a real problem as the legislation would have already passed the Senate and the Administration already being on record as saying if the legislation reaches the President’s desk he will sign it.

“That combination could provide cover for liberal and moderate Republicans to say ‘well, the President has said he will sign it, it has already passed the Senate, we are not really casting an anti-gun vote because, after all, the President is not anti-gun and he said he will sign this.’ It could be seen as sort of a free vote for the liberal and moderate Republicans in the House. On the House side, I feel confident the Republican leadership can prevent it from coming to the floor, unless, as I say, it passes the Senate first,” Barr detailed.

The Republican Line

When asked what alternative the industry has to throwing its support behind the re-election of George Bush since he has not been as forthright as he could have been on issues firearms firms feel are important, Barr replied, “Of course, the election of John Kerry would be much worse- and that’s what the Republican party always uses as the excuse for support of the Republican ticket, they say ‘the alternative is much worse.’ We get Republican administrations who don’t really do anything. They come to the Second Amendment community in each election cycle and say, ‘Vote for our ticket, as, after all, the alternative is far worse.’ And consequently, we get Republic administrations who could do a lot for the Second Amendment but don’t.

“Overall in the upcoming elections I think pro-gun candidates, Republican and Democrat, will continue to do very well. Kerry will very carefully continue to play both sides. He will, as he has been doing on his web site, try to champion himself as a great outdoor enthusiast and hunter and yet still push ‘common sense gun control.’ The Democrats have learned that coming out as anti-firearms is a loser for them. They feel they can triangulate their way through by talking about sportsmen and John Kerry’s military background and his understanding of firearms. So they will clothe themselves with a superficial legitimacy and then say they believe in ‘common sense gun control’. That’s the tact they will take and I think they will become relatively bold in those efforts,” Barr concluded.

Barr, who says he is not seeking elective office, addressed the industry during the Glock party at the 2004 SHOT Show. He speaks out on firearms and privacy issues and is available to address group meetings. His radio program, Bob Barr’s Laws of the Universe, is heard on Sundays, at 6 pm EST on Radio America. His web site address is: www.BobBarr.org

Colt’s Sues to Block ‘Copycat’ M4’s

Colt Defense LLC, supplier of the M4 carbine to the U.S. military, has filed suit against Heckler & Koch, Inc. and Bushmaster Firearms alleging the two firms are selling “copycat” versions of the design.

As part of its requested relief, Colt’s seeks a court order to prohibit Bushmaster and H&K from using the M4 name or design in any of their products. Colt claims Bushmaster’s XM-15 E2S “M4 Type” and H&K’s planned “HKM4” are “identical” to Colt’s product, according to the suit filed in U.S. District Court in Norfolk, Virginia.

Colt has sold more than 7 million M16 rifles and M4 carbines and the designs are in use in over 80 countries.

“Bushmaster has intentionally copied the names used by Colt’s and the look and feel of Colt’s M4 carbine in order to mislead the consuming public into believing that Bushmaster’s products are comparable to Colt’s,” says the lawsuit.

Oberndorf, Germany-based H&K last year expressed a “serious interest” in acquiring Colt’s and signed a confidentiality agreement to review Colt’s financial and technical information, the suit says. After receiving the information, H&K terminated discussions and later announced the “HKM4” which has “the same look and feel” as Colt’s M4, the suit says.

Colt Lockout Ends

Union workers have returned to their jobs at Colt’s Manufacturing Co. after a two-week lockout imposed in early April, following the expiration of their labor contract.

A three-year contract covering workers at Colt’s Manufacturing Co. and Colt Defense expired at midnight on April 1st, and the companies immediately sent second-shift workers home and turned away first-shift workers the next morning, The Hartford Courant recently reported.

“We told them a long time ago, that we would not let them work without a new contract, and we meant it,” said Carlton Chen, the gunmaker’s vice president and general counsel.

Union leaders said it was misguided to lock out workers while negotiations continue. “When I heard it, I thought it was an April Fool’s joke. I couldn’t believe the company did that,” said Phil Wheeler, regional director for the United Auto Workers, which represents the employees.

Colt’s was the site of one of Connecticut’s most contentious labor disputes. In January 1986, more than 1,000 of Colt’s workers walked off the job in what evolved into a four-year-long strike. During the strike, there were occasional clashes between police and picketers, and Colt’s asked West Hartford police to supplement the company’s security force at the front gate in the latest dispute.

“You know what? We don’t make toasters here. We make weapons. And the last thing we want is any kind of trouble. We obviously have to be very careful,” Chen said in explaining the police presence.

Wheeler said health benefits and job security are major issues. Colt’s is asking workers to pay a portion of their health insurance which Chen said is presently paid in full by the companies. Workers are also concerned about job security as Colt’s lease on its West Hartford plant expires in a couple of years.

The lockout affected 348 of nearly 500 employees at the companies. Chen said the companies are ahead of their manufacturing schedules, and that non-union supervisors were working production jobs during the lockout. Colt Defense, which manufactures military products, apprised the U.S. military of the labor problems.

Workers returned to their job on April 12th, working under the terms of their old contract while negotiations continued on a new agreement. “Frankly, we had a change of heart,” said Chen in explaining the decision to allow workers to return. “During the course of the lockout, we were negotiating and made some progress and I think it was a gesture of good faith.”

Wheeler said it was “good news” that workers were back on the job, but he added difficult negotiations lie ahead. “There are still a lot of issues holding us apart,” he said. “I don’t think it’s going to be anything that’s going to be settled overnight, but at least they’re working at it.” At press time, negotiations were still underway.

New Managing Director at SAAMI

The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute (SAAMI) has named Rick Patterson as its managing director. Founded in 1926, SAAMI is an association of the nation’s leading manufacturers of sporting firearms, ammunition and components. Its work involves the publication of industry standards, coordination of technical data, and the promotion of safe and responsible firearms use. Patterson also works with the shooting range community on environmental and business issues through the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF).

Patterson steps into his new role following the retirement of SAAMI’s executive director, Lt. Gen. James Chambers, USAF (ret.) who had served in that job for five years. SAAMI’s headquarters, which had moved to Washington, D.C. during Chambers’ tenure, will be returning to NSSF’s Newtown, Connecticut office complex.

D.C. Suit Dismissal Sustained

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals recently sustained the trial court’s dismissal of negligent distribution and public nuisance claims brought by the City of Washington, D.C. against members of the firearms industry (District of Columbia, Appellant, v. Beretta USA et al, No. 03-CV-24).

In a related case, the court permitted nine individual plaintiffs to proceed against firearms manufacturers for alleged violations of the “Assault Weapon Manufacturing Strict Liability Act of 1990” (Lawson et al, v. Beretta USA et al, No. 03-CV-38).

The appellate court ruled that the city’s claims of negligence and public nuisance failed basic tests of duty, forseeability, and remoteness, citing as legal authority the numerous dismissals of other cities’ similar claims in other cases. As to the individual plaintiffs, the appellate court held that they had sufficiently pleaded a claim under Washington, D.C.’s “strict liability” act (in which liability could be found without fault) and that they should be permitted to proceed to discovery to attempt to prove their allegations that each was injured by the discharge of a specific “assault weapon or machinegun” as defined by the act. The court clearly contemplated dismissal of manufacturers after discovery for lack of evidence as to which specific product “caused plaintiffs injuries,” and reaffirmed that punitive damages are not available to plaintiffs under the act, according to an analysis by Sturm, Ruger & Co.

“While we were pleased that the court reached the correct decision on the city’s attempt to assert now largely-discredited legal theories of public nuisance and negligent distribution, we believe that the D.C. act upon which the remaining individual cases are based is flawed,” said Sturm, Ruger’s president, Stephen L. Sanetti. “Whether by further appeal or by discovery of the facts of these remaining individuals’ cases, the manufacturers should ultimately prevail.”

The author is the publisher of the small arms industry’s two most widely-read trade publications, The New Firearms Business (a bi-weekly which covers the domestic small arms industry) and The International Firearms Trade (a monthly newsletter primarily of interest to the import community). For subscription information, send an e-mail to: FirearmsB@aol.com.

by Chris Choat

A RETRACTABLE GRAPPLING HOOK FOR REGULAR AND SUPER HEROS

With twin goals of Spiderman-like vertical mobility and safety, Capewell Components, Inc. of South Windsor, Connecticut, has licensed from the U.S. Army, a lightweight, retractable grappling hook for scaling walls and buildings, and boarding boats. The device, which Capewell plans to bring to market later this year, offers a material edge to first-responders and special operations soldiers. The Individual Protection Directorate and the Army Natick Soldier Center originally designed, developed, and tested the hook as part of its mission to provide warfighters with high-quality, safe, and easily portable equipment. The hook, which folds up into a compact, portable cube weighing less than 1.5 pounds, when deployed can support 1,608 pounds, or six 268-pound men. A smaller hook is also a safer hook: it doesn’t get hung up accidentally while being carried, it can be thrown farther, which offers greater mobility in scaling obstacles, and it affords greater distance in clearing hazards. Grappling hooks have many uses, including gaining entry or providing exit from buildings. For climbing and descending, the user places or tosses the grappling hook onto a roof, through a window or anywhere that catches and secures itself to give the necessary support. The other end of the hook is attached to a rope, which the user climbs or fastens to an item that is to be raised or lowered. Most grappling hooks are large, heavy, bulky, and risky to use because the breaking strength of the metal is largely unknown. To improve the safety of this useful equipment, engineers at the Natick Soldier Systems Center in Massachusetts developed super new lightweight, high-strength materials that cut the weight and bulk by 50 percent over the standard grappling hook. Capewell has licensed this technology and will mass-produce a high-quality retractable grappling hook for diverse markets. TechLink, a nationally recognized technology transfer organization located in Bozeman, Montana, worked with Capewell and the Natick Soldier Systems Center to assist Capewell in applying for the exclusive right to license and commercialize this technology. TechLink is also assisting the company in transitioning the grappling hook back to the Army for potential use in warfare. The grappling hook will complement Capewell’s life support systems, such as its military compact descenders as used by military personnel, SWAT teams, and firefighters. In addition, Capewell offers a line of ascent/descent products for use by the same type of users mentioned above plus construction and oil rig workers, and building maintenance personnel. For more information please contact Capewell Components, Inc., Dept. SAR, 105 Nutmeg Road South, South Windsor, CT 06074. Phone: 1-860-610-0700. Fax: 1-860-610-0120. They can be found on the web at www.capewell.com.

NIKON ANNOUNCES 6-18x40AO BUCKMASTERS® RIFLESCOPE

Nikon Sport Optics has announced the addition of a new long-range riflescope that combines target-style precision with big game hunting ruggedness and enhanced optical performance. The new Nikon 6-18x40AO Buckmasters series offers shooters a versatile magnification range and advanced performance features that make it a valuable addition to beanfield rifles, antelope guns, varmint rigs and other long range shooting setups. The 6-18x40AO Buckmasters incorporates precision ground and polished lenses coated with Nikon’s exclusive BrightVue proprietary lens coating, which boosts light transmission up to 92%. Its durable 1-inch main body tube is constructed with aircraft grade aluminum and it is nitrogen filled and O-ring sealed for true waterproof, fog-proof and shockproof performance. Nikon’s new long-range scope is available with the popular Nikoplex reticle or Nikon’s target dot reticle, which incorporates a fine crosshair with a 1/2-MOA dot. It also features an Adjustable Objective (AO) lens, allowing the shooter to adjust for parallax at any range from 50 yards to infinity. A 40mm objective lens allows for low mounting of the scope on most rifles, and eye relief is 3.4 to 3.7-inches to accommodate harder recoiling rifles. Like other Buckmasters scopes, a black matte finish is standard. Nikon’s new Buckmasters 6-18x40AO incorporates target-style windage and elevation knobs, with precise 1/8 MOA clickstops. The large dials make them easy to operate with gloves, and each has highly visible, numbered, index marks, allowing for quick adjustments and easy and accurate return to zero while on the bench or in the field. The 6-18x40AO provides 40 MOA of internal windage and elevation adjustment for long range shooting capability. For maximum versatility and shooting precision, Nikon includes an extra set of oversized target knobs and a screw-on sunshade with each scope. Like all Nikon riflescopes, the new 6-18x40AO is protected by Nikon’s exclusive Lifetime Full Warranty. For more information on all Buckmasters riflescope models, plus information on Nikon’s full line of Rangefinders, Binoculars, Spotting Scopes and Riflescopes, please contact: Nikon Sport Optics, Dept. SAR, 1300 Walt Whitman Rd., Melville, NY 11747-3064. Phone: 1-800-248-6846. They are located on the web at www.nikonusa.com.

NEW G-36KE “BLUE GUN” FROM RING’S MANUFACTURING

Ring’s Manufacturing, producers of replica training firearms, has just introduced their newest “Blue Gun”. The new model is an exact copy of the H&K G-36K. Ring’s Manufacturing has been producing replica impact resistant polyurethane plastic training firearms for years. They actually started their business by producing their highly detailed replicas for the motion picture industry. These exact replicas can be used for weapon training exercises such as weapon retention, room clearance, using cover, practicing position and stance and others. They are highly detailed and in most cases even weigh the same as the firearms that they represent. They are molded in “Law Enforcement Blue” in a safety color that is recognized throughout the world. For special situations they can also be ordered in black. The “Blue Guns” feature a steel “skeleton” to prevent flexing and bending while maintaining the handling and balance of the actual firearm. The guns also feature metal hard points that slings can be attached to. With the guns being the exact size of their real counterparts they can also be used with sighting devices and, in the case of their handguns, holsters. Ring’s has over 30 models of handguns as well as submachine guns, assault rifles, shotguns, magazines, knives, flashbang grenades, flash lights and other accessories. Their newest model, the FSG36KE, is a copy of the advanced new assault rifle from Heckler & Koch. For more information on these exciting training aids please contact Ring’s Manufacturing, Dept. SAR, 99 East Drive, Melbourne, FL 32904. Phone: 1-321-951-0407. Fax: 1-321-951-0017. Their products can be seen on the web at www.blueguns.com.

POLYMER CASED .223 AND .308 AMMUNITION FROM NATEC, INC.

Natec, Inc., has now introduced the world’s first patented, high pressure, polymer cased ammunition called PCA SPECTRUM. The lightweight PCA cartridge is produced from an engineered polymer supplied by a world-leader in manufacturing polymers and is supplied exclusively to Natec for ammunition. Conventional projectiles, propellants and primers utilized in Natec’s unique PCA casing generate similar or better ballistic/performance results to comparable metal-cased products, at lower charge weights. Polymer is a natural insulator meaning that fired cases are immediately cool to the touch. Another benefit is that the polymer color can be changed so different loads can be color coded for instant recognition. PCA ammunition is produced in the USA on state-of-the-art equipment, using modern manufacturing processes. The new ammunition offers a light weight, high performance round at a lower cost and will work in any weapon already chambered for the same brass cartridge. As of this writing the ammunition will be produced in four different .223 loadings and three .308 loads. Natec is currently completing its development of a .50 caliber load called the 50 caliber PCA Spectrum. For more information on this new development in ammunition please contact, NATEC, Inc., Dept. SAR, 11 Arkansas Street, Plattsburgh, NY 12903. Phone: 1-518-324-5625. Fax: 1-518-324-5627. Their website is www.natec-usa.com.

by Mark Genovese

In reality, it was legitimate Class 2 manufacturers with the machinery, parts, personnel and know-how already in place who were in the best position to develop semiautomatic-only belt-fed guns from their full-auto derivatives. Two factors were involved in my acquisition of an HK21 semiautomatic-only. In 1984, I purchased an HK91A2 and was impressed with its obvious quality of manufacture. The second factor was the engineering shortcomings of my first semiautomatic-only belt-fed, the Rock Island Armory SA 1. Initially, there were only three companies producing semiautomatic-only belt-fed versions of full-auto originals. They were DLO in Arcadia, Florida with their line of Browning belt-fed guns; Rock Island Armory in Colona, Illinois with the SA 1 version of the M60; and Vollmer Manufacturing of Bloomington, Illinois with a fine semiautomatic-only copy of the HK21. Several years later, Valkyrie Arms in Olympia, Washington, started marketing its great semiautomatic version of the M1919A4 Browning gun.

What the general shooting and collecting public do not know about these complex semiautomatic-only firearms is what it takes to legally bring them to market. The fusillade of BATF rules and regulations forced on the prospective manufacture can be mind-boggling, beginning with “Once a machine gun always a machine gun”. This means that you cannot take a post sample HK21, torch cut the receiver three times as prescribed by the BATF (because in this case it would include the push-in feed box), then assemble these cut parts on a pre-ban HK91 rifle receiver. If you doubt my words, buy a HK21 kit for $1,795 and you tell me how you’re going to re-weld the push-in feed box when there is none. How then did Vollmer Manufacturing make their semiautomatic-only HK21guns? They traveled to the HK-licensed INDEP SA factory in Portugal, negotiated, purchased and imported the unassembled component HK21 parts in the white. Because the parts were never a live machine gun, Vollmer, with BATF approval in writing, was permitted to build their semiautomatic-only HK21 on pre-ban HK91 rifle receivers.

There would, however, be more hoops for Vollmer and their engineering crew to jump through. BATF regulations state that you cannot remove a firearm’s serial number. If you look at where the H&K 91’s serial number is, you will see it is dead center over the push-in feed mechanism unit. Because of the innovative design genius of Terry Dyer, an employee of Vollmer at the time, they overcame this hurdle by cutting away the magazine-well sheet metal to the right and left of the serial number leaving this centerpiece in a straight sheet. Then, it was carefully folded up once and back down accordion style while still attached to the HK91 receiver. This was neatly welded into place up and out of the way of the feed box. It was then finished to provide a raised plaque appearance. All this was completed with prior BATF written approvals. Subsequently came the arduous task of fitting the welding jigs to properly assemble all the parts onto the semiautomatic-only HK91 receiver in accordance with original factory specifications. For all of you that recently purchased a torch-cut HK21 kit with the desire to have it built into a working semiautomatic-only, all is not lost. Although, in reality your chances are slim at best to build a truly legal semiautomatic-only HK21, you could in theory still put together a very exotic HK21 semiautomatic-only, or a Model 11 or the Model 13 in 5.56x45mm (similar to the HK91 but has the trunnion, barrel shroud and quick-change heavy barrel from the HK21). A nice feature of the Vollmer HK21 is that you can easily convert it to magazine-feed by removing all three pieces of the belt-feed mechanism and replace it with a magazine adapter. One sells for about $250, but it will not fit in a Vollmer HK21 without two holes being milled in the receiver. Keep in mind that this work would be a permanent alteration to the receiver, requiring prior BATF written approval. The other adapter is the very rare original HK21 accessory, which will fit perfectly, but will set you back about $750 (mine is marked “HK21 483 11/71”). You will have to change the H&K 21 double-wound recoil spring for the weaker HK91 spring. You will also need a complete HK91 bolt and carrier because the HK21 carrier has an offset belt-feed mechanism slot which will impinge against the inside of the magazine-feed lips, resulting in a failure to strip a round. I was able to avoid the purchase of the HK91 bolt group by slowly stoning the inside of both feed lips. Be careful, it you take off too much material the magazine will not retain the 7.62x51mm cartridge.

On the subject of interchangeability of parts for the Vollmer H&K 21, in various firearms publications, you will find from time to time HK21 barrels selling for around $300 each. They can be German marked “HK” or Portuguese marked “FMP”. The chances are that neither will fully lock up in your Vollmer HK21, and if it does, take a good look at your headspace, as it’s probably not correct. The same goes for the links used to feed the HK21. Everything you will read about this firearm states the 21 is capable of digesting DM13 and M13 disintegrating link belts or DM1 non-disintegrating link belts. After much experimentation, skinned knuckles and UPS deliveries, I can state with authority, the continuous belts definitely do not run in my HK21. You will also read everywhere the HK21 can – by changing the barrel, cartridge guide, belt feed insertion unit and bolt – be converted to fire 5.56x45mm or 7.62x39mm cartridges. Let me let you in on a little secret: your chances of purchasing these HK21 parts are one in a billion, especially the 7.62x39mm. I have heard of sightings on occasion of HK21 barrels in caliber 5.56x45mm and once of a 5.56x45mm HK21 bolt head. But until I see it with my own eyes, it’s all talk. There was a purpose-built, extremely light tripod Model L012 with optical periscope sight. These are as easy to get as the 7.62x39mm conversion parts. I once heard one was selling for $2,500.

I got around this one by purchasing a FN Model 30 tripod made of lightweight titanium alloy, shipping it to TDyer Gunsmith and Machine Shop (Dept. SAR, RR#2, Box 119, Heyworth, IL 61745; phone: 309-473-3377; email: tdyer@mindspring.com) for a complete rebuild, including H&K black finish. Terry offers a beautifully machined set of adaptors that fit in the bipod shroud slots to the mount. This is the Cadillac of the German Bundeswehr for the MG3 series machine gun, commonly referred to as the MG3 mount. Just last year this set-up would cost you up to $2,500. Supply and demand has changed that. I picked one up last week for under $600, delivered brand-new. In order to fit the HK21, you will need some serious machine work done to the recoiling head. It must be lowered to clear the HK21 feed tray. TDyer Gunsmith and Machine Shop offers his outstanding conversion on a limited basis.

I fully understand that there are people out there who would purchase one of these fine firearms never intending to actually shoot it though I am not one. As far as I’m concerned, burn the paint right off it. Get the barrel so hot, you need an ice pack just to look at it. Definitely put it through its paces. You will feel better in the morning. In my case after about 5,000 rounds of Czech black primer ZV69, things started to get loud and the 4-foot-long muzzle flash aroused my curiosity. When the cocking lever disappeared down range, I figured it was time to check the headspace, there was none. It was absolutely paint and tune-up time. Off it went to Terry’s shop so he could do his magic. I decided to go the whole nine yards. First repair the headspace problem, not as easy as it may sound. In this case it would require stripping the gun completely to the trunnion, replacing it, then rebuilding from the ground up. Second, fit and headspace a spare second barrel and serialize both to the gun. We also decided to smooth out the recoil. This would require a factory long (often called a “E” or Dutch Buffer) buffer. This part is 1 3/8 inches longer than the stock part, meaning the cocking slot would have to move forward by that amount or you would not be able to lock the bolt in the open position. He also reinforced the lock slot with extra material. Then I had the receiver and both barrels cryogenic treated for hardness, fit a new FBI ambidextrous single-fire trigger group, plus a half a dozen other small details. It was worth the wait.

by Al Paulson

One of the most common questions asked by newcomers to the mysteries of sound suppression is, “Can I use my .223 suppressor on my .22 rimfire rifle and pistol?” The short answer is “Yes.” The long answer is “Yes, but why would you want to put a 1 to 2 pound .223 can on a rimfire arm, when you can use a much lighter suppressor dedicated to rimfire use?” Of course there are compelling reasons such as limited budgets or a fascination with owning a centerfire and rimfire system with a shared suppressor. Nevertheless, I never had much use for this approach until Dr. Jay Quilligan of Quicksilver Manufacturing developed, what I believe to be, the lightest AR-15/M16 silencer in the marketplace: the all titanium QSMS 5.56mm sound suppressor. Weighing an astonishingly light 9.5 ounces (that’s just 7.3 ounces more than the flashhider it replaces), this little titanium can not only provides yeoman performance with the 5.56x45mm round, but it is also small and light enough to provide user-friendly service when mounted on a .22 pistol. This is no small achievement.

Before conducting a hands-on evaluation of the titanium QSMS on both a .22 LR pistol and a .223 Remington (5.56x45mm) carbine, it would be useful to take a look at the suppressor’s design. The 5.56mm QSMS sound suppressor is fabricated from a proprietary grade of titanium that is vastly superior to the G2 titanium commonly used in the suppressor industry. I said “commonly” because titanium suppressors are actually quite unusual, and they tend to be rather expensive: as much as three or four times the price of a stainless steel silencer.

The QSMS suppressor evaluated in this study is 6.0 inches long and 1.30 inches in diameter, tipping the scales at 9.5 ounces. Tubing thickness is 65 thousandths of an inch. While the specimen evaluated in this study was polished bright, the suppressor is also available in a non-reflective bead-blasted natural finish (a dull gray), or a non-reflective black chemical finish. The end-caps are screwed into place and bonded with a high-temperature (2,000+ degrees Fahrenheit) ceramic cement rather than welded, making this a very handsome suppressor but one that should not be subjected to sustained full-auto fire, in my opinion, since threads are the weakest link in the system. The only thing I would do differently, if I were building this silencer, would be to weld unthreaded end-caps into place. That said, this design has proven throughout the eight months of this study to be sufficiently durable for its intended missions (principally used by law-enforcement entry teams), including limited full-auto fire.

The internal design of the titanium silencer is based upon the proven K-baffle with slanted sidewall. Do not make the mistake, however, of thinking that this design is legacy technology. It is quite the contrary. Besides using superior metallurgy in the titanium sound suppressor, Quilligan’s internal design takes K-baffle technology to a whole new level in terms of how he is able to work the gases very hard in a very small space in a way that is both novel and effective. Complex and quite innovative porting, venting and cross-jetting strategies are based on very sound physics. The blast baffle is asymmetric in an original way. Yet the silencer delivers very good accuracy despite the asymmetry, which is remarkable. The blast baffle is designed to be slightly less than one 5.56mm bullet length from the muzzle based upon advanced muzzle break theory. This greatly reduces first-round pop with standard 5.56x45mm duty ammunition and improves the overall efficiency of the can. It is one of the key design features that enable the titanium silencer to be so effective. Porting and venting create a major frequency shift upward so that the frequency mix of the suppressed centerfire gunshot noise matches the frequency mix of bullet flight noise. This seems to make bullet flight noise (i.e., the ballistic crack or sonic boom) of 5.56x45mm ammunition disappear within the CQB environment.

Shooting Impressions

The first thing I noticed when shooting the titanium QSMS on a 5.56x45mm M4 carbine was that the sound suppressor made shooting very comfortable without hearing protection. The suppressor virtually disappeared during rapid-action drills. Then I began to notice the weapon’s extremely eerie sound signature and the apparent absence of bullet flight noise from the shooter’s perspective. When I had someone shoot past me at a range of 30 yards while I was 10 yards from the bullet flight path, the frequency masking effect was still quite effective. Only if I concentrated with all my might and with no distractions, could I detect the slightest Doppler shift of a bullet going past me.

When the titanium QSMS was mounted on a Smith & Wesson Model 2213 pistol with 3-inch barrel, I was pleasantly surprised at how well the system handled. Balance was wonderful and the low barrel position permitted using the pistols’ sight’s to see over the 1.3-inch diameter sound suppressor. Quicksilver has a small number of specially modified S&W Model 2213 pistols for use with sound suppressors at the time of this writing. The pistols can only be purchased with a titanium QSMS 5.56mm sound suppressor. This makes a nifty package.

The small amount of additional weight added by the Quicksilver can was simply not a factor in my performance. I did notice, however, that the Ultralight suppressor heats much more rapidly than the typical suppressor in this caliber that has two to four times as much mass. This does become an issue when shooting with 5.56mm ammunition, but there is an easy fix: Rocksett high-temperature, engineering adhesive.

Made by the Flexbar Machine Corporation, Rocksett is actually a ceramic cement that is used widely to lock, bond and seal nuts, screws, splines, pipes, and other structural materials. Rocksett is noteworthy because of its stability over an unusually wide range of temperatures (from -35 to +2,015 degrees Fahrenheit). Rocksett also withstands oils, fuels, acids, and alkalis.

When Rocksett is used for the temporary bonding of a Quicksilver suppressor to a barrel, an unusual installation protocol must be strictly adhered to. This will allow the operator to remove the silencer – when desired – by hand. Failure to follow this regimen will permanently bond the suppressor to the barrel. Place one or two drops (maximum) on the rearmost barrel threads near the shoulder at the rear of the threaded portion of the barrel. Screw the suppressor tightly against the shoulder behind the threads to ensure proper alignment with the bore. Allow to dry according to manufacturer’s instructions (I usually allow to dry overnight). The suppressor has never loosened during sustained semiautomatic firing and limited firing of short bursts. The suppressor could always be removed by hand when desired and then re-installed using Rocksett and the aforementioned installation regimen once again.

Once this study was completed, firing a 30-round magazine in one continuous full-auto burst tested the durability of this minimalist use of Rocksett. A second 30-round magazine immediately followed that. The Rocksett-secured titanium bantamweight suppressor continued performing like a champ, leading me to have confidence in dumping one full magazine at once should the unlikely requirement present itself.

When used on the S&W Model 2213 pistol, an o-ring is used to ensure that the suppressor does not loosen from the .22 rimfire barrel. I was concerned about maintaining proper barrel alignment using this approach, but alignment never became an issue throughout the testing with the .22 rimfire pistol. While subjective shooting impressions were positive, there is no substitute for obtaining objective standards of performance as well. Both subjective and objective analyses are needed to make a truly informed decision on a product.

Quicksilver Performance

Performance of unsuppressed and suppressed firearms were compared using the testing regimen and equipment used by Paulson (1996) as amended by Paulson, Parker, and Kokalis (2002). Test data using the titanium Quicksilver QSMS 5.56mm sound suppressor on the S&W Model 2213 pistol with Remington .22 rimfire ammunition appear in Table 1. Test data evaluating the same titanium suppressor on a Bushmaster M4 carbine with 14.5-inch barrel using 5.56x45mm ammunition, appear in Table 2.

Putting a 5.56mm sound suppressor on a .22 rimfire rifle or pistol will generally provide adequate to good sound reduction, but the titanium QSMS delivers a most impressive 40-41 decibels of net sound reduction. Even with high velocity ammunition, mean (average) sound signatures remain well below pellet gun noise levels, using the Crossman American Classic Model 1377 .177 caliber pellet pistol as the benchmark. The Crossman produces sound signatures of 120-123 dB, depending upon the number of pumps. Only the first round of the day fired through the QSMS, using high velocity or standard velocity ammunition, overlaps the noise levels of the Crossman air gun. The bantamweight Quicksilver delivers a sound signature of 116 dB with high velocity and standard velocity fodder and 114 dB with subsonic ammunition. That’s significantly quieter than the Crossman air gun when you remember that the decibel scale is logarithmic, not linear.

The little titanium bantamweight is no slouch when fired with 5.56x45mm ammunition, either. The QSMS delivered a net sound reduction of 27 dB with standard duty ammunition (Black Hills 62-grain FMJ match) and 32 dB with the 63-grain Soft Point Ultra Stealth Subsonic Match ammunition from Engel Ballistic Research. Jay Quilligan specifically designed this suppressor to have minimal first-round pop with standard 5.56mm duty ammunition. First-round pop measured just one-tenth of a decibel more. Quilligan seems to really understand the arcane art of sound suppressor design.

Final Thoughts

The 9.5-ounce titanium QSMS 5.56x45mm sound suppressor from Quicksilver Manufacturing offers a compelling mix of performance characteristics. When used as a .22-rimfire suppressor, it delivers a most impressive 40-41 decibels of sound reduction, depending upon ammunition. I have evaluated major-league .22 rimfire suppressors that weighed more than the QSMS suppressor and did not deliver this much sound reduction when shot dry. When using 5.56x45mm ammunition, I have evaluated AR-15/M16 suppressors that were several times larger and heavier that weren’t as quiet.

Clearly, quieter sound suppressors are available in the marketplace. Furthermore, there are better choices if a lot of full-auto fire is a mission requirement. But for law-enforcement use on an entry or auxiliary weapon, for use by qualified civilians for home defense, to safeguard the hearing of both shooters and observers, or to target practice without offending the neighbors down the road, the bantamweight titanium QSMS provides a compelling mix of performance characteristics. It even seems to make the ballistic crack disappear at the distances most 5.56mm shooting seems to occur, which is a very eerie experience for even the most jaded suppressor cognoscenti.

Finally, the titanium QSMS is a team player, providing yeoman performance on both .22 rimfire and 5.56x45mm platforms. This is the first 5.56mm sound suppressor that actually seems truly at home as either a rimfire or centerfire silencer. Best of all, the QSMS from Quicksilver Manufacturing does so at the improbably light price of $650. Jay Quilligan at Quicksilver Manufacturing should be justifiable proud of his achievement because it merits a place in the history books. It also merits serious consideration by the law-enforcement professional as well as both the budget conscious and the advanced collector.

Author’s note: Subsequent to this article being written, medical problems forced Quilligan out of the machine shop and he has sold the business to Don Ellis, who is also known as “The Glock Guy”. I’ve enjoyed working with Ellis in the past. Quilligan will continue to provide R&D support to Quicksilver, so there should be a very smooth transition, and we should look for more good things from Quicksilver Manufacturing.

Bushmaster

Dept. SAR
999 Roosevelt Trail
Windham, ME 04062
Phone 800-883-6229
Fax 207-892-8068

Engel Ballistic Research
Dept. SAR
544A Alum Creek Road
Smithville, TX 78957
Phone 512-360-5327
Fax 512-360-2652
Email engelbr@swbell.net

Flexbar Machine Corporation
Dept. SAR
250 Gibbs Road
Islandia, NY 11722-2697
Phone 800-879-7575
Fax 631-582-8487
Email sales@flacbar.com
Website www.flexbar.com

Quicksilver Manufacturing
Dept. SAR
419 E. 4th Street
Post Falls, ID 83854
Phone 208-699-0251
Fax 208-723-8122
Website www.quicksilvermanufacturing.com

by Jean Francois Legendre

A common feature among all former Warsaw Pact Armies is that ammunition for machine guns is not provided belted from the factories. Unlike Western Armed Forces for which machine gun belts are composed of disintegrating links which are discarded after firing, in the Former Warsaw Pact Armies, the belts for infantry machine guns (up to 14.5mm) are considered as weapon parts and are to be reused until unserviceable. Obviously, the non-disintegrating pattern of the belts helps the recovery for further use.

Since machine gun belts are not factory loaded with ammunition, this task is then delegated down to the unit level. In order to cope with this tedious activity, especially when large quantities of ammunition is to be belted, belt loading machines are especially required.

The former East German Armed Forces had to cope with the same situation, enhanced to an even worse level, due to the diversity of the armament used among its different units (National Popular Army (National Volksarmee – NVA), Police (Volkspolizei – Vopo), Border Guards (Grenztruppe – GT), Militarized Police (Kasernierte Volkspolizei – KSP), etc.). Therefore, a unique multipurpose belt-loading device has been designed to handle all the different machine gun belts in service; in one compact unit.

On the basis of the Second World War German “Gurtfüller 34”, the crank-operated belt-loader for MG34/42 belts, a new multipurpose belt-loader was adopted for service in 1964 under the designation “Gurtfüllvorrichtung 64” (“Belt-loading device 64”.) This modular machine is capable of loading different belts in calibers 7.62×39, 7.62x54R and 7.92×57, thanks to interchangeable inserts. Furthermore, it will also fill AK47 magazines for caliber 7.62×39. Loose cartridges are driven from a curved feed-tray in which the rounds are manually placed side by side which enables the loader to align the required belting sequence (ball, tracer, incendiary, etc.).

In caliber 7.62X54R, belts for the SGM (modernized SG-43) and PK’s family can be loaded. The required insert is engraved “7.62 mR” which reads “7.62 mit Rand” (with rim).

In caliber 7.92×57, belts for the MG34 and MG 42 can also be loaded. The corresponding insert is engraved “7.92”.

Finally, for the 7.62×39 caliber, an extra spacer engraved “M43” is first to be inserted into the feed-tray so as to accommodate the shorter round. Two different inserts are provided to handle the two different types of belts available for the RPD machine guns. The first insert is engraved “M43sG” and is designed for the original Russian style belt where the links are positioned within the cartridge extraction groove.

The second insert, engraved “M43uG” is provided to cope with the later RPD belt style where the link is positioned by a re-curved tab folded over the cartridge base. A third, more complex insert, is provided to load MPi-KM (variant of the Russian AKM) magazines and is engraved “M43 M.”

It is evident that the feature which slows down the rate of belting capacity of this machine is the manual filling of the feed-tray. Therefore, for each caliber, 7.62×39 and 7.62X54R, a special feed accessory is provided, respectively denoted as “GFV-64, Z1” – Zubehör 1 (accessory 1) and “GFV-64, Z2” – Zubehör 2 (accessory 2). This feed-device, in the form of a large pan, is operated by the main crank handle motion by means of a driving chain. This simultaneously enables, in one single turn, to move the belt one step forward, to insert a cartridge into the belt and rotates the pan to feed one cartridge in the correct position. More than 300 7.62x54R rounds and 500 7.62×39 rounds can be thrown in bulk into the pan. By means of a grooved wheel, cartridges are ingeniously pre-positioned in the correct position before being fed into the loader itself.

No doubt that many former East-German armorers and soldiers have been grateful to this loader for having preserved their fingers, as anyone who has ever manually loaded belts can attest to. Since the re-unification of Germany in 1989 and thereafter the re-organization of the Armed Forces, it seems that many of these multipurpose loaders have been discarded. Only the screwdrivers and brushes contained in the boxes have been salvaged for further private use; indeed those tools are invariably missing in every box the author has examined.

In 1943, Russell S. Robinson started the design and development of what many would consider to be a proper machine pistol, i.e. a pistol that would fire automatically yet having recoil so low as to be controllable in this mode of fire. The Model 11 is not a true Constant Reaction gun in which the barrel, extension and bolt are used to pre-absorb recoil, but uses the slide or jacket to provide all of the inertia. This is a unique approach to solving the problems of firing in full automatic with a weapon the size of a Colt M1911A1.

The Model 11 employs two distinct principles: firstly to smooth out the rearward recoil kick and secondly, to smooth out the torque impact resulting from spinning the projectile to about 1,500 rpm which disturbs aim in a light hand held weapon. The second principle involves rotating the barrel while the slide is moving forward, with the rotation of the barrel in the same direction as the spinning projectile. While we will examine in detail the operation and design of the Model 11 later on, we will first take a look into the history of its development, and what role Russ Robinson had in mind for the Model 11 when designing and developing it. It turns out that this was the role of a Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) long before the concept of a PDW came into vogue.

Inspiration from the Gatenby .45

In 1942, an Australian named Gatenby submitted to the Australian Army Inventions Directorate (A.I.D.) for evaluation a very unusual .45 caliber Machine Carbine/Pistol. Intrigued, the A.I.D. sought a version in 9mm for evaluation and Robinson, at the time involved in firing-range tests of his Model 5 Cal. .50 machine gun, was contracted by the A.I.D. to design a version in 9mm.

The Gatenby gun fed rearward out of the magazine, with a fixed buttress on the pistol grip having a fixed firing pin. A sliding barrel was used with about 1.5 inches of movement. When a round was chambered and fired, the force of engraving and friction of the bullet in the rifling carried the barrel forward against a stiff spring, with a spring-biased extractor in the buttress holding the fired case against the breech face. A fixed ejector spun the empty case off the breech face after the barrel had moved forward about 1.25 inches. Hitting a forward stop at its forward limit of movement, the barrel returned rearward, with a fixed finger under the barrel striking the point of the next cartridge in the magazine. This thrust the cartridge rearward against a ramp that guided it upwards, and, simultaneously, the recoiling barrel pushed the point of the cartridge upward and chambered.

Problems with feeding reliably due to insufficient support of the cartridge while the barrel moved rearward, as well as the heavy recoil, made the Gatenby very difficult to control in a full-auto burst mode. The heavy recoil was due to a combination of the simultaneous recoil shock of ignition and the shock of the returning barrel hitting the fixed breech face.

Robinson designed two variants of the 9mm Gatenby, these being known as the Models 8 and 10. While the Gatenby did not continue any further, it did impress Robinson with some aspects of the design. He initially considered that the Constant Reaction principle was only applicable to .30 caliber and larger, but the Gatenby concept inspired him to apply a variation of the principle to a light weight gun. He felt that a cyclic rate of 600 rpm, with continuous recoil of 5.2 pounds, with the recoil varying about 1.75 pounds, would result in an accurate one-hand held machine pistol. The end result was the S.R. Model 11 9mm Machine Pistol.

Development and design of the Model 11

Conceived in early 1943, the drawings were finally completed by March 1944, and construction was approved in November 1944. Major modifications to the design were necessary due to Russ Robinson’s failure to realize that when the slide struck the barrel via the chambered case, substantial energy was lost in getting the six ounce barrel up to slide speed. As a result of this failure, six ounces had to be added to the slide weight at the rear to compensate. These modifications and redesign were finished by mid February 1945. By early September 1945, major components had been fabricated at the Small Arms Factory (SAF), Lithgow and the prototype gun had fired some 1600 rounds in tests.

The S.R. Model 11 9mm Machine Pistol was designed to initially meet some 13 specifications laid down in 1943 following the advice and assistance of Major J.E.M. Hall, then chief of the Army Small Arms Branch, Directorate of Artillery. One requirement that could not be met was the weight, as the slide alone had to weigh one pound. Additional recommendations and suggestions were made by Australian Army and R.A.A.F. service personnel returning from fighting overseas and later by the Canadians. In this revised list of specifications, numbering 24 in total, the weight was increased.

While some of the 24 specifications laid down have been examined in an article from the now defunct Fighting Firearms, (Summer 1996, Constant Reaction Guns II), let us look again at some of the more interesting. These are as follows:

1. Cyclic Rate of 500-600 rpm;
2. Weight not to exceed 2.5 pounds;
3. Provision for automatic ejection of empty magazine from gun;
4. Safety and fire-selection controls must be conveniently located and designed for immediate operation by right and left trigger finger only;
5. Recoil force to be smoothed out to permit accurate auto or semi-auto fire single handed;
6. Except for pushing home successive magazines, no handling or operational function to require a second hand;
7. The action to be kept in a cocked mode upon termination of burst fire as well as ejection of the magazine; and
8. Magazines to be made as expendable as possible.

Some of these requirements and features had never been seen before such as the automatic ejection of magazines when empty. Alternative feed systems were mentioned in place of the magazine. For example, a flexible feed system was proposed feeding through the pistol grip though nothing came about from this proposal. The auto-ejection of empty magazines, coupled with the retention of the gun in a fully cocked position, allowed for a very short time break in firing estimated to be about 0.5 second. The only movement required to re-commence firing was the pushing home of the new magazine. This feature resulted from advice from Australian soldiers fighting in the jungles of New Guinea.

During a trip to Canada, on the way home from the UK in 1945, Russ Robinson visited Small Arms Ltd. and John Inglis Co., Ltd., the latter being manufacturers of the GP35 Pistol and the BREN. Both of these manufacturers expressed a great deal of interest in the Model 11. Colonel Jolley, the Manager at Small Arms Ltd., suggested that a light holster or combination holster/shoulder stock be developed, similar to that of the Mauser Broomhandle and the FN GP35, to enhance the effective range of the Model 11. However, a simple tubular telescoping stock was eventually designed and manufactured, which was attached to the pistol via a tapped hole in the frame. The holster ended up being made of canvas with a separate slip to accommodate the telescoping stock.

When Russ Robinson returned to the UK in the latter part of 1945, he took with him a number of S.R. Model 11 Machine Pistols complete with tubular stocks and canvas holsters. These guns were then later modified after tests in 1946. While these tests were carried out by the UK Ordnance Board, in another ironic twist, the trial report was signed by Major J.E.M. Hall, the Australian Army officer whose advice led to specifications for a 9mm machine pistol being laid down in Australia and ultimately resulted in the development of the S.R. Model 11. Major Hall had been transferred to the UK to work on various small arms projects, and was in charge of a design team working on the .280 rifle project.

The S.R. Model 11, in its initial form, resembled a normal semi-automatic pistol, with the exception of the grooves machined into the exterior of the long barrel. Conducting further research for this article proved the old adage that “hands-on” research provides new insights into a subject. Up until now, it was commonly believed that only four S.R. Model 11 9mm Machine Pistols, including the prototype, were manufactured at SAF Lithgow, though there were some references in official files to a fifth gun being manufactured for spares only. The fifth gun was recently discovered in an official collection in Australia, and it is in an unmodified condition, unlike the other existing Model 11 guns that were modified in England. With the number 5 marked on the slide, it appears that this gun was assembled at SAF Lithgow, and somehow ended up in this official collection along with a modified Model 11 that is now in another official collection within Australia. This discovery allows us to view for the first time what the original Model 11 looked like prior to being modified in England. The markings on this fifth gun match those shown in the original drawings, and the differences between the unmodified and modified specimens are quite striking. The most obvious difference is the extended tang on the pistol grip while the modified slide is longer, heavier and has different markings.

Trials and Tests in the UK

In 1946, the Model 11 underwent sand and mud tests at Enfield held in conjunction with accuracy tests. Major Hall ran these trials, and the accuracy tests produced some interesting results. The Model 11 was found to be more accurate in full-auto fire than the Sten Mk V and the Polish-designed Machine Carbine Experimental Model (MCEM), which is believed to be the MCEM 2. Both the Sten Mk V and the MCEM 2 were used as controls in both the accuracy and sand/mud tests. The accuracy tests showed that the Model 11 was not as accurate as the two control guns in semi-auto fire. The sand and mud tests showed some problems with the change lever and also clearance between the magazine and the housing had to be increased slightly.

Russ Robinson’s work for the British at the time concentrated more on machine guns so the Model 11 received only spasmodic attention to improve the design. After carrying out their initial tests, the Ordnance Board (OB) felt that if it looked like a pistol, was carried like a pistol in a holster, was used like a pistol, and its weight was like a pistol, then it should shoot like a pistol in semi-auto fire. The OB advised Robinson that the gun should be re-designed so that it would provide accurate semi-auto fire but at the same time maintain the accuracy levels achieved with full-auto fire. This was easier said than done, as it would require a major re-design of the Model 11 to allow semi-auto fire from a front sear position, and a change from a fixed firing pin to a more conventional floating firing pin. Robinson looked at this, and this re-design was known as the Model 16. Unfortunately, the Model 16 was never built, with the exception of some firing fixtures.

In 1948, Robinson experimented with heavy alloy metals to try and increase the weight of the slide without making the gun more bulky. Using an alloy made by General Electric Company known as “Heavy Alloy”, which was 50% heavier than steel, new slides were manufactured which were slightly thicker and longer than the original slides. Modifications to the frame included welding an extension to the tang of the frame. Slides were manufactured and fitted to the Model 11 guns that Robinson had brought with him from Australia, and it was envisaged that further tests would result in a total re-design and lead to further manufacture. These tests never occurred because Russ Robinson moved to the United States, and the British had by then adopted the Patchett submachine gun.

Operation of the Model 11

The S.R. Model 11 is a very simple gun with a total of just 22 parts including checkered wooden grips and screws. It has a floating barrel that is the secret of the low recoil force in the various machine pistols designed by Russ Robinson. The floating barrel enabled the forward momentum of the slide to be fully harnessed to pre-absorb almost half of the recoil. The automatic ejection of the magazine is accomplished by an ejection system that is triggered when the rising magazine follower strikes the magazine retainer when it rises to the top of the magazine. The release of the magazine retainer permits the magazine ejector to thrust the magazine downward and out of the butt. At the same time, a heel on the ejector rises and holds the slide slightly to the rear of the sear position. When a loaded magazine is thrust in place, the magazine ejector is rocked upward by the rear wall of the magazine and its heel is withdrawn allowing the slide to move forward .025 inches to rear (cocked) position, and the gun is ready to fire.

When the trigger is pressed, the slide is accelerated forward by the driving spring, the rear end of which bears rearward against the barrel and holds it against its rear stop. As the slide moves forward, it forces the barrel to rotate at a fairly constant angular speed by the grooves in the slide nut engaging the external grooves on the barrel. By the time the slide reaches forward or firing position, the rotational energy of the barrel is about one half that of the fired bullet. When the fixed firing pin of the slide strikes the primer and ignites the charge, a very slight delay occurs while combustion fully develops. At the speed the slide is moving, it wants to move about .030 inches before the recoil is sufficient to arrest and then reverse the motion of the slide. Because of this delay, the slide is arrested in 9mm weapons not by recoil, but by the slide striking the fixed barrel and frame via the fully chambered cartridge case. The greater part of the forward energy of the slide is dispersed into the frame or pistol grip. In order to make the forward energy or movement of the slide fully available to pre-absorb almost one half of the recoil, the barrel of the Model 11 is allowed to slide forward with the slide.

As the bullet leaves the muzzle it has about twice the rotational energy as that of the rotating barrel, so the barrel rotation is arrested and reversed by the rotating bullet. But as the slide moves rearward, the barrel’s rotation is decelerated so that the decelerating torque is in the same sense as the accelerating torque when the slide is going forward. Thus the heavy torque impulse to spin the bullet is replaced by a continuous very small torque which is applied throughout the entire cycle of fire, and which is too small to affect aim during automatic firing.

Each cycle of fire in the Model 11 is followed by a small cushioned blow of the slide against the rear buffer of the pistol grip, which represents a reserve of energy to provide for elevated firing or firing under foul conditions. The blows against the buffer can be felt, but they are very small compared with usual 9mm recoil. The Model 11 was not a true constant reaction gun but it employed a combination of the constant reaction principle with rotating the barrel in the direction of projectile spin, and recoil was reduced greatly by this unique combination. Robinson found that the rapid firing of the gun produced a succession of reactive torque impacts upon the gun, thus affecting accuracy. There is a tendency for such a firearm to react with non-axial twisting pulses. And if these impacts could be cushioned so that the impact is applied to the gun over a long time, then the effects on accuracy due to imparting bullet spin in a very light weapon can be virtually eliminated. The selector mechanism used with the Model 11 is a simple three-position system. The selector is ambidextrous and can be used with either trigger finger. The full-auto position is when the selector lever is fully up and parallel with the slide. Moving the selector lever downwards about 20 degrees clicks it into semi-auto position; and in the safe position the selector lever is fully down and blocking access to the trigger while internally locking the sear.

Ejection of empty cases is via an ejection port in the top of the slide. With the exception of a magazine change, all operations necessary to use the gun require only one hand, thus meeting a major specification laid down back in Australia. Magazine capacity was 14 rounds for the initial holster friendly magazine, and 30 for the subsequent magazines.

The Model 11 U.S. Patent

In 1970, Russ Robinson applied for a U.S. Patent on the concepts he developed with the original Model 11, with the U.S. Patent Office granting the patent on June 12, 1973. The patent disclosed two different approaches to the original ideas as used in the original Model 11, and the additional approach is worthy of some discussion.

The original approach is disclosed though with some differences from the actual Model 11. Rather than have the recoil spring positioned around the barrel as in the actual Model 11, the patent disclosed having the recoil spring being positioned below the barrel. It is believed that this approach was used in the design of the later Model 16. Another difference disclosed in the patent involved the addition of a ring of a resilient material, such as synthetic rubber, to the forward bearing surface between the slide and the external helical grooves in the barrel. This feature was included specifically for the Model 11 as a “…type of firearm…in which a short dwell time occurs in the movement of the slide after it has completed its counter recoil movement and before it receives its recoil movement…”

The alternate embodiment disclosed in the patent was for a firearm with a rotating barrel and two bearings, one at the front of the barrel and the other at the rear, the rear bearing being positioned in the receiver of the firearm. The design allowed for the barrel to be restrained from longitudinal movement, but allowed for the unobstructed rotation of the barrel within the receiver and within the constraints of the two bearings. The receiver included a saddle at the front of the receiver with a friction clip or clamp as a part of the saddle. The friction clip or clamp utilized a simple tension screw that was threaded into a threaded hole in the saddle.

Tightening the screw increased the clamping action of the friction clip and increased the torque resisting the rotation of the barrel with respect to the receiver. When correctly adjusted, the firing of a shot resulted in the barrel being reactively spun by the projectile to an angular velocity in which its angular momentum, less the losses generated by friction, was equal to but opposite to that imparted by the projectile. This resulted in the clamping torque being applied to the barrel so that the barrel was brought to a rest in a period considerably longer than the period of projectile travel in the barrel. Reduction of the torque level and its application to the receiver resulted in the cushioning of the reactive torque impact on the receiver.

Research into the various guns developed by Russ Robinson has failed to find any particular firearm that utilized this version of the invention, and it is believed that this approach was a theoretical design and concept that was never proven in an actual firearm.

The Model 11/16 as a PDW

Examination of personal and official files has shown that, if the problem of semi-auto fire could have been solved quickly, the British would have seriously considered adopting the Robinson gun for use in a multi-purpose role replacing the pistol and the machine carbine. This is the role that Russ Robinson envisioned right from the start for the Model 11, a role now known as a PDW or Personal Defense Weapon.

Initially, the S.R. Model 11 was designed as a standard holster weapon for officers, NCOs, drivers, jungle artillerymen and such, but the fact that it was so light and able to be used with one hand opened up many possibilities for use by other military personnel. Robinson felt that a 2.5-pound 9mm carbine that is normally carried in a holster would be extremely valuable for street and jungle fighting, and night operations. He envisioned that, combining the use of such a weapon with the standard infantry rifle, there would appear to be little requirement for the orthodox type carbine.

The OB was of the opinion that a combination of the self-loading pistol and the machine carbine would be very interesting, but weight would be a major factor. The weight would have to compare favorably with other self-loading pistols for it to be seriously considered. While the weight factor was easily achieved, it was the semi-auto requirement that was awkward to achieve without a major re-design of the gun.

The Model 16 still kept many of the highly desirable features of the Model 11, including one-handed operation, ejection of empty magazines, selective-fire capability, and most critical, a projected weight of 2 pounds 4 ounces unloaded.

The story of the Model 11 finished when Russ Robinson moved to the US, and no further development of the Model 11 or Model 16 occurred. However the specifications laid down for the Model 11 so many years ago mirror, in many aspects, current requirements and operational roles for a PDW/OPW.

Perhaps we do need to reflect upon what has occurred in the past, take heed, and start to break out of the circle that continues in small arms design. Many of today’s so-called advances in small arms have their roots in the past, when lessons were not heeded. Just imagine what would have happened if the British had adopted the Model 11 or 16. Much time, money and effort would not be expended today trying to create a solution that may already exist. In a conversation with Russ Robinson in 1995, he indicated that he would be glad to undertake the design of an improved Model 16 if a firm requirement arose from a responsible source. Regrettably, following his passing away in late 1998, this will not occur. But, perhaps we may still see such a gun incorporating Russ Robinson’s concepts and ideas.

The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of the following: Australian Army Engineering Agency (A.A.E.A.), (formerly A.T.E.A., Army Technical & Engineering Agency), Maribyrnong, Victoria, Australia; MOD Pattern Room, Nottingham, United Kingdom; the late Mr. Herb Woodend, and the late Mr. Russell S. Robinson in the preparation of this article. Their assistance is gratefully appreciated.

by Julio A. Montes

The Fuerza Aérea de Chile (FACh) was established in February, 1913 at El Bosque, and by the year 2000, the service was rated among the best in Latin America. There are four main airports within the Santiago, Chile metropolitan area. The Benitez Airport is the International Airport; while Tobolaba Airport functions as the domestic terminal. The main Air Force Base is located at El Bosque, and the 2nd Air Brigade formerly operated from Los Cerrillos Air Base. We will take this opportunity to have a closer look into the modern and efficient Chilean Air Force, with emphasis on its elite ground element and a review of their small arms.

Currently, the principal air superiority fighter is the F-5E. It was acquired in the US but highly modified and modernized by the local ENAER Company, with assistance from Israel (IAI), with the Elta EL/2032B multimode radar, integrated EW, and new jammers, chaff/flare dispensers, HOTAS controls, El-Op HUD, central air data computer and other improvements. The Tiger III – as it is called now – is able to use the latest air-to-air missile series produced by Israel, such as the Python III & IV.

The Air Force also acquired the complete fleet of Belgium Mirage 5 fighters modernized to Elkan standard. The M5 Mirages were overhauled and modernized by SABCA in Belgium and placed for sale as soon as the work was completed due to defense budget cuts in that European nation. The Elkan (Guardian) standard includes canard surfaces, nose strakes, MIL-STD 1553D databus, GEC Ferranti HUD, Thomson CSF laser rangefinder, NAVWAS with a contour matching terrain system, active and passive ECM, HOTAS, Martin-Baker MK-10 ejection seats, and a single point refueling probe. Chile purchased the entire stock, and in doing so, the FACh was able to greatly improve the combat element of its air force.

The FACh already operated several Mirage 50 modified by the ENAER/IAI team to the Pantera standards. The Pantera (Panther) includes canard surfaces, multimode Elta EL/M2001B radar, Elta nav/attack system, Caiquen III RWR, and Eclipse chaff/flare dispensers. The combat element is complemented with a handful of Vietnam-era A-37B Dragonflies, and more recent A-36 Falcons (Halcones), or Spanish CASA C-101s assembled locally.

In 1954, the Chilean Air Force reorganized its basic structure that survives to this day. The FACh Combat Command is divided into 5 Air Brigades (AB). Each brigade consists of one Base Wing, with two or four operational Squadrons (Groups), a liaison flight, an air defense group, and an electronic communication group: The 1st AB is housed at Los Condores, in the northern Iquique; the 3rd AB is based at El Tepual, in Puerto Montt; the 4th AB operates from Ibanes at Punta Arenas, and the 5th operates from Cerro Moreno, Antofagasta. Until recently, the 2nd AB was housed at Los Cerrillos, in the vicinity of Santiago, but the unit is in the process of relocating. Also based in Los Cerrillos is the Escuadrilla de Boinas Azules.

BLUE BERETS

The FACh organized a special jump team on 27 November, 1971. The team would eventually adopt the name Boinas Azules (Blue Berets), and has achieved considerable success in the sport arena, winning the parachute championship celebrated at Girardet, Colombia, every year since 1997. As implied by their name, their distinctive attire is the blue beret.

All members of the team must complete the rigorous course at the Army Parachute and Special Forces School, with each team member averaging approximately 2000 jumps. With such an impressive resume it was obvious that the team could accomplish other special operational tasks. Therefore, in time of war, each team member is ready to function as Combat Air Controller, and the team, as a whole, has mastered some 75 combat specialties.

The first jump of the Chilean Parachute battalion took place on 20 August, 1965 before passing on to form the nucleus and cadre of the renamed Army Special Forces and Parachute School. This facility provides training to the Blue Berets in the specialties of Jump Master, Pathfinder, Rigger, and HAHO and HALO techniques. Jump platforms are provided by C-130s and CASA Aviocars C-121s.

Small arms available to the team members are basically the same than those used by the Army Commandos, ranging from CZ-75, Beretta 92F and Sig P220 pistols, and Taurus PM-12, FAMAE-SAF, UZI and MP5 submachine guns. For precision work, the Blue Berets prefer the Galil SR99 in 7.62mm.

The SAF & Mini SAF submachine guns are based on the proven SIG design, bearing resemblance to the SIG short carbines. The guns contain modular construction as to make most parts interchangeable. The upper and lower groups are made of stamped sheet steel and the overall finish is in black phosphate. The function is by blowback and they all have a last shot hold-open device to speed reloading. The sights are very similar to the MP5 type with a rotary drum rear and a hooded post up front. The rear sight has 50, 100, and 150 meter range selectors and can be adjusted for windage. A quick detachable scope mount can be mounted on the upper receiver. The guns are well made and robust, and use straight line magazines. The Mini-SAF has a 115mm barrel while the standard SAF has a 200mm barrel. The Mini-SAF can be fitted with a folding stock in much the same manner as the MP5K PDW.

FACh AIR DEFENSE REGIMENT

The Air Defense Regiment was established on 15th May, 1930. Today, the Grupo de Defensa Antiaérea 24 and the Grupo de Comunicaciones y Detección 34 are part of 1st Air Brigade (Los Condores AB, Iquique); Grupo de Defensa Antiaérea 25 and Grupo de Comunicaciones y Detección 35 are part of 3rd Air Brigade (El Tepual AB, Puerto Montt); Grupo de Defensa Antiaérea 23 and the Grupo de Comunicaciones y Detección 33 are part of 4th Air Brigade (Carlos Ibañez AB, Punta Arenas); Grupo de Defensa Antiaérea 21 and the Grupo de Comunicaciones y Detección 31 are part of 5th Air Brigade (Cerro Moreno AB, Antofagasta). The 2nd Air Brigade (Los Cerrillos AB) was originally equipped with the Grupo de Defensa Antiaérea 22 and Grupo de Comunicaciones y Detección 32, that later formed the nucleus of an Air Defense Regiment at Colina. In early 2003, Gral. Osvaldo Sarabia Vilches announced a reshuffle of the FACh units, including the transfer of the AD Regiment from Colina to Quintero Air Base, and its reorganization into a Rapid Deployment Force.

The Regiment is tasked with the defense of FACh airfields and facilities. The unit performs in a role very similar to the RAF Regiment. Each Group is divided into a ground defense element, and an AD element. The black beret worn by these operators also indicates the completion of the Army Commando Course, and prompts the nickname Aquilas Negras (Black Eagles). The Army Commando course at Pelpedue lasts 5 months. The first Commando Course took place from the first to the thirtieth of November in 1962. Elements of the regiment are also trained as Commando Instructors, Snipers, and Para-divers by the Army. In 1999 the Course PARASAR (Combat Parajumper SAR) was introduced to add Combat SAR skills to the regiment. The course covers trauma treatment, emergency medical response, extraction under any environment and conditions, parachute skills, diving, mountain SAR and basic aeronautics.

Until recently, the main air defense weapon was the British made Blowpipe SAM, but now the unit is equipped with the French Mistral MANPAD. There are also some Oerlikon DGF-001 35mm guns and one was on display for us at Los Cerrillos along with one Mistral MANPAD. Until recently there were some 20mm gun batteries still in use. The locally built FAMIL 20 is particularly interesting in that the first systems used recycled 20mm guns taken from obsolete Vampire fighters. The guns were matched to a locally designed mount to give a basic but fast tracking air defense system, and the rate of fire was reduced for ground use.

Until the National Workshop & Military Factories (FAMAE), was able to obtain the license for the production of SIG rifles and carbines, the military forces purchased weapons from many diverse sources. This is reflected in the various small arms, and other weapons systems, where we found material from very diverse origins. The 5.56mm Galil rifle, along with the newly arrived 5.56mm Minimi squad machine gun, is the standard weapon of the Regimental troops and Combat SAR operators. The FACh uses the MAG-58 in place of the more common HK21 and MG-3 found with the Army. The SIG rifles, built locally by FAMAE, also appear to be solely assigned to the Army. Officers carry the CZ-75 or the Beretta 92F pistols. There are some Milkor L6 Striker 6-round grenade launchers, and SPAS-15 shotguns, although there is considerable use of the more traditional Winchester and Remington models.

For precision work, there is the Galil SR99 semiautomatic in 7.62mm and Barrett M82 in 12.7mm. The SR99 was developed starting in 1982, when a requirement was issued in Israel for a precision rifle for ranges from 300 to 600 meters with standard ammunition. The SR99 is a gas operated rifle using a rotating bolt inside a bolt carrier which is propelled by the gas piston. The rifle comes with a barrel of 508mm in length and a folding stock, which makes it very compact for movement. The rifle also comes with a standard 6×40 telescope sight, and it is fed by a 20-round box magazine.

For base security and patrol, the regiment used, until recently, several armored vehicles made locally. The Makina Carancho 180 was made by Makina Ltda based on the Chevrolet S-10 pick up truck. The Makina Multi 163 has a hull with a shape very similar to the UR-416 and is based on a modified commercial design.

ANTI HIJACKING GROUPS

The ASA (agrupación Anti-Secuestros Aéreos) is a little known elite anti-hijacking element of the FACh. The unit lives in great secrecy, housed at “La Casona” (large house), a hangar located somewhere inside the Arturo Merino Benitez International Airport. The A.S.A. was established by government decree in 1981 with the sole responsibility to deal with terrorism and hijacked airplanes. It is thought that the unit consists of no more than 200 operators divided in several squadrons composed of 4-man teams. The Special Combat Skill badge must be earned by these operators by attending the respective training at the Army’s Parachute and Special Forces School. The course has duration of 4 1/2 months, and between others, the candidates are taught Tae Kwon Do to become experts in hand-to-hand combat. The A.S.A. has received training from the GIGN (France), GSG-9 (Germany), and HRT (USA). The unit has proved to be extremely effective by foiling a hijacking at Matavari Airport in the Eastern Island in 1989 and another hijacking attempt was thwarted in 1995 at Cerro Moreno Airport, Antofagasta.

Internal Security is the responsibility of the Carabineros, under the Ministry of Defense. The Carabineros are divided into 12 Police Regions, with one additional Police Region for the Metropolitan Area (Santiago). The Metro Police consists of 6 Zones, with 10 police precincts, sub-divided into several commissaries. There is a Special Forces precinct with the 28th, 29th and 40th SF commissaries, which are mainly anti-riot police squads. For SWAT type missions, the Carabineers work with the GOPE, or Grupo de Operaciones Policiales Especiales. The GOPE has been trained by the Germans and Israelis and it is believed that the GOPE consists of some 200 operators, divided in cells of 4 operators, and platoons of 25 to 30 men.

The similar UAT, or Unidad Anti-Terrorista, is located at the Tobolaba Airport, in Santiago, and remains under the Ministry of the Interior. The UAT consists of 150 operators divided into seven-man teams.

Small arms available to all these operators are basically the same, ranging from Beretta 92F and Sig P220 pistols, and FAMAE-SAF, UZI and MP5 submachine guns. There are also SIG SG-540 and Steyr AUG 5.56mm rifles, and several types of shotguns.

For precision work, these commandos prefer the German MSG-90 7.62mm, which comes equipped with a receiver meeting NATO-STANAG 2324 that allows a large assortment of optical and electronic sights to be mounted. The standard sight is a 12x telescope with range settings from 100 to 800 m. As with the SR99, the MSG is a semiautomatic rifle capable of rapid fire.

Additionally, there is the German Mauser SP-66 in 7.62mm that uses the Gehmann bolt system allowing fewer disturbances when operating the bolt. The rifle comes with a 650mm long barrel, and meets the same STANAG 2324 as the MSG-90. For extreme precision distance shooting, the commandos use the 12.7mm Barrett M82.

THE FUTURE

The very dear Hawker Hunter fighters were retired in 1995 with the arrival of more modern equipment. In 1988, Chile placed in orbit its first satellite, the Fasat-Bravo, launched from Baikonur, Russia. In 2000, the first female cadets were accepted in the Chilean Air Academy. On January 30, 2002, the Air Force Commander announced that the service is to invest $600 million in purchasing 10 F-16C Block 50 fighters from the United States. The F-16C had competed against the French Mirage 2000-5 and the Swedish Gripen. For most of the competition, the Swedish machine was ahead of the game, but last minute negotiations resulted in a change of heart in favor of the US aircraft. In return for choosing the F-16s, Chile hopes for two realizations: the approval and signature of the Free Trade Agreement with the US, and the possibility that the Falcons be supplemented with several more second-hand F-16 aircraft coming by transfer from US surplus. The FACh leadership would like to replace all front line fighters with F-16s, and several electronic and weapons systems already used in the Tigers, Panteras and Elkans could be recycled to the Falcons. With the F-16C fighters, the FACh will become the most modern air force in the region.

by N.R. Parker

If you become seriously interested in the guns you own, and are interested enough to start researching the history of a particular gun such as who designed or invented it, sooner or later you may want to see if there are any patents granted by the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) that relate to the particular gun. This article is intended as a guide to finding any patents that may have been granted by the USPTO, the classification systems used, and conducting a search on the USPTO Web Site.

There are a number of ways to see if a patent has ever been granted for a gun, though doing it via the USPTO web site is probably the easiest and the quickest. Bear in mind that there are unfortunately restrictions on what you can search, and how you can search, and when one takes into account that the USPTO has granted over 6.5 million patents since 1790, one of the main problems for the USPTO is the size of the database. Currently it is about 4 terabytes large, and full search capabilities are restricted to patents granted from 1976 onwards. This restriction does affect the patent searcher, especially if they are interested in firearms from the pre-20th century through to 1976 era. However, before we get too deeply involved, let’s look at some basics.

Patent Classifications

The USPTO uses its own unique patent classification system, and while there is another more widely used system, called the International Patent Classification (IPC) which is used outside of the US, we won’t examine the IPC system for now. There are Concordances available that give an IPC to USPTO and USPTO to IPC equivalent classifications and checking these can be helpful in finding foreign patents, as foreign countries use the IPC system extensively. As the US system is the one we’re interested in, let’s probe a little deeper into the USPTO patent classification system.

US Patents are placed into over 400 different classes, depending upon the patented item. There are 4 main classes that are of interest for our purposes and these are Classes 42, 86, 89, and 102. These classes are Firearms (Class 42), Ammunition and Explosive Charge Making (Class 86), Ordnance (Class 89), and Ammunition and Explosives (Class 102). There are other classes that are also of related interest including Class 124 (Mechanical Guns and Projectors). As the four main classes 42, 86, 89 and 102 are of most interest to us, let’s look at the USPTO class definitions.

The following definitions are extracted from the USPTO Manual of Classification.

CLASS 42 FIREARMS – CLASS DEFINITION

This class includes all the portable firearms, i.e., those which are supported by hand when operated, such as shoulder guns, pistols, toy firearms and cane guns, except the automatic or explosion-operated firearms. This class also has such firearms combined with cleaners, entrenching devices, bayonets, and other cutters (including specifically pistol-swords). The following devices are likewise found here either, per se, or in combination with the firearm; ram rods, gun-rests and some body supported arm rests.

CLASS 86 AMMUNITION AND EXPLOSIVES MAKING – CLASS DEFINITION

Instruments and processes peculiarly adapted for making fixed ammunition, including percussion caps, cartridges, or other explosive charges for firearms or ordnance, pyrotechnic devices, blasting charges, etc.

CLASS 89 ORDNANCE – CLASS DEFINITION

This class includes all guns adapted to be mounted or supported otherwise than by hand, all explosion-operated guns including hand and shoulder firearms, bomb dropping devices, and those gun combinations and sub-combinations which are not provided for in other classes including mounts, supports, carriages, loading and hoisting mechanisms, shields.

CLASS 102 AMMUNITION AND EXPLOSIVES – CLASS DEFINITION

This is the residual class for ammunition propelled by explosives and explosive methods or means which includes:

Missile, blasting means, payload, pyrotechnic, gun ammunition and/or miscellaneous explosive means. Gun barrel cleaning means which are propelled through the barrel by explosive or fluid under high pressure. Fluid under high pressure, other then chemical reaction, which escape very rapidly. Material which burns or combusts which is intended to be projected, dropped, thrown, or propelled is proper for the class. (1) By releasing a combustion material to the atmosphere, e.g., gas, incendiary shell, grenade, etc. (2) by generating heat to damage an object, e.g., thermite means. Sub-combinations peculiar to the class which are not classified in other classes, e.g., cartridge case, primer igniter, fuse, sabot, rifling band, wad, propellant form, etc. Dummy, practice, drill, training ammunition, etc., is classified with the conventional ammunition.

All of these classes are sub-divided into sub-classes, and the Manual of Classification used by the USPTO is always under revision.

An important point to remember is that all US patents, regardless of their age, are listed under their current classification on the USPTO Web Site. It is highly likely that, due to the revision of the classification system over time, the current classification may not be the classification originally given to the patent when granted.

For this reason, it is important to check the Manual of Classification as an initial step if checking by classification rather than by other means, such as the inventor’s name. If we don’t know the USPTO classification, we can search by description which will give us the class, and sub-class we are looking for, and once we have the class or sub-class, we can go from there.

Patent Databases at the USPTO Web Site

The USPTO web site provides searching by a number of different search criteria, and these are the quick, advanced and patent number searches. There are two databases that may be searched, and these are the Full-text since 1976 database, and the Full-page images since 1790 database.

Another database that may also be searched is that of Patent Applications which have been published since March 15, 2001. We will discuss the Patent Application database later, as there are special criteria that apply to this database.

The Full-text database allows you to search by some 30 different search fields, ranging from Title and Date through to Name of Inventor, US Classification, International Classification, and through to Claims and Description. The Full-text database also allows searching by certain time periods, and this is from 1976 onwards. This helps when narrowing down search criteria. When displayed, a list of patents granted post 1976 display the patent number and the title of the patent.

The Full-page Image database basically allows you to search by US classification, number or date only. When a list of patents granted prior to 1976 are generated by a search, all that is displayed is the patent number and the class or classes under which the patent is classified.

We are restricted to 1976 and onwards for full-text search, and this includes the name of the inventor or the name of the assignee if the patent is assigned to a firm or if the rights of the patent were assigned to another party or person or company. It is highly unlikely that the full-text search for pre-1976 US patents will change in the future, but for the present, it does restrict doing simple searches. There are a number of ways to get around this restriction, though it usually means checking patents individually to see if any patents listed under a certain class were granted to a particular person or company.

Another database that is searchable is that of Patent Applications. Since March 15, 2001 the USPTO has published Patent Applications. While in foreign countries patent applications have been published some eighteen months after application, until recently patent applications have been kept from public eyes due to US patent laws. Currently, there are a number of reasons to exempt a patent application from publication with the main reason requiring the applicants to submit a signed form with the patent application requesting non-publication of the patent application because there will be no filing of an application in a foreign country. This restricts publication until the patent has been granted. However, if no such request is submitted then the patent application is published. Many applicants do not seek publication for obvious reasons. These include commercial reasons, and if you have a lot of time, effort and money invested in an invention, why let the competition know what you’re doing? Intellectual property rights, such as patents, are valuable and many companies will go to extreme measures to ensure protection of their intellectual property. The Patent Application database is a full-text database and the same rules apply to searching as for post-1976 patents, with the exception that the database is limited to post March 15, 2001 for the date.

No matter what database is used to search; the patent numbers displayed are simply clicked on to allow viewing of the patent, either in full-text version or in full-page images. Viewing US patents does require some software that is downloadable from the USPTO web site via a link or by simply clicking on a URL.

Patent Viewing Software, Associated Software Problems and Access Controls

All the US patents require a file viewer to allow for correct downloading, viewing and printing of the patent in question. The patent files are TIFF file format, but not your normal TIFF file. The TIFF file viewer must specifically display TIFF files using ITU T.6 or CCITT Group (G4) compression. This means that you must use a plug-in to your browser to allow viewing of the patent images, and unfortunately there is a limited number of plug-ins that will permit this, and this is dependent upon the operating system of your PC.

For the Apple Macintosh, Apple’s freely distributed QuickTime version 4.1 or later will allow viewing, but does not provide printing capability. It is available from the Apple Web site at http://www.apple.com/software/.

For Windows system PC’s, the only free, unlimited time TIFF image viewers offering full-size, unimpeded patent viewing and printing unimpeded by any advertising on Windows x86 PCs are AlternaTIFF: http://www.alternatiff.com (tested on Internet Explorer, Netscape & Opera), InterneTIFF: http://www.innomage.com/inteneTIFF.htm (tested on IE & Netscape). For Linux, a plug-in called “Plugger” works nicely with Netscape Communicator. It is available at http://fredik.hubbe.net/plugger.html.

AlternaTIFF is a web browser add-on (ActiveX control or plug-in) and while it is free to use, it must be registered before it can be used to view images. If you use Netscape, Opera or another web browser, AlternaTIFF is available as a standard plug-in. If you use Internet Explorer 4.x and higher, it is available as an ActiveX control with auto install or as a downloadable ZIP file.

InterneTIFF consists of the viewer for Internet based TIFF images and innoVUE which is a viewer for locally saved TIFF images, and both of these viewers are bundled together when you download InterneTIFF. InterneTIFF works with IE 5.1, SP2, 5.5 and 6+ and Netscape Navigator, Communicator, Netscape6, Netscape7, Mozilla and Opera5+.

If there are any problems with either of these programs, check or read the FAQs on the respective web sites.

Once you have downloaded, installed the software and re-booted your PC, you are then able to view, print and save the patent TIFF files.

There are a number of problems associated with some of the software and downloading patent images, and the main one is that with AlternaTIFF, you are restricted to downloading the patent pages one at a time. With the full version of InterneTIFF, (check the web site for the current price), one can download, print or save the whole patent at once, without having to wait for individual pages to download. The free version, which allows for a 5-day evaluation during which you get to try all of the features, then reverts to printing, saving and viewing of each page. However, if you are prepared to download or print out the patent page by page, then use AlternaTIFF.

There is one other catch in using these programs. With AlternaTIFF, if you use your browser to view locally saved TIFF files, your browser may open the TIFF file with AlternaTIFF, but it is not as reliable as using a proper graphics application rather than a plug-in. With InterneTIFF, if you view locally saved TIFF files, you will use innoVUE, which is the file viewer for local TIFF files, and this means that all TIFF files on your PC will be opened by innoVUE. By default, your locally saved TIFF files are associated with innoVUE, and if you want to prevent innoVUE from opening your local TIFF files, you need to associate your TIFF files with a different application. You will have to use a graphics file viewer program such as Adobe PhotoShop or JASC’s Paint Shop Pro to open all TIFF files, including those which use the LZW file compression technique. Please remember this if you intend to download, store or print out a lot of US patents. If you want to be able to open a TIFF file directly and have it automatically open in a graphics application, you need to make sure TIFF files are associated with that application.

One way to associate files is to carefully follow these instructions:

1. Use Windows Explorer to locate any TIFF file on your computer, and select it (left-click).
2. Hold down the Shift key while you right-click on it.
3. Choose “Open With” from the menu.
4. Select your application from the list, or if it’s not listed, press “Other” to locate it.
5. Make sure “Always use this application…” is checked.
6. Press “OK”.

From now on, you should be able to view TIFF files by double clicking on them. (At least until you install some other application that changes your file associations again).

There is a warning from the USPTO that needs to be discussed here before we progress any further. The USPTO will not tolerate mass logins to their servers, with the subsequent mass downloading of patents. Individuals, companies, IP addresses, or blocks of IP addresses who, in effect, deny service to the general public by generating unusually high numbers (1000 or more) of daily database accesses (searches, pages, or hits), whether generated manually or in an automated fashion, may be denied access to these servers without notice. There are a specific number of users allowed at any one time, and as access, searching, downloading and printing is free via the web site, don’t abuse this access. The information available is a treasure trove, and there are commercial sites that charge quite high prices to do exactly what you can do for free at the USPTO web site. Abusing this facility will result in restricting or blocking your access. Conducting a patent search at the USPTO Web Site First thing we need to do is to download and install the appropriate software to view any patents available from the USPTO Web Site. As most people will be using a PC rather than an Apple Macintosh, initially I would suggest downloading the AlternaTIFF software from the following URL: http://www.alternatiff.com/

As stated above, this allows one to have free, unlimited patent viewing and printing from the USPTO Web Site. Once you have had some experience with searching, downloading, and viewing, I would suggest that you try the InterneTIFF software, and then purchase the full version if you intend doing extensive searches. The full version has some very good features for downloading, saving and printing patents. After downloading and installing the AlternaTIFF software, and connecting to the Internet through your ISP, go to the following URL: http://www.uspto.gov

As there are a number of different ways to search the patent databases, we will start with the following method, which also gives us an indication of the various sub-classes within a classification. We will look at other methods later on. So, what are we looking for? Is it in the firearms class, the ordnance class or the ammunition class? As an example, let’s assume it deals with automatic guns, and this places it in the ordnance class, this being class 89. Let’s go to the following URL: http://www.uspto.gov/go/classification

Next step is to check the actual class itself, so we click on the Class Numbers and Titles and that will take us to the following Web Page and URL. http://www.uspto.gov/go/classification/selectnumwithtitle.htm

We then scroll down to the class number, select the actual Class Number and Title, in this case 89, click “GO”, and the following Web Page and URL will be displayed.

When this is displayed in your browser, it will display the entire breakdown of the class and sub-classes within Class 89, and from this we can go to the particular sub-class we are interested in searching. To the left of every class or sub-class is an icon, which is a little white P in a red box. Clicking on this icon will result in a list of all US patents granted in the particular class or sub-class selected. This is one of the fastest ways to get a list of all US patents granted in that particular class or sub-class. If there are more than 50 patents in the class or sub-class, the patents will be displayed in a list of 50 patents per list, starting with the most recently issued patent and going through to the oldest patent issued for the sub-class. To check older patents will require clicking on the “Next List” box at the bottom of the page.

Patents with full-text search capability will be displayed with the patent number and patent title while patents granted prior to 1976 will display only the patent number and patent classification and sub-class(es) if classified in more than one sub-class.

Once we become familiar with the four main classes relating to firearms, and the sub-classes associated with the main classes, we can move on to searching with specific search fields in the full text database.

Searching the Full-Text Database

The Full-Text Database is a database that contains U.S. patents granted post-1976, and the database is capable of being searched by a number of specific fields. There are 30 specific fields by which the database may be searched, and these range from title, patent number, inventor, assignee, country, through to claim(s) and description/specification. You are even able to search for specific words within the description/specification field. To go to the Full-Text search page, enter the following URL for the Quick Search or Boolean Search Web Page: http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/search-bool.html

This will also give one-click access to other search pages such as the Advanced and Patent Number search pages as well as help files and searching by patent classification.

This page presents you with two terms and two fields that will allow you to search, and it is not necessary to enter all four items. You may also use the Boolean terms “ and”, “or”, and “and/not” to be more specific about the patents one is searching. Unless I am doing a search that needs to be very specific in the terms and the fields, I usually only enter one term and one field, and for what I am usually searching for, the Quick Search or Boolean Search page is the search page that I use most frequently.

The USPTO web site has extensive on-line help files for greater in-depth searching, such as that offered in the Advanced Search page, and explanations about the navigational icons used on the web site. If you intend to do a lot of searching, then spend some time and go through the help files as they explain more in far greater detail about patent searching than I am able to explain in this brief coverage. Once you get to know your way around the USPTO web site, most of the URLs listed here are available through one-click buttons.

Searching the Patent Application Database

Most of what has already been explained applies to searching the Patent Application Database with two exceptions. This Database covers the time period from year 2001 through to the present year, and the patent applications listed are only those where the applicant has not requested non-publication of the patent application. Patent applications subject to the non-disclosure request are only published when the patent is granted. If the patent is not granted, then the patent application is not available for examination by the public.

Other Methods of Patent Searching

There are a number of other methods of patent searching, and the most useful method basically involves spending some time at a library, but this may not be your local library. The USPTO has a program whereby libraries across the USA become part of the Patent and Trademark Depository Library (PTDL) Program. This program has been in place since 1871, and there are many libraries, both public and university, that are members of the PTDL Program. A full list of libraries is available at the following URL: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/ptdl/ptdlib_1.html

Using a PTDL is most useful when you are searching for patents granted prior to 1976 and these patent are not text-searchable on the USPTO web site. The PTDL Program provides a large amount of official documents in paper and electronic formats to libraries joining the PTDL Program, beginning with the year of PTDL designation. Part of the official material supplied to a PTDL are the Annual Indexes of Patents, Parts I and II, and the Official Gazette — Patents. The Annual Index of Patents, Part I is the List of Patentees, and this is probably the most valuable when searching old patents, as the patentee (or inventor) and the assignee (the person or company who owns part of or all of the patent) are listed alphabetically. All patents granted to an inventor are listed, and this will enable the researcher to quickly find the patents of interest. Currently, the most recent issue of the Annual Index of Patents is for the year 1997. If you are lucky, and the library closest to you has been part of the PTDL program for a long time, say back to 1900, then it is likely that they will have copies of the Annual Indexes back to 1900. If not, you may have to check with another PTDL library.

Once you have checked the Annual Indexes, and obtained the patent numbers you are seeking, it is then just checking the patents on the USPTO Web Site for viewing or printing.

There are also two books that are valuable when searching for specific patents dealing with automatic guns, and these are Volumes 4 and 5 of Chinn’s The Machine Gun series. The original 4-volume set of books covered US Patents relating to automatic guns up to 1954 while the fifth volume covered US Patents from 1955 through to 1971. If your field of interest is in automatic guns, these books are invaluable, as they give the patent number and patentee name(s), along with a brief abstract of the patent. Once you have the patent number, it’s a simple step to the Internet to view, save or print out the relevant patent.

To understand the world of patents, you need to understand about the classification system, which is the heart of the USPTO. Understanding the classification system and the various search fields will allow you to search an extremely valuable asset, an asset that directly chronicles the technological development of man.

In the firearms world, patents are a valuable asset for many companies and individual inventors/designers, as they represent formal recognition and protection of the unique designs that have been developed by the companies or the inventors/designers. So enjoy your searching. I’m sure you’ll find it an extremely interesting experience.

by Timothy Kast

Every shooter, at some time or other, requires really good gun oil. With the wide array of products on the market, the question becomes, which one? There are always adequate oils for everyday shooting chores, and another fancier grade for collector guns, then a different choice altogether for military weapons. Wouldn’t it be nice to chuck them all for one central quality lube that worked well on everything?

I was first introduced to TW-25B while on board one of Naval Special Warfare’s Mark Vs. While the crew was preparing the boat, the weapon’s chief was mounting the Ma Deuce Brownings and the 40mm grenade launchers in the aft pintles. After settling each gun into its mount, they would go over the entire firearm using a strange white grease and an aerosol spray of gun oil. The spray was unusual in that it dried to a matte, or dry finish, whereas most gun aerosols leave a shiny, wet residue on everything. Upon returning to the slip, I examined the parkerized finish on the weapons. To my surprise, the ocean’s salt water was beaded up on the barrels as if they had been waxed. On removal, a quick wipe-down was all that was needed before securing the weapons. That crew had been using TW-25B.

TW-25B is a non-corrosive, non-flammable and non-toxic lubricant that is unaffected by climatic conditions, dust and sand particles, or salt water. It has shown to eliminate galling in stainless steel, and has been proven to reduce carbon, copper, and lead build-up. It is ideal for black powder and military corrosive powders. It was developed to fulfill the rugged challenges of extreme environmental conditions while greatly enhancing the load bearing capability of the treated surface. Every instance where another lube had done an adequate job, TW-25B markedly excelled in that same scenario. I have routinely used WD-40 to coat freshly parkerized gun parts after refinishing. WD-40 is inexpensive and sold nearly everywhere. I have found, however, that TW-25B seals the open pores of the metal more efficiently so recoating is less of an issue. Where other lubes evaporate or wear off, TW-25B remains in place, especially in adverse conditions.

Reassembly of parkerized parts is made easier when the components have a thin coat of the TW-25B grease applied throughout the reassembly process. This is especially true when the firearm in question is being stored away for long periods of time. Corrosion is nonexistent when used in place of cosmoline or heavy grease. Cosmoline usually requires a lengthy cleaning regimen, whereas a gun treated with TW-25B can be pressed into service without further attention.

Barrels have often been the subject of controversy. Some people advise against the use of a petroleum based product on the bore of a barrel; yet neglect, rust and corrosion can easily pit a bore beyond salvage. The instructions for TW-25B recommend using this product in the bore. The manufacturer states that it will improve bore accuracy and actually increase muzzle velocity. I have personally used the spray on a clean patch run through the bore, and on guns that will be stored. I lightly lubricate a patch or mop with the TW-25B grease, then gently pass it through the bore. Naturally, as with any final exercise such as cleaning and lubricating a firearm, you would want to check the finished bore with a bore light to confirm a clean and unobstructed barrel. It is very long-lasting and will not freeze, wash off, or even burn off in between cleanings.

As a smith, I have observed that an alarming amount of malfunctioning firearms can be traced to a lack of lubrication on the moving parts of the gun. Magazines are often the most neglected. Take the floor-plate off a number of magazines and you will find a rusty, corroded mess. Neglecting lubrication for fear of attracting grit or sand, they can seize from a number of different causes including dried perspiration, rainwater, and surprisingly, grit. TW-25B when sprayed onto the magazine spring, the inside of the mag body and the follower will impart a dry film of lubrication that will prevent malfunctions. The outside of the magazine can also benefit from an application of this lubricant to make this part of your firearm more weather resistant.

In various discussions concerning gun lubes, many enthusiasts ask how long have you used a particular product and been pleased with it, and what type of scenarios have you used it in? My experience with TW-25B spans approximately seven years or more. I have employed it as both a spray, and a grease, in almost every conceivable manner within the firearms industry. It is particularly adept as a penetrant to access areas that a regular lube could not be worked into. It dries to a flat finish that will repel rain, sweat or salt water and can be restored simply by wiping with a paper towel or shop rag. The grease can be used on exterior surfaces of a parkerized firearm as a final seal in inclement weather. It has wide operating temperature range that encompasses -90° to + 450° Fahrenheit. Lubrication occurs microscopically, so there is penetration to the metal pores of the gun. Petro-Lubricant Testing Labs in Wharton, New Jersey repeatedly certified TW-25B to qualify under the United States Navy’s stringent FTM-4001 Test. This test, which requires the lubricant to be applied to a steel plate and subjected to a 5% salt fog for 500 hours, resulted in no rust and no corrosion. The superior properties of TW-25B have been discovered and specified by a number of military contractors and firearms experts worldwide, including the US Army Missile Command, US Army Special Forces, US Navy, US Navy SEALs, US Marine Corps, FBI Academy, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Gunsite Academy, Fabrique Nationale, Sigarms, Glock, Raytheon, United Defense, Dillon Aero, Knights Armament, General Dynamics Armament Division, Colt Mfg., Olympic Arms, Oto Melara, Para Ordnance Mfg., Sig Sauer & Son, Smith & Wesson and throughout law enforcement. TW-25B is formally specified for military use under the Defense Logistic Agencies National Stock Number (NSN). The sponsoring of those NSNs was pressed forward by the United States Navy. The National Stock numbers are listed below.

TW-25B (syringe)
NSN 9150-01-448-2266

TW-25B (1.5 oz. tube)
NSN 9150-01-439-0859

TW-25B (4 oz tube)
NSN 9150-01-439-1873

TW-25B (16 oz caulking tube)
NSN 9150-01-439-1864

TW-25B (16 oz zerk tube)
NSN 9150-01-439-0857

TW-25B (16.9 fl. oz spray)
NSN 9150-01-448-2298

Contact information:

Mil-Comm Products Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 43278
Upper Montclair, NJ 07043
Phone: (973) 743-5404
Fax: (973) 743-7139
www.milcomm.com

By Dan Shea

We keep our monuments, our graveyards, our collections of war trophies, in memory of those who went before. It is those who toiled and sacrificed and perhaps died in so doing, that we reflect about when we gaze on these relics. We remember the struggles that brought us our Freedom. Many small communities around the United States have a single monument, or almost forgotten grave markers, and once or twice a year local citizens appear and mow lawns, weed flowers, and generally spruce things up so that generations to come can be educated, and perhaps become intrigued by the stories of those sacrifices.

Similarly, a number of concerned people have banded together, and bonded with the Curatorial group at the U.S. Ordnance Museum in Aberdeen, Maryland. SAR has covered the museum and its collection in the past, but now we need to bring some things to the attention of our readers. It would appear that much of the collection is suffering horribly, despite the best efforts of a devoted staff and volunteers. Plainly put, they need some buildings. Some really, really big buildings, and they are having a fund raiser.

Tanks and cannons are somewhat above our normal subject matter, but the Ordnance Museum has numerous other displays and artifacts that are of great interest to the readers of SAR. Dr. William Atwater, Director/Curator of the Museum has been gracious in the past in allowing SAR to photograph the small arms artifacts that are not presently on display, and he and Roy (Ed) Heasley, Curator, as well as other Museum staff, have made arrangements for our writers and other small arms technical historians to study there.

With the wealth of small arms artifacts that are at the Museum, we have always had an interest there. It is impossible to not notice the damage that is occurring to many of the artifacts that are presently displayed outdoors. Many of the tanks and cannons on display had battle damage to begin with, but now the weather is having its way with them. There is also the danger of lead based paint from over 200 artifacts rusting away, as the residue washes off into the aquifer.

The Museum has several renovation facilities, and they do a wonderful restoration job. The state-of-the-art paint removal building that collects the hazardous materials is a sight to see, and the end results of their restoration work are being stored in various empty warehouses in the area. They are waiting for a day when they can be properly displayed. It is hoped that the current fund raising efforts will make that vision a reality in the near future.

The Ordnance Museum has worked up a plan using modern construction techniques, various work forces including the SeaBees and Engineers, and just plain artful fund raising, to build the needed facilities for about $3,000,000. We are certain that some politically savvy readers could help in finding Congressional backers, but as it stands, the Ordnance Museum Foundation is doing this on a private contribution level.

Our heritage is important. The weapons and trophies brought back from foreign wars allow the next generation, and the next, to understand what was done to secure their Freedom. The Ordnance Museum has always taken the time to get the general public in for educational purposes, and they always have time for the younger generations to come in and learn. We at SAR think it is important for those of us in the industry and military, as well as those with the general interest, to help make this information and experience become readily available. With that in mind, we are presenting a few pictures of Museum features, and how you can get involved in the process of really “Making a difference.” -Dan

Procedures for an Aberdeen Proving Grounds Ordnance Museum visit:

Hours: Open 7 days a week from 9:00 am to 4:45 pm. Closed on National Holidays except for Armed Forces, Memorial, Independence, and Veteran’s Days.

Due to heightened security, there is a new procedure for visitors without military or U.S. government ID. Obtain a Day Pass at the Maryland Blvd. Gate on Rte 715. Other gates will not issue passes.

Directions from I-95: Exit onto Rte 22 towards Aberdeen. Exit to Rte 40 W (right turn) through Aberdeen. Right on Rte 715 S. At the security gate, park in the visitor’s parking area and take your driver’s license (Picture ID) and car registration (or car rental papers) to the security personnel and get a Visitor’s Day Pass. You will only be authorized to drive to and from the Museum, not to other areas on the proving grounds.

How you can help:

The Ordnance Museum Foundation is a 501(c)(3) Non-Profit Corporation registered as a Charity with the state of Maryland. A donation made to the Foundation is tax deductible within the limits of Tax Laws. The Foundation has organized a “Building Campaign” in order to raise approximately $3,000,000 that is needed to construct the ten buildings needed to house the artifacts and complete some other needed renovations to existing structures and displays.

Some examples of the range of recognition that would be given to donors:

$100-$200: Walkway Brick with your name. $500-$1000: Lifetime Member and your name on the recognition plaque at the Museum. $1,000- $10,000: Lifetime Member and recognition plaque associated with a Museum artifact. $10,000 and up: Specific galleries named after the donor (individual or corporation). $300,000: A building named after the donor.

The Museum is quite flexible in developing appropriate methods of recognition within the limitations of Federal and US Army guidelines. A number of restoration projects have been funded by the families of veterans who served in a certain type of tank or vehicle, US or foreign, and they felt it was an appropriate tribute to that service to have the veteran’s name on a recognition plaque.

There are also a variety of annual and lifetime memberships in the Foundation, that support the activities as well,

For more information contact:

The Ordnance Museum Foundation, Inc

PO Box 688
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005
Tel: 410-272-3622
Fax: 410-278-7473
Website: www.ordmuseum.org
Email: ordmusfound@erols.com

Rumor has it that there might be a Cholly & Marie Steen building in the offing, but this is unconfirmed at press time. Marie has lobbied hard to help this fund raising event, and most of us just figured that Cholly would be unable to resist her charms when it came to ponying up for a building at his favorite museum. -Dan