During a recent visit to the Springfield Armory National Historic Site Museum in Springfield, Massachusetts, Small Arms Review was granted access to the area of the museum where weapons not on display are stored. Only 16-percent of the museum’s collection is currently on exhibit.

One might wonder why some of the more unique, one-off firearms are not on display. I have asked this question of several museum curators over the years, and the answer is always the same. The average military museum visitor is interested in seeing a rifle or handgun that was issued to them, their father or grandfather. Most are not interested in one-of-a-kind prototypes.

High Standard T48 7.62mm FN FAL Rifle Serial Number HS-1

One of the rarest FN FAL rifles was manufactured by the High Standard Corporation, Hamden, Connecticut in 1954. The Belgian FN FAL rifle, as originally manufactured in Europe, was produced using the metric system of measurement. Canada, Great Britain and the United States all used the Imperial system of inches. Any rifle produced in these countries would need to adhere to their standard of measurement. One of the obstacles encountered with the Belgian rifle was that all the factory drawings were done using the metric system.

The Springfield Armory was busy with the T44E4 rifles and numerous other projects and decided to turn the task over to a commercial entity. Bids were taken for the project, and the contract was eventually awarded to the High Standard Corporation. As part of the agreement, High Standard was to manufacture at least 12 functional FN FAL T48 rifles from their final drawings. Harrington and Richardson received a contract and manufactured 510 inch-pattern T48 rifles for testing and evaluation.

Inland M1 Carbine Serial Number 1

The M1 carbine was manufactured during World War II, issued to primarily arm personnel who were not engaged in front-line infantry fighting. The carbine used a new 7.62x33mm cartridge with a 110-grain bullet at a muzzle velocity at approximately 1,970 feet per second. The carbine was designed to supply a more effective weapon to those who would normally be issued a handgun. The M1 carbine was manufactured by a large number of contractors. One of those contractors was the Inland Division of General Motors. In the museum’s holdings is the first production M1 carbine made by Inland, serial number 1, with two unusual characteristics: a “web” forward of the trigger guard and a corrugated curved butt plate. The first five tool room models of the Inland carbine were made by R.F. Sedley, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.

T29 .30 Caliber Grease Gun Serial Number X38

The experimental T29 submachine gun was developed by the Guide Lamp Division of General Motors during the fall of 1944. The T29 is a straight blowback M3A1 “Grease Gun” chambered for the .30 carbine cartridge. The barrel is 14 inches in length; the overall length is 28.8 inches. Development was terminated with the introduction of the select-fire M2 carbine.

Savage Submachine Gun .45ACP Serial Number X-1

The experimental Savage submachine gun, caliber .45, was manufactured by Savage Arms, Utica, New York. Equipped with a folding spike bayonet, magazine and sling, this submachine gun shares many features with the production Reising M50 submachine gun and feeds from a 20-round Reising magazine. The weapon was designed in the 1940s by Eugene Reising for Savage Arms.

High Standard Submachine Gun .45 ACP Serial Number 7

The High-Standard Submachine Gun Caliber .45 was designed by Carl G. Swebilius of High Standard with the patents assigned to the corporation. The .45 caliber prototypes were made by High Standard; production UD42 9mm models were manufactured by Marlin for the United Defense Supply Corporation. Reportedly only seven weapons in caliber .45 ACP were made for submission to various testing boards.

Submachine Gun Thompson M1A1 .45 ACP Serial Number 1244194

Manufactured by Savage for the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, Bridgeport, Connecticut, this is a presentation M1A1 Thompson submachine gun with a polished blue finish. The serial number represents the total number of Thompson submachine guns; 1928, M1 and M1A1 models made by Savage. The weapon was donated to the Springfield Armory NHS by Savage Arms, Westfield, Massachusetts on October 17, 1978.

Swedish-K, 9mm Caseless Ammunition Serial Number 356615

A submachine gun that was introduced to the Navy SEALs at Fort Bragg and remained in their inventory through the Vietnam War, was the Swedish Model 45, also known as the m/45 or Swedish-K.

A Swedish-K submachine gun, serial number 356615, was converted by the U.S. Smith & Wesson Corporation to electrically fire caseless 9mm ammunition. The m/45 was followed by several S&W Model 76 submachine guns that were designed for caseless ammunition before the program was terminated.

Smith & Wesson Model 76, Caseless Ammunition Serial Number X219

Model 76 serial number X219 was one of several Model 76 submachine guns converted to fire caseless ammunition. The ammunition was fired electrically. Power was supplied by a 30-volt dry cell battery located in a compartment forward of the trigger guard. The magazine release lever was redesigned to clear the battery box. Note the on-off safety switch on the pistol grip (barrel is missing from the weapon).

U.S. Rifle, M1 Caliber .30 Serial Number 1

Manufactured by Springfield Armory, Springfield, Massachusetts in May 1934, this is the first model shop semi-automatic, gas-operated (gas-trap) M1 Garand rifle with 8-round clip feed mechanism. Manufactured by semi-production, tool room methods in the Model Shop at Springfield Armory under direct supervision of John Garand. The cost to the government for the 80-model shop M1 rifles was $1,831.00 in 1934, or $32,268.51 in 2018 dollars.

U.S. Rifle, M1 Caliber .30 Serial Number 81

This M1 was manufactured by Springfield Armory, Springfield, Massachusetts in 1937. It is the first series production model M1 gas-operated, semi-automatic rifle with 8-round clip feed mechanism. Parkerized finish with many small parts blued. This is the first production line M1 manufactured in 1937 at a cost of $214.54. Serial numbers 1 to 80 were tool room models.

U.S. Rifle, T20 Caliber .30 Serial Number 1

The T20 was manufactured at Springfield Armory, Springfield, Massachusetts in October 1944. Experimental gas-operated, select-fire rifle, essentially a modified M1 adapted to a 20-round detachable BAR box magazine. The receiver was made .3125-inch longer than a production M1 to solve a problem feeding from the BAR magazine. The weapon was designed to fire from open bolt in the full-auto mode; closed bolt in semi-auto mode. The open bolt feature did not adequately solve cook-off problems.

Muzzle velocity was 2750 feet per second and cyclic rate of fire 500rpm. Weapon has an overall length of 44.5 inches, a barrel length of 24 inches and weighs approximately 10 pounds without accessories. Development of the T20 model was terminated in January 1945 with recommendations that minor changes and strengthening of various components be made. A rifle incorporating these minor design changes was designated as the T20E1.

Remington T22E2 .30 Serial Number 1

Concurrent with Garand’s work on the T20 rifle, a competitive contract was awarded to Remington Arms Company to develop an improved M1 rifle. Remington’s prototypes were designed around a standard length M1 receiver. Like the T20, the T22 used a BAR-style 20-round magazine. Manufactured and developed by Remington Arms, Ilion, New York. The T22E2 was essentially an M1 converted to select fire and modified for a detachable box magazine.

Belt-Fed German Fallschirmjagergewehr, FG42

After World War II ended, the idea to develop a new U.S. general purpose, light machine gun was renewed. A captured World War II German weapon, a late model FG42, was examined and adopted as a base design. The FG42 (Fallschirmjagergewehr, or Paratroopers Rifle) was a limited production, shoulder-fired, rifle caliber weapon intended solely for the German paratroop forces, produced from stampings and welding.

The mechanical solution for the conversion was engineered by the Bridge Tool & Die Works, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1946. The resulting weapon is a conversion of the Type 2 FG42 German paratrooper rifle with the belt feeding mechanism of the Maschinengewehr 42, a German, belt-fed general purpose machine gun, fabricated from sheet metal stampings. The Bridge Tool & Die conversion weapon is a gas-operated, blowback type combination—air-cooled; bipod supported; with forward handgrip and rear shoulder stock. The receiver cover is marked WaA 147.

T33 Clarke Arms Rifle Serial Number 8

The Clarke Arms Company of Boston entered their T33 series rifles in the U.S. Ordnance Department’s lightweight rifle competition. The T33 rifle development program was begun in March 1949. The weapon was a lightweight, selective full- and semi-automatic rifle. The purpose of the lightweight rifle program was to replace the M1 rifle. This project was suspended in late 1950, because the weapon lacked sufficient ruggedness and demonstrated poor performance under adverse conditions. The Clarke Arms Company dissolved on December 22, 1954.

T44 Rifle Serial Number 1

The first 7.62mm T44 rifles were built on .30 caliber T20 receivers. Spacers were used in the receiver to adapt the T20 receiver for the shorter 7.62mm cartridges. A new short receiver, specifically designed for the 7.62mm round, was introduced on the T44E4 model.

First Production M14 Rifle Serial Number 2000

The first U.S. M14 rifle off the series production line at the Springfield Armory in 1957 was serial number 2000. The presentation grade rifle was finished in a high polish blue with a fine black walnut wood stock.

M14E2/A1 Rifle Prototype, Springfield Armory M14 Serial Number 6488

The M14 rifle as issued, was very difficult to fire accurately in full-automatic. As a result, many were issued with selector locks, limiting their operation to semi-automatic-only. In attempt to design an M14 that could effectively use its full-auto feature, the USAIB/M14 was conceived at Fort Benning, Georgia, by Captain Durward D. Gosney. The Springfield Armory M14 Serial Number 6488 was fitted with an in-line pistol grip stock, wooden foregrip, muzzle stabilizer and commercial rubber recoil pad. In this configuration, the M14 demonstrated that the automatic fire accuracy requirements could be consistently achieved.

Due to size limitations, only a small portion of the unique firearms stored at the Springfield Armory Museum are featured in this article, as are the brief descriptions. Watch future issues of Small Arms Review for more in-depth articles and photos on many of these weapons.

Special thanks to Curator Alex MacKenzie and the entire museum staff.

For more information about the museum:

Springfield Armory National Historic Site
One Armory Square, Suite 2
Springfield, MA 01105-1299
Phone: 413-271-3976 Website: nps.gov/spar

When I answered the phone, I could sense the frustration in his voice. The caller was a friend of mine who head up small arms procurement in a Scandinavian country. His quick greeting was followed by the description of a small machine screw. As he gave me the dimensions in millimeters, I banged out a few numbers on my calculator, and realized he was describing a 6-40 screw – common in our inch-system. He told me it was for a U.S.-made gun sight. He had checked all of his sources in Scandinavia and even some in Europe, but none of these suppliers had any on hand. He asked if I would buy him some of these screws so he could pick them up when he visited me in Florida during the following week.

This episode started me to thinking about U.S. small arms. Is it time we consider going metric? I know we’ve been at this crossroads before, but it has never happened. Maybe there are good reasons now to reconsider. If you’ll allow me to present some facts, I’ll let you be the judge.

One of the first facts to consider, is that a “decimal-based measurement system” (the metric system) was proposed by Thomas Jefferson in 1790 and the U.S. mint was formed to produce the world’s first decimal currency with the U.S. dollar equal to 100 cents. Our system of measure did not go that way. As I’m sure you know, our inch-system is a carryover from our days as an English colony. The last major holdouts for the inch system were one-time fellow colonies: New Zealand, Australia, and Canada who switched over to metric more than 40 years ago.

Flirtation with a Metric Small Arm-the FN FAL

In 1953, the U.S. military had to decide what they would do if the 7.62mm Belgian FN FAL (U.S. designation T48) were to win the competition against the U.S. T44 (M14.) After beating out the M14 in several trials, the FAL was on the fast track to become the official U.S. service rifle, but the FAL did have one detractor: the design was metric. To assure there would be no U.S. production problems, Harrington and Richardson was awarded a contract to convert the design over to the inch system. H&R built a quantity of 500 inch-system FAL’s of exceptional quality. As this production was ongoing, engineers under the direction of Springfield Arsenal’s Roy Rayle, worked around the clock to correct deficiencies in the M14 design. In 1954 testing, the two rifles – T44 (M14) and the U.S.-made T48 (FAL) tested to a draw, and in subsequent trials the T44 went on to win.

Why the big exercise to make an inch-system rifle? To enable U.S. production of the T48-FAL in the 1953 timeframe, there was almost no choice but to convert the design and the drawings to the inch-system. Factories across America had manual lathes and milling machines that could produce weapon components, but these were all set up with inch-system controls. Screws, roll pins, solid pins, spring wire, and sheet metal stock were readily available in U.S. markets, but only in inch-system sizes. Similarly, measurement tools, like vernier calipers, micrometers, and gage blocks were configured for inch-system only measurements. Producing metric components in the U.S. without converting to the inch system was simply not a reasonable option. Success of the T44-M14 made the issue temporarily go away, with no need for further consideration of the metric system in small arms for a long time afterwards.

U.S. Government Mandates Metric

By 1968, most of the world had become metric so a Federal law authorized a 3-year study to determine the impact of increasing metric use in the U.S. Many of the major companies in the U.S. passed out conversion manuals for the International System of Units (SI) that was being adopted throughout the world and trained their workers to use the metric system. By this time, the newer Computer Numerically Controlled (CNC) lathes and milling machines were capable of easily converting back and forth from inch to metric so there would be no major trauma when metric drawings reached the production floor.

The U.S. Metric Study was completed in 1971 and their published report recommended we should “go metric” on a carefully coordinated national program. Congress passed the Metric Conversion Act of 1975 and established a U.S. Metric Board, but a timeline was never established for metric conversion. U.S. arms producers like the General Electric Armament Systems Department, followed a government directive mandating that new guns should be metric. They complied in the next product they released, making the drawings for the newest Gatling gun totally metric. And what about the ammunition feed system that connected to it? It was produced using inch system dimensions. Why? Because the government directive said the guns had to be metric, but made no mention of the feed system, so it was a half measure at best. This was typical of the resistive mood of the country towards the metric system. After years of public apathy, spending money, and achieving only marginal results, the U.S. Metric Board was disbanded by President Reagan in 1982.

European Small Arm is adopted: It’s a Sweet Baby but it’s Metric.

In the mid 1970s an international shoot-off resulted in the adoption of the first metric weapon in modern U.S. military history, the 7.62mm FN Herstal Belgian MAG-58. The machine gun, U.S. designation M240, was designed totally in metric. The Army bought the manufacturing rights and the drawings with the intent to competitively procure the weapon and spare parts from manufacturers in the U.S. This required that the Army bring these 1950s era drawings up to current standards, meaning the ones outlined in a specification known as ANSI-Y-14.5 managed by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. The Army converted the drawings themselves but left the metric system in place. They also left the drawings in first angle projection – the European standard – but more about that later.

It is important to note that by the late 1970s, the manufacturing scene in the United States changed dramatically. CNC machine tools were everywhere, with most of them easily capable of switching from inch to metric. Many conventional lathes and milling machines had digital readouts added to them, making them capable of inch/metric conversion with the push of a button.

FN Herstal won the 1979 production contract to make the M240 in the U.S, and built a factory in South Carolina. FN knew they would be faced with a challenge in finding qualified machinists and other factory help, but they had experience in setting up small arms factories in third world counties and reckoned South Carolina would be easy by comparison. They brought in their own manufacturing team to train the workers, hired manufacturing managers who had prior experience setting up manufacturing plants outside the U.S., and went totally metric on the manufacturing process. During the first full production year, a quantity of 4,509 M240’s was the production goal set by the Army. Guns from every production lot that year had to pass an interchangeability test with other M240s made on the same line. At specified intervals, U.S. made M240s were interchanged with FN Herstal-made guns and were required to pass the same acceptance test. In every case, the weapons functioned flawlessly and the production goals were achieved.

Five years later, the FN South Carolina plant submitted the lowest bid and won the manufacturing contract for the M16A4. If there was to be a metric/inch production challenge, this was it. There was no plan to change the M16 drawings to metric. In fact, it was never discussed. Rather, buttons were pushed on the CNC machines and machines that were formerly making metric M240 parts were now making M16 components. Not only were both inch and metric drawings on the shop floor at the same time but the U.S. drawings were in third angle projection and ones of European origin were in first angle projection.

First Angle – Third Angle: What is it and Who Cares?

The “projection of a drawing-first or third angle” relates to engineering drawings, or “blueprints” if you prefer that term. Since we must use a two dimensional drawing to define a three dimensional component, rules have been set up for where different views are positioned on the drawing – this is called the “projection.” Europeans set their drawings up in first angle projection while in the U.S. we prefer third angle projection. First angle and third angle drawings have one view in common but the rest of the views are in opposite locations. The differences between these conventions are explained in the illustration, and it all makes more sense if you consider the logic behind them. In the third angle system, the user moves his/her eye around the part 90° at a time to “see” another side of the part and the view is positioned accordingly. In the first angle projection system the part is “rotated” 90° each time for a new view. If you are familiar with one system and not the other, you’ll find the left side view where you expect the right side to be, the top where the bottom should be, and so on.

Textbooks describing these systems make the case that Americans find first angle projection illogical. To avoid confusion, drawing standards specify that a figure with two views of a truncated cone be placed in the title block of every drawing to show the part is depicted in first or third angle projection. There is little danger in confusing metric dimensions for inch dimensions; like making a firing pin 400 inches long instead of 400 millimeters. Not paying attention to whether the part to be made is described in first or third angle projection, however, can easily result in parts being made backwards.

By now you may be wondering how FN Manufacturing made out manufacturing with drawings in first and third angle projection as well as metric and inch. Surprisingly it didn’t cause them any problems. The U.S. Army eventually did convert the M240 drawings to third angle projection, fearing that small businesses making spare parts without understanding the application could mistakenly make the parts backwards.

Where Are We Now?

He we are today, 30 years after the metric M240 was put into U.S. production and where is our manufacturing technology? Essentially with the flip of a switch, practically every modern machine tool will operate in metric or inch. Electronic digital readouts on manual milling machines and lathes give even those machines dual capability and the opportunity for even the smallest machine shop to produce in either system. Even inspection equipment from Coordinate Measuring Machines to hand held vernier calipers and micrometers swap metric units for inch units at the push of a button. And what about first and third angle projection? Most good Computer Aided Design (CAD) systems that we now use to make our drawings can switch from either system by the mere selection of a “radio” button. Our military continues to procure metric weapons including the Beretta M9 pistol and the Heckler & Koch M320 grenade launcher and at the same time inch-system weapons like the M4 and M110.

It is the job of U.S. arsenals and military directorates to specify what small arms will be bought along with the drawing packages that define them. There is a directive in the Federal Acquisition Regulations that specifies metric dimensions should be used. Officially, the metric system is preferred, but there are open ended exceptions to the Metric Conversion Act. This means the military doesn’t really care if your drawings are inch or metric or if your hammer rotates on a 1/8-inch pin or one 3 millimeters in diameter. One of the newest small arms under consideration by the military is the LSAT designed by AAI. This light machine gun, firing cased telescoped ammunition, is designed in inch system and is likely to stay that way unless the military directs otherwise.

Pro – Let’s Do It

Just how difficult would it be to specify totally metric weapons from here on out? There would be changes to threaded fasteners, pins, nuts, spring wire, rollers, ball or roller bearings and other hardware. For the most part, the standard metric sizes are close enough to the standard inch sizes so that nothing is sacrificed in strength or durability. Sheet metal comes in standard metric sizes but this is one where direct substitution that could cause a problem causing the substituted part to be too thick or too thin. This change does require careful study and potentially some dimensional changes to mating parts.

Our NATO and other allies are all using the metric system and sometimes our weapons systems. If our small arms were designed with metric, components like pins, screws, and other hardware, would be available to them in their normal supply chains avoiding situations like the one my Scandinavian friend encountered. In short, metrification would make all U.S. small arms more attractive to the rest of the world.

Likely the best reason is that the metric system is incredibly simple. U.S. schools are teaching the metric system and students are finding it easier than our inch system. One high school teacher told me that when her students are required to make measurements, she gives them metric rulers. She switched from inch rulers because students became so bogged down with fractional inch conversions; they were missing the point of the exercise.

Con – Let’s Don’t

We’ve been making parts in inch system dimensions for a long time, now, and have a ready supply of inch system hardware and components. In many cases, metric components are more expensive. The easiest path forward is to continue to let small arms manufacturers produce weapons using any system they want.

Any change, no matter how small, always has an associated price. Not every machine shop is equipped with the latest machine tools and measuring equipment, and even those that do, will still find a certain percentage of their equipment will become obsolete.

The manufacturing success at FN aside, it cannot be denied, there is always the possibility of making manufacturing mistakes when using both inch and metric drawings in the same factory. Introducing metric drawings in first angle projection will only compound the problem.

Conclusion

It’s decision time. Do we make the change to metric in small arms now, or do we kick the can down the road and hope for the best? After all, we still have some allies who, like us, have not adopted the metric system – Liberia and Myanmar. If we hurry, we might at least say we’re not the last country to “Go Metric.”

By Christopher R. Bartocci

Last month we looked at Type’s A and B of Colt’s SCAR (Special operations forces Combat Assault Rifle) program. Both used the traditional gas impingement system as found in the M16/M4 family of weapons and fared very well in the trials. However, there was an unwritten requirement that SOCOM wanted a conventional piston operated weapon. They felt it would be more clean and reliable under the extreme circumstances that they operated under.

Colt set out to develop their own piston driven mechanism. Piston systems were nothing new to Colt as they had experimented with it many years ago. In the late 1960s to early 1970s, experimentation was going on at Colt, Rock Island and Winchester to develop a standard piston mechanism to deal with the problems the early rifles had with the switch-over to ball powder. This also was as a response to the publicity of the reliability of the AK47. In the end, a report in 1968 stated that the 10 prototype weapons performed about equal to the current M16A1 rifles. Colt developed the model 703 as a piston driven operating system. Although totally unlike the current SCAR design, it indicates that Colt had investigated this in the past. The 703 was a full-length rifle with a piston rod that was attached to the bolt carrier, much like the AK-type piston. By the time Colt had concluded the development of the 703, all the changes made to the M16A1 and ammunition made a piston-operated mechanism unnecessary.

The Colt 703 rifle when fired, the bullet would propel down the barrel, and gas was bled from the barrel into the gas cylinder created between the end of the piston rod and the front sight base. The piston rod, being attached to the bolt carrier group, would move rearward extracting and ejecting the fired cartridge case. When the bolt carrier group reaches it’s furthest rearward motion the buffer/buffer spring would drive the bolt carrier group forward stripping a round from the magazine, chambering it, and the bolt would lock into battery ready for the next shot.

Colt SCAR Type C

SOCOM’s unwritten requirement for a piston operated rifle was based upon their belief that this system kept the gun cleaner due to hot gasses not being blown into the bolt carrier causing fouling. This is especially true when being fired with a suppressor.

Colt began work to design their own piston system. With the requirement for a free-floated barrel, Colt opted to use their newly designed one-piece upper receiver. Keeping the legacy M4 platform was important as it was very user friendly. Once the shooter grasps the pistol grip, all manipulations of the selector and magazine catch can be made without manipulation of the shooters hand. The left hand will insert the loaded magazine a hit the bolt catch to reload. Due to the magazine dropping free and the bolt holding open on the last shot, reloading can be accomplished is seconds. An added benefit to keeping this platform was taking advantage of the existing familiarity of the operators’ use with the M4A1 carbine.

The SCAR Type C Upper Receiver

The upper receiver chosen was the Colt proprietary one-piece upper receiver. This allowed the barrel to be mounted to the receiver and permitted to free float; increasing accuracy as well as assist in cooling. The upper receiver utilizes a forward assist assembly, fired cartridge case deflector and an ejection port dust cover. There is a continuous Mil-Std 1913 rail that goes from the top of the charging handle area to the front sight base. This will allow the mounting of multiple optics including night vision, reflex sight as well as a laser. The side rails allow the operator to mount flashlights or other accessories. The bottom portion of the rail is removable allowing the mounting of a grenade launcher. When the standard cover with the rail is on, a vertical pistol grip may be installed. During testing, the newly designed Grip Pod Systems vertical pistol grip was used. This vertical pistol grip/bipod is made of 7075 T6 aircraft aluminum, the same as the Colt SCAR receivers. The bottom of the grip turns into a spring-loaded bipod with a push of a button. When the operator drops to the prone position and engages the bipod, the carbine has a stable base for aimed firing. When the bipod is engaged and the weapon shouldered, the magazine will not snag on the ground.

The carbine utilizes the same BUIS (Back Up Iron Sight) as the Colt Type A. The rear sight is a modified Colt carrying handle rear sight. Colt took a standard carrying handle and removed the handle just leaving a lightweight rear sight. There are no sharp edges to snag. It is adjustable for elevation out to 600 meters and has two sight apertures. A 0 to 200-meter close and a long-range aperture. However, any BUIS can be used whether it be an ARMS #40 L or a Knight Armament BUIS.

The front sight is a Colt designed foldable front sight assembly attached to the gas block. This same front sight assembly was used on all three of Colt’s entries and was activated and locked by a button on the left side. This utilized a square 4-notch front sight post and is adjustable for elevation only.

The Colt Piston Operating System

The piston system is very simple and very reliable. In firearms design there are two basic piston systems. The first is where the piston/operating rod is directly attached to the bolt carrier such as the AK47/AKM. The second is the short-stroke tappet where the operating rod strikes the face of the bolt carrier driving the carrier rearward while the piston rod reciprocates back to its rested position in front of the firearm such as the AR18, SKS and FN FAL.

The system chosen by Colt is the latter. By going with the two-piece operating rod the weight may be decreased. Colt has been working on their piston systems for a couple of years in their model shop. In 2003, a prototype was made showing an early attempt of their system. Over the next couple years their design would be modified and perfected to the final system they chose for their SCAR candidate

The final system begins with their proprietary one-piece upper receiver. The barrel is secured to the inside of the receiver and the barrel left free-floating. The system consists of the op rod and return spring. The front of the system consists of the gas cylinder and the mechanism is locked into the weapon by a large pin in the front sight/gas block. There is a gas relief vent in front of the gas cylinder that vents through the front of the front sight assembly. Colt has tested this operating mechanism with over 18,000 rounds without cleaning and without failure. This piston system does not require routine maintenance during cleaning.

As the bullet travels down the barrel upon firing, the bullet passes the gas port and gas is directed into the gas expansion chamber, driving the piston rearward. The rear of the piston impacts a modified carrier key on the bolt carrier group driving the carrier group rearward. While the carrier group continues rearward, the piston rod returns to its forward resting position. On the bolt carrier group’s rearward travel the bolt unlocks, extracting and ejecting the fired cartridge case from the carbine. Then the compressed heavy buffer and spring return the carrier group forward stripping an unfired cartridge from the magazine, feeding it into the chamber, and then the bolt locks into the barrel extension. The carbine is ready for the next shot to be fired. Another benefit of the piston-operated system is the ability to set the cyclic rate of the weapon. Colt chose to make the SCAR Type C fire at 800 rounds per minute comparable to that of the M4A1 with Mk 262 Mod 1 ammunition.

The Bolt Carrier

The bolt carrier group looks very similar to the standard M16/M4 family of firearms but with one major change: a new bolt carrier key. Also, there are no gas rings on the bolt due to the expansion chamber being in the front sight assembly instead of the back of the bolt carrier group. Another innovation that Colt has done is to change the finish of the bolt and carrier. It has a proprietary UCT Defense UltraChem (nickel boron) finish to eliminate the need for any lubricant whatsoever. This slippery finish needs merely a wipe with a rag to clean. This coating also improves corrosion resistance. The extractor utilizes the improved gold extractor spring with the stronger black extractor buffer.

The Barrel

As per specifications, the barrels come in two different lengths. The standard carbine barrel length is 14.5 inches and the CQC (Close Quarter Combat) barrel is 10.5 inches. Both barrels are heavy barrels to insure they can take the required heavy firing schedule demanded by SOCOM. The barrel utilizes the standard 1 turn in 7 inch rifling twist that is required to stabilize the Mk 262 Mod 1 ammunition currently in use by SOCOM. Additionally, as per requirements, a Knight’s Armament Quick Detach flash suppressor is installed for use with the silencer. The front sight base has a bayonet lug for mounting a bayonet on both barrels even though one cannot be mounted on the 10.5 inch barrel.

The chamber has been modified to comply with the “Over the Beach” requirement specified for the SEALS.

The Lower Receiver

The lower receiver is identical to the ones used on Type A and B. It is a standard M4A1 lower receiver with the modified selector lever. As per requirement, this ambidextrous selector operates over 90 degrees of travel (as opposed to the Colt standard of 180 degrees). After testing was completed, this change was not well received. The reasoning in unclear as to whether they were just too used to the standard or if it did not manipulate as fast as the original.

The magazine release is the patented Norgon ambidextrous version. The stock is the VLTOR stock with dual battery compartments for the optics. This is a standard four-position Colt buffer extension with a H2 buffer. Due to the carbine utilizing a heavy barrel, the buffer with 2 tungsten weights and 1 steel weight was necessary to prevent light strikes from bolt carrier bounce. Improved hammer/trigger pins are used that are manufactured of stainless steel. This increases service life especially with heavy volume of fire required of the SCAR weapon. The finish is done in the required flat earth finish (coyote brown) done by Kal-Guard.

Conclusions

The opportunity arose to test fire Colt’s Type C SCAR in their engineering range in the basement of the factory. There was little difference in the feel between the direct gas and the piston driven carbines and their cyclic rate was about the same. The carbine fired was quite worn and neglected from the SCAR trials. However, the carbine functioned flawlessly; firing nearly 500 rounds in 15 minutes. The bolt carrier group was completely dry without lubricant.

There seems to be little doubt that the next generations of M16/M4 carbines will be piston driven mechanisms. Colt plans to introduce a piston driven law enforcement carbine in early 2006.

With the SCAR program moving forward with procurement from FN Mfg. Inc., only time will tell how the new weapons will stack up compared to the M4A1 carbines currently in use. The SCAR trials were without a doubt the most grueling small arms testing in the world since the original Armalite AR-15 was pitted against the government designed M14. Lessons learned in this weapons development program will influence further research and development of further upgrades or new weapons designs of the future.

By Frank Iannamico

The service life of the famous Belgian designed Fusil Automatique Leger or FN FAL 7.62mm rifle has eclipsed for most of the ninety-plus nations that adopted the weapon during the 1950s. As a first line infantry weapon, the old workhorse FAL has largely been replaced by more modern small-arms.

Back during the 1980s new Belgian made FN FAL semiautomatic rifles, designated as the LAR (Light Automatic Rifle), were imported specifically for the U.S. civilian market. While the Belgian made rifles were extremely accurate and very well made, they were quite expensive; costing nearly twice as much as a semiautomatic Colt AR-15.

The world wide retirement of the FN FAL rifle has provided many parts and part sets for enthusiasts, and has created a substantial market for U.S. made receivers. FN FAL rifles built on American made receivers have been reasonably priced and extremely popular.

A Brief FAL History

During the post World War II era many of the allied nations began to search for a modern infantry rifle to replace their aging small-arms, many of which were long-obsolete bolt action rifles. The NATO alliance, formed in 1949, was set up largely to discourage an attack by the Soviet Union on the non-Communist nations of Western Europe. The NATO members decided that one of the joint military items that needed to be standardized was small arms ammunition. The action was taken to prevent the supply problems all nations had encountered during World War II and Korea. The selection of a service rifle was left up to each individual country: most chose the FAL.

The Belgian FAL rifle was designed by a Fabrique Nationale factory design team headed by Dieudonne Saive. The original FAL prototype rifle introduced in 1948 was chambered for the midrange 8mm Kurz round first fielded by German forces near the war’s end. Subsequent prototypes were chambered for the experimental British .280 cartridge.

The controversial NATO standard cartridge selection program ended with the adoption of the U.S. developed 7.62×51 cartridge in January of 1954. Anticipating the NATO adoption of the U.S. endorsed 7.62×51 round, efforts by Dieudonne Saive and Ernest Vervier began as early as 1952 to adapt the FAL rifle for the U.S. cartridge. The resulting 7.62mm weapon was considerably longer and heavier than earlier variations.

From 1952 through 1956, many of the NATO alliance countries began to seriously consider the Belgian rifle. Canada was the first NATO country to officially adopt the FAL rifle in July of 1953. Since the FN FAL rifle was built using the metric system, the Canadian Government was the first to address the challenge of converting the drawings from metric to inches. Later that year, the United States ordered 3,000 standard and 200 heavy barrel metric FAL rifles from Fabrique Nationale in Belgium. The Belgian made rifles were designated as the T48. While the United States began work on making an inch-pattern U.S. manufactured FAL rifle, the Belgian made T48 weapons were issued to the U.S. Army for field testing. During 1954 Great Britain also ordered a number of the FAL rifles chambered for the new 7.62 NATO cartridge for testing.

A meeting was held at the Office of the U.S. Chief of Ordnance on 10 May 1954 in order to brief representatives of the Springfield Armory on the policy for the T48 rifle program. On 26 May 1954 Armory officials attended a conference held at the head office of Canadian Arsenals Limited. The purpose of the Canadian meeting was to participate in what was called the American-British-Canadian Program (A-B-C) to convert the metric FN FAL drawings to American Standards. The group distributed translated drawings and manufacturing data to prospective contractors who were invited to submit bids for production studies. It was established that engineering information would be exchanged between the United States, Great Britain and Canada with Canadian Arsenals Ltd. acting as the clearing house. Spare parts requirements for a normal one-year maintenance program were compiled for the 500 T48 rifles to be manufactured in the United States.

After a brief study it was determined that converting the metric Belgian drawings to inches would not be an easy task. Other concerns were U.S. Ordnance specifications for materials, heat-treating procedures, manufacturing tolerances and other manufacturing operations. Personnel from the U.S. Springfield Armory were originally assigned the job of converting the FAL manufacturing drawings. However, since the Springfield Armory was busy with the T44E4 rifle development and numerous other projects, it was decided to turn the job over to a commercial entity. Bids were taken for the project and the contract was eventually awarded to the High Standard Company. As part of the agreement, High Standard was to manufacture twelve functional FAL T48 rifles from their final drawings and were to be delivered by September of 1954. The U.S. FAL, the T48, adopted the Canadian improved magazine design that included a reinforced magazine lip. This modification made to all inch-pattern FAL rifle magazines, made the magazine non-interchangeable with metric FAL rifles. The first U.S. made T48 FAL rifle was fired at the Springfield Armory on 9 May 1955. Despite the fact that there was no formal contract between Fabrique Nationale and the United States, the company granted the U.S. at no cost, the complete rights to produce the FN T48 rifle domestically.

After all of the conversion drawings were completed, the Harrington and Richardson Arms Company and International Harvester both submitted bids to manufacture the T48 rifle. Harrington and Richardson was eventually chosen to produce the T48 rifles while the Springfield Armory would manufacture the competing U.S. T44E4 design. The Hand Arms and Equipment Unit of the Armory was ordered to prepare Ordnance drawings, provide manufacturing information and technical data to the Boston Ordnance District, for use in administering the contract number DA-19-020-ORD-3436 for the caliber .30 T48 rifle to H&R.

A representative from the Springfield Armory attended a four-day conference held from May 16-20, 1955 at the Royal Small Arms Factory in Enfield, Middlesex England. The conference, initiated by the British government, was the first in a series to promote cooperation and eventual tri-partite NATO standardization of the Belgian FN FAL rifle. The general feeling was that since the NATO countries had (reluctantly) adopted the U.S. 7.62mm cartridge, they expected the U.S. to reciprocate and adopt the FAL rifle. Then, not only would NATO have a common cartridge, but a common service rifle as well.

Officials from Fort Benning reported that the Belgian made T48 rifles were experiencing functioning problems under dusty conditions. Similar problems were encountered with the FAL rifles during desert testing by Great Britain. To address the problem, a small delegation of Americans who represented the U.S. contractors, visited the Royal Arms Factory in England and the Fabrique Nationale factory in Liege, Belgium. The problem was traced to the FAL’s close manufacturing tolerances between the bolt carrier and the receiver. The Belgium engineers suggested the incorporation of “sand cuts,” or zig-zag grooves machined into the bolt carriers. This eventually solved the problem.

After the first 100 U.S. made T48 Harrington and Richardson FAL rifles were ready in September 1955, 10 were randomly selected for testing at the Aberdeen Proving Center. The Harrington and Richardson T48 rifles experienced a few initial problems with small parts failing and stoppages. After these problems were addressed and solved, testing resumed. Early manufacture Harrington and Richardson T48 rifles were unable to qualify in the accuracy test. This problem was traced back to excessive machining tolerances on the barrels, partially as a result of a drawing conversion error.

A final head to head full-scale test of the T48 versus the T44E4 was scheduled for the spring of 1956. However, instead of an out and out test, only a brief trial was conducted. The testing took place concurrently at Fort Benning, Georgia and the U.S. Marine Base at Quantico, Virginia.

There was a great deal of skepticism on behalf of those involved in the testing about the United States Army adopting a foreign designed infantry weapon for its forces. Many felt that the U.S. Ordnance Department was simply going through the motions of testing the FAL rifle to appease the other NATO members, who were pressuring the U.S. to adopt the Belgian rifle. On the other hand, there was great political pressure from the U.S. Army and the Springfield Armory to adopt the U.S. designed T44E4.

After the trials were completed, Fort Benning reported that both rifles were suitable for army use, failing to decisively choose one design over the other. The U.S. Marine testing at Quantico reported that the Springfield Armory’s T44E4 rifle entry held a slight edge. It seemed as though no one was prepared to select one rifle over the other, as it was becoming a very sensitive political issue.

After a thorough study of all the test reports, which lasted nearly a year, the U.S. Ordnance Department finally came to the conclusion that the U.S. designed T44E4 rifle possessed the following advantages;

1. The T44E4 rifle was a full pound lighter than the T48.
2. The T44E4 contained fewer parts and had a single-port gas system that didn’t require adjustments.
3. The similarities between the T44E4 and its predecessor, the M1 Garand rifle, would ease both training and manufacturing requirements.

Despite pressure from the other NATO countries for the U.S. to adopt the Belgian designed T48 rifle, on 1 May 1957 Secretary of the Army Wilbur H. Bruckner announced that the T44E4 and T44E5 were being adopted as the Standard U.S. service rifles as the M14 and M15 respectively. An Ordnance Committee meeting held on 14 November 1957 finalized the adoption of the M14 and M15 rifles as Standard.

The Belgian FAL rifle, in slightly varying configurations, was eventually adopted as the standard infantry rifle by over ninety countries. The FAL would become the most prolific rifle among the NATO alliance, and made in far larger quantities than any other 7.62mm rifle.

FN Manufacturing, Inc. is one of the United State’s leaders in producing small arms. FNMI produces the hundreds of thousands of M16A2 and M16A4 rifles for the United States military, but they also produce the various belt feds we use as well- the M249 “SAW”, The famed “M240 Golf” of the United States Marines, and more currently the “M240 Bravo” adopted by the US Army to replace the M60 GPMG. They have a fifty-caliber offering in the M3P and QCB models, as well as the Browning line of handguns, and the newest addition of the 5.7 x 28mm line including the P90 SMG and the Five-seveN pistol. FNMI is no new kid on the block, being the child of FN Herstal, the 150-year-old weapons manufacturing giant in Belgium.

Rusty Spitzer has been with FN Manufacturing Inc. since the beginning of operations at the new plant in Columbia, SC, a total of 21 years in-house there, since March of 1981. He started as an apprentice barrel maker, and worked his way up to supervision. He has worked on the production and assembly of the M249, M16, and M240 series of firearms, and has been teaching armorers and users for over 15 years. Rusty is the “Weapons Trainer” and a top notch one at that. I had previously attended the M249 Armorers Course that had Sal Fanelli as an instructor, and I was very pleased with the course that Sal taught.

Learning the functioning of firearms requires some basic mechanical understanding. It should also be stated here that there is a major gulf between what a true gunsmith can do, and what an armorer is expected to. Not all gunsmiths are armorers, and it is certainly true that not all armorers are gunsmiths. This point is not some frivolity- it is important to understanding military firearms repair. The man who has incredible skill at checkering and fine tuning a $25,000 shotgun might be lost when confronted with 400 M16 battlefield bring backs ranging from “unfired” to “shot full of holes and run over by a truck”, and the armorer who can set up a line and dig into that pile of ’16s might well be lost trying to make a replacement part by hand. The best of both worlds is someone who has cross training in the disciplines, but that is rare today.

Some simple definitions:

•An “Operator” is expected to know basic things about his weapon. Field-stripping into the major components, proper cleaning techniques in all conditions including adverse weather, and inspection for wear or malfunction. He is expected to know how to clear jams, and to keep the weapon in operation, as well as deployment and use of the weapon.

•A “Unit Level Armorer” is expected to perform certain functions above an operator- to replace parts, to perform minor field modifications as necessary to keep the weapon operational, and to use gauges and manuals to ensure the weapon is within guidelines of operation. Troubleshooting at the Unit Level is perfunctory, and difficult problems and weapons past spec are sent to the Depot Level. The Unit Level Armorer is expected to have a good working knowledge of how the firearms in his care operate, from troubleshooting to functional principles.

•A “Depot Level Armorer” has access to a machine shop, and can perform almost any function in repairing the weapon. Very often the Depot Level Armorer is more of a machinist with a minor in gunsmithing. This is also the point where weapons that are too worn or have sustained irreparable damage are “DX’d”, meaning tagged for destruction.

The armorers course I attended at FNMI was geared towards the armorer at the unit level. Students are also introduced to some Depot level tools and recommended techniques, for familiarization purposes.

Rusty started the course simply. There was an M240B on each table, and the first item at hand was “Safing the weapon”. After we had done that to the point where he was satisfied that everyone was on the same page, we went to a field strip. Some students were handier at this than others, I have field time with the M240B and it’s daddy the MAG58, so it was easier for me than the uninitiated. Rusty stayed with everyone until we had it right. He didn’t overcomplicate the first couple of times in disassembly, but as we continued to “Take it apart, put it together, take it apart” he kept adding information about the function of the M240 series, and the problems encountered in the field.

This is a very effective training technique. While your hand and mind are getting more comfortable with how the weapon fits together, information is almost subliminally entered into the routine- very good for memory. By half way into the first day, the diverse group of students had mastered stripping and assembling the M240 series, and had started into the subgroups. We took each subgroup down to pins and springs, with a running commentary from Rusty on what we were to look for. He had chosen M240s that had approximately 200,000 rounds each on them, and this allowed us to see various wear points. Adding in the audio visual aids- we viewed the differences between US Army and US Marine Corps training and field stripping, and Rusty had a cut away M240 to follow the functioning of the weapon. The cutaway sectioning was positioned so that it was easy to see how the toggle lock up on the M240 works, and how robust that lock up is.

I found the course to be information packed and well designed. Rusty’s experience with the diverse needs of students shone through, and I think that everyone in that classroom left with a good understanding of the M240 series of weapons, the good points, the wear areas, and how to keep them running properly. You can’t ask for more than that!

Quick ID on the M240 Series:

•M240 is the coaxial left hand feed model with pull cord charger

•M240B is the US Army version with buttstock and handguards on the barrel area.

•M240C is the coaxial right hand feed model with pull cord charger

•M240D has spade grips and is used in some flex mount and helicopter operations

•M240G is the US Marine Corps version with buttstock but no handguards on the barrel area.

•M240H is the new helicopter version

Cost of the courses at the FNMI facility in Columbia South Carolina runs from $395 on the two day basic operator for the M249 to $545 for the three day M240 Armorer, and $1195 for the five day M3P or QCB .50 caliber combination Operator/ Armorer course. Recertification classes are also available for those who need to update their training. There are also group rates available, and discounts for more than one person from the same unit going through the class.

Each class can accommodate up to 12 students at the FNMI facility, and courses of up to fifty students have been taught off site. Cost on having an FNMI instructor come to your site and do training must be arranged with Rusty.

We need to define a “Qualified person”, since FNMI does not offer these courses to the general public at this time.

For the Operator courses:

•1- Current military armorers and operators who have the MOS in combat arms.

•2- Active duty Law Enforcement personnel.

•3- Gunsmiths who have a letter from a law enforcement agency that they are functioning as that group’s armorer.

•4- employees who are part of FNMI’s dealer and distributor network.

For the Armorer courses:

•1- Current military armorers and operators who have the MOS in combat arms.

•2- Law enforcement personnel who are in the function of department armorer.

•3-Gunsmiths who have a letter from a law enforcement agency that they are functioning as that group’s armorer.

•4- employees who are part of FNMI’s dealer and distributor network.

FNMI Training Group has the following courses available for qualified personnel:

•M16A2/A4 Rifles
•M249 Machine gun
•SPW Machine gun
•MK46 Machine gun
•M240B&G Machine gun
•M240D Machine gun
•M3P .50 Cal machine gun
•P90 Submachine gun
•Five-seveN Pistol
•Forty-Nine Pistol
•Special Police Shotgun

For more information on the courses and a course schedule, or to arrange for an on site training class at your facility, contact Rusty Spitzer via email at rustys@fnmfg.com or via telephone at 803-736-0522 ext 291/246

FN Manufacturing Inc.
Attn: Weapon Training Coordinator
PO Box 24257 Dept SAR
Columbia, SC 29224
Website: http://www.fnmfg.com

But, while FN holds an enviable place among leading small arms manufacturers for conventional land conflict, it has not until now been competitive in the arena of what is euphemistically called “less lethal.”

Police and Peacekeepers

Today’s news headlines trumpet involvement by military and paramilitary police deployed worldwide in various operations and missions that require incredibly restrictive rules of engagement. From seemingly endless ethnic strife such as Arab-Israeli or Irish-British, to the ongoing mess in the Balkans, to a hundred other lesser known places and causes, these forces most often find themselves hobbled by geo-political realities. To avoid giving the television newsmen dramatic pictures of bloody armed confrontations becomes a first priority. Thus, their ample numbers of conventional weapons such as assault rifles and grenade launchers are rendered nearly useless.

Similarly, domestic police forces charged with the responsibility of maintaining law and order have the unenviable task of putting their lives at extreme risk from the actions of determined and often ruthless protesters, provocateurs and other criminals. Woe be to the “insensitive” cop who is observed by reporters and cameramen as he responds to threats against life and limb with an old-fashioned nightstick or a blast of shotgun pellets.

Kinder, Gentler Response

There are many non-lethal options available now and some of these have been around for decades. Tear gas, pepper spray, stun guns, “rubber bullets,” water cannon and the like are tried and true tools when the situation gets ugly but not ugly enough to justify terminally perforating the miscreants. Each of these has both capabilities and limitations that must be carefully balanced. None can be considered ideal in itself for the endless variety of situations presented now or steadily evolving. What to do?

Less Lethal

Taking the initiative, FN has recently introduced some interesting new tools in the category of “Less Lethal” (henceforth known here as LTL), a nomenclature formalized by gurus in law enforcement to set this stuff apart from old fashioned handguns, shotguns, rifles and the like.

Small Arms Review was recently invited to cover FN’s American LTL premiere for law enforcement and the military, held at CRUCIBLE Training Center, near Fredericksburg, Virginia. CRUCIBLE is a major player with federal, military, police and security personnel and its facilities are well located in close proximity to concentrations of big name organizations in the Washington, DC area.

Louis Dillais, a former officer in French special operations, is FNH USA’s director and served as host for approximately twenty attendees each day with a program that including classroom instruction and an opportunity to view and participate in live fire of three LL systems that are now offered by his parent company, FN Herstal, also known as Herstal Group.

Paramilitary Paintball

The first system shown by FN was the FN303, a strikingly configured assault rifle style launcher that owes much to commercial paintball technology but with a distinctive twist. Design engineer Jim Brunette of FN Manufacturing was up from South Carolina to showcase his exciting new creation, enthusiastically explaining its why’s and how’s, then fielding questions.

As presently configured, the FN303 is essentially a 12 gauge size smoothbore semiauto that can be locked under most assault rifles such as the M16, or fitted with a slide-detach stock as the “stand alone.” It uses regulated compressed air to pump a variety of custom-designed 8.5-gram projectiles out to a maximum effective range in excess of 100 meters. Two sizes of on-board air tank are offered, with the smaller giving about 60 shots and 100 from the larger. The tanks have standard fittings that will allow quick refilling at any fire station or scuba shop with appropriate adapter.

Its quick detachable fifteen round drum magazine has a clear plastic cover facing the shooter, allowing an instant status check of remaining shots as well as anticipation of what type of cartridge is next in line for firing when mixed loads are employed. Larger capacity mags may be in the works for fielding later.

The distinctive ergonomic layout of the gun is reminiscent to me of the BATMAN school of design, with angled grip surfaces of high strength matte black polymer that are ribbed for fingers with no prejudice toward right handers or lefties. Although seemingly robust enough to survive most operational and tactical mishandling or abuse, the weight of the gun module itself (called the “undercarriage version”) is a modest 4.2 lbs/1.9 kg, comparing favorably with an M203 grenade launcher. Overall length of the gun is a handy and quick-pointing 29 in./74 cm. in what is called the “stand alone” version with quick attach buttstock.

A Picatinny Rail interface is mounted on the top of the launcher, which allows clamping on just about any type of sight that customers may prefer. The test guns we handled had both rudimentary flip-up iron sights and the excellent new EO holographic target tickler.

Stinkin’ Ammo?

Another real beauty of this launch system is the clever design of its ammunition. Where ordinary round paintballs are severely limited in range and accuracy by the immutable laws of physics, the 303’s ammo is fin stabilized and relatively heavy. While the barrel is a smoothbore 12 gauge size, the projectile is a stubby, domed plastic cylinder with a series of slightly angled fins molded into the sides. On firing, wind drag causes the projectile to spin, giving it much greater stability than is possible with a ball. For consistency of aim and trajectory, their weight is standardized at 8.5 grams each, regardless of the payload. Velocity is necessarily limited by LL considerations when people are downrange so as to avoid potentially fatal blunt trauma.

Just about any kind of liquid, powder or solid payload is a fair candidate for loading and launching, but right now the field includes six main categories. As previously mentioned, the system will shoot ordinary commercial paintballs (just think about how the guys at the local game field will react when you show up with your FN303) for cheap fun and short range practice.

Best performance comes, of course, from the specially configured ammo. Low velocity impact rounds come in black or white one piece plastic housings and don’t burst on impact. These are used for both marksmanship training/function verification as well as in situations when it is desirable to “sting” troublemakers. This is the round that punched big holes in the thick cardboard “E” silhouettes set up at 50 yards as seen in the accompanying photos.

Another category is marking rounds and this includes both washable and permanent dyes as well as a type that shows up only under ultraviolet light. These have many uses including identification of leaders or other key persons in mobs and demonstrations. Illuminating rounds carry the same type of chemical mix commonly used in break and glow lightsticks, both visible and infrared. They are particularly useful in illuminating interiors to assist operators wearing NVG’s (night vision goggles).

Choking and tear agents are the fifth ammo category, filled with the customer’s choice of such classic irritant powders as CS or CN. Yes, it takes a bunch of them to really get the air fouled inside a room, but that’s another reason for the fifteen round magazine and rapid semiauto delivery.

The last category is my personal favorite and probably that of every other high school jokester. Malodorants are a jolly group of super stink bomblets that spray on impact their gag-inducing payload. It should be great fun to pop a few into the middle of a room filled with angry protesters or individually apply “aroma de skunka” to leaders of any sort of antisocial mob. Sorry ‘bout that…

Not surprisingly, given the system’s capabilities, FN plans to offer the FN303 only to bonafide law enforcement and military users. The basic package of launcher, detachable buttstock, a couple of mags, plus hoses and air tank is being offered.

SAMOURAI

For such situations when the rather small 8.5 gram payload of the FN303 isn’t nearly enough, a team from the French firm of Lacroix was also on hand with their formidable SAMOURAI launcher, available through the FN organization. This manportable mini cannon is in French military service now and is used for lots of pretty spectacular tasks like blowing up bunkers, knocking down brick walls and delivering heavy smoke generators. It throws 600 grams of whatever you care to load, from high explosive to choke or stink, out to about 300 meters.

While there are similar weapons in use elsewhere such at the US Marine Corps’ SMAW, the French SAMOURAI is distinct in having nearly zero backblast and resultant firing signature. This can be particularly important in urban warfare where engagement of targets must routinely be done from inside buildings or in closely confined alleyways.

Taking a cue from existing smoke and flash-bang rounds already being used, Lacroix engineers have developed other payload transporters containing irritants like CS and CN. According to spokesman Hugh Williams who conducted their part of the program at CRUCIBLE, the possibilities are endless for other specialized munitions.

The firing demonstrations that followed were an eye-popping exercise in seemingly brutal recoil that was – in reality – simply a thoughtfully engineered solution to the challenge of kicking a big and heavy round way downrange from a shoulder mounted mortar. A close look at the accompanying photos should show that shooters and onlookers were uniformly unharmed by the experience of firing the SAMOURAI, and usually described the effect as being “more like a strong push than a kick.” Well, they ran out of time and practice ammo before I could get a chance to try it myself. I wasn’t disappointed…

LC23-1

Somewhere in between the big SAMOURAI and the little FN303 is Lacroix’s LC23-1, a hand-held projector that is capable of firing a variety of specialized payloads as dictated by the situation. This single shot palm pistol is, according to Hugh Williams’ briefing, “especially appropriate in routine situations requiring the control of individuals or the occupants of vehicles or buildings.”

Translated from bureaucratic-speak, this is a handy single shot pocket projector that can be loaded with a bunch of different cartridges to take care of a bunch of different situations without killing anybody foolish enough to be in the line of fire. Echoing the lineup of the FN303, choose paint markers, malodorants, or irritants. Formidable!

Serious Inquiries Only, Please

For more information on FN’s expanding line of LL systems or traditional weaponry, contact Louis Dillais at FNH USA, Inc., 1364 Beverly Road, Suite 303, McLean, VA 22101, or FN Manufacturing, Inc. at www.fnmfg.com.

FN303 Tech Specs

Device: FN303 Less Lethal System
Operation: Compressed air, semiauto
Weight: 5 lbs. for Stand Alone version, 4.2 lbs. for Undercarriage version
Length: 29 in. for Stand Alone, 16.7 in. for Undercarriage
Feed: Detachable 15 round rotary magazine
Number of Shots: 60 with small air bottle, 100 with large
Maximum effective range: 100 meters
Ammunition: Standard paintballs, irritants, malodorants, impact/training, marking, Illuminating

Conventional wisdom also has it that a precision rifle’s trigger guard must be a solid steel piece with a hinged steel floor plate to ensure accuracy. FN’s Special Police Rifle has a four round detachable box magazine and an aluminum trigger guard. We like the quick reload capability that the box magazine offers, despite the fact that it will be used only upon rare occasion. One can make the argument that in a rifle such as this one, a detachable box magazine really isn’t necessary, but if it doesn’t detract from accuracy, why not have the capability? Again, is 1/2 MOA 100 yard accuracy good enough? Of course, we have all heard the rumors of detachable box magazines of competitor’s rifles dropping out of the magazine well under recoil, but we experienced no such problem with the FN rifle The magazine release is a large spring loaded component that should hold the magazine in place regardless of recoil level.

When FN Manufacturing (FNMI) initially offered us the opportunity to visit their Columbia, South Carolina facility and fire several of their law enforcement and military products, we were skeptical as to the company’s capability to manufacture a precision rifle with so many unconventional features at such a low cost. We were especially leery of the claim that the rifle would deliver sub minute of angle accuracy “out of the box.” After firing the Special Police Rifle, however, we have become believers.

We were unable to evaluate the rifle using different brands of ammunition, so we fired several groups at 100 yards using only Federal Gold Medal 168 grain match ammunition. The results speak for themselves. Our three round groups averaged 0.75 MOA, with the best group through a warm barrel a solid 1/2 MOA.

How does FN accomplish their “magic” with this rifle? FN begins with a “pre 1964” type Winchester action, with Mauser type claw extractor. FN-owned Winchester is once again manufacturing this action due to popular demand. Many shooters feel that the “pre -64” Winchester action is the best available. While we do not wish to touch that “third rail” of shooting belief, the fact is that the “Pre-64” Winchester action has some very desirable features. First is the three-position safety that can be used to lock both the bolt and striker or only the striker, allowing the shooter to manipulate the bolt with the safety engaged. Second, we appreciate the ability to remove the striker mechanism from the bolt body for cleaning and maintenance without the use of tools. Whether or not the Winchester action is superior to its competitors, we will leave to the judgment of the reader, but the fact is that this rifle shoots, despite a factory trigger pull that is far too heavy, as we will presently see.

Although in an innovative way, FN does apply several traditional accuracy techniques to the Special Police Rifle. Barrel, bolt and receiver are hand fitted and individually numbered. Each action is trued to the breech face and chamber and the bolt face squared to the barrel axis. The barreled action is mounted in an H-S Precision Pro Series synthetic stock using aluminum bedding blocks. The barrel is free floated. The Mauser-type extractor is made of stainless steel and is Teflon(r) coated to ensure smooth operation and to prevent binding. This also assists in controlling the cartridge throughout the cycle of operation from feeding through ejecting. The rifle is finished in manganese phosphate.

We found the fit and finish of the Special Police Rifle to be essentially flawless. The rifle is not intended for esthetic good looks, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder and this rifle is a functional tool. There are no machining or tooling marks visible and the fit of all components is excellent. The muzzle is deeply crowned and recessed to protect it from inadvertent damage. The test rifle was fitted with an MWG long range MIL-STD-1913 rail mount, MWG military spec rings, a Leupold Mark III 10x fixed power telescope, and a Harris bipod.

Our sole complaint regarding this rifle is its trigger – the only element that detracts from an otherwise excellent rifle. The trigger comes from the factory set at 4 – 5 pounds, which is on the high side for a rifle such as this. The rifle’s trigger had no discernable creep or backlash, and the example that we fired had already been reset by FN’s gunsmiths to three pounds. Every Special Police Rifle purchaser will probably take the rifle to the nearest gunsmith before he ever heads to the range for the first time to have the trigger readjusted to a more realistic three or so pounds. We believe that manufacturers should provide their rifles with a trigger already set to precision tactical levels, rather than forcing the customer to take his new rifle to a gunsmith before he uses it. Indeed, we have been informed that all law enforcement purchasers of Special Police Rifles so far have done exactly what we have stated herein – reduced the trigger pull to three or 31/2 pounds. Why did FN opt for the heavy trigger? We were informed that it was due to liability considerations, but we believe that if small specialist manufacturers can manufacture their precision rifles with three-pound triggers, so can large manufacturers.

One of the best aspects of FN’s new Special Police Rifle is its price – $940 suggested retail, Law Enforcement Officers with Department letterhead $740. As with most rifles of this type, even those costing much more, the Special Police Rifle is sold without mounts or sights. Other than the trigger pull, we could find nothing to complain of on FN’s new rifle and can see no “cut corners” on it. Costs are reduced by using “off the shelf” components and by CNC controlled manufacturing processes at FN’s Columbia, South Carolina plant. It is difficult to believe that a rifle such as this can be made and sold at such a low price, but the proof is in the shooting, and this rifle shoots! The rifle has already been adopted by several South Carolina law enforcement organizations and if all Special Police Rifles perform up to the standard of the one we fired, it is going to be difficult to keep these rifles on dealer’s shelves. What is best is that the Special Police Rifle is available not only to law enforcement officers and agencies, but also to civilians, as its accuracy and rugged construction makes it an ideal competition or hunting rifle. Even when the cost of having a “trigger job” done by a qualified gunsmith is taken into account, FN’s Special Police Rifle is a bargain.

FN Special Police Rifle Specifications

Caliber: 0.308 Winchester (7.62x51mm)
Empty Weight: 9.88 lbs. (4.47 kg)
Overall length: 45.75 in. (1116 mm)
Barrel length: 26 in (660mm)
Twist rate: 1:12 in (305mm)
Magazine capacity: 4 (+1) rounds
Stock: H-S Precision Pro Series
Trigger pull: 4 -5 lbs. (1.8 – 2.2 kg)

The United States extensively tested the FN FAL as the T48 rifle, chambered for the U.S. 7.62 round (T-65), from 1952 until the official adoption of the M14 rifle in May of 1957. An educational contract was awarded to Harrington & Richardson Inc. to manufacture 500 7.62 mm FN-FALs (T48s), as a study to see what problems might be encountered in domestic manufacture of the weapon. The Ordnance Department finally concluded after years of testing and development that both the 7.62 caliber T-48 (FN-FAL) and the T-44E4 (M14) were “suitable for army use”. In a decision that had been expected from the outset of the testing program, the U.S. Ordnance Department declared their own design, the T44E4, as the winner and the weapon was adopted as the new service rifle of the U.S. Army. The new rifle was designated as the “U.S. Rifle 7.62 M14.” The reasons given for choosing the T-44 over the T-48 were: the T-44 was 1 pound lighter, had fewer parts, had no need for a manual gas regulator, and it would be easier to manufacture because of the similarities to the M1 rifle. While the U.S. Army adopted the M14 the rest of the free world choose the FN FAL.

The FN-FAL is known by many different nomenclatures designated by the adopting countries: the British L1A1, Austrian STG58, the German G-1, the Canadian C1A1 and others. The FN-FAL was available in several models including, the standard rifle, and the para-folding stock version and the FALO, heavy barrel model. The heavy barrel models were usually equipped with an integral folding bipod. The FAL rifle was manufactured in both metric and inch configurations. The FALs adopted by the British and most Commonwealth nations, including India, Canada and Australia were manufactured in the inch pattern while the remaining countries adopted the metric design. The inch pattern guns have virtually the same outward appearance as the metric rifles and a few parts will interchange between models. The magazines are also dimensionally different. The metric magazines will usually work in an inch pattern rifle, but the inch pattern magazines will not fit into the magazine well of a metric gun. While the FAL was capable of full automatic fire (650-700 RPM) many countries chose to issue the rifle in semi-auto only. Because of the powerful cartridge and the relatively light weight of the weapon it was difficult to manage during full auto fire.

The FAL is a gas-operated, select fire weapon that uses a tilt-to-lock bolt system. The standard model is 43.6 inches in length, and weighs a hefty 10.3 pounds loaded. The magazine is a detachable box style with a 20 round capacity. Standard barrel length is 21 inches, four right-hand grooves, one turn in 12 inches (varies). Muzzle velocity with standard NATO military ball ammunition is 2800 feet per second. A non-reciprocating cocking handle is located on the left side of the receiver, with inch-pattern models featuring a folding cocking handle. An adjustable gas regulator is provided to insure reliable operation under extended use in the field. Most FAL models are equipped with a receiver mounted, folding carry handle that is located at weapons center of gravity. The weapon is very well made, extremely rugged and reliable.

The basic FAL rifle was manufactured in different models. U.S. collectors commonly use the Belgian designations to describe the configuration of a particular FAL regardless of the country of origin.

•Model 50.00 The standard full stocked version.

•Model 50.41 Heavy barrel.

•Model 50.63 Folding stock, 18-inch barrel.

•Model 50.64 Folding stock 21-inch barrel.

Civilian FN-FALs

From 1959 to 1963 a limited number (1,848 according to the BATF) of German G1 pattern rifles (FN-FALs) were approved for importation into the United States. These were imported by the Browning Arms Company and are commonly know as the G series FALs, because of the letter G or GL prefix on their serial numbers. What make these rifles unique is they have the original military sear cut receivers, although most were imported in a semi-automatic-only configuration. These rifles are eagerly sought after today and are on the BATF’s Curio and Relics list. 1950s H&R manufactured T-48s, and the Canadian experimental models made by FN, although quite rare in private hands, are also considered C&R firearms.

In the early 1980s BATF approved, semi-automatic-only, versions of modern military rifles were being offered on the U.S. civilian market. Military contractors like FN, Colt, H&K, IMI, Steyr and even former Warsaw Pact countries began producing guns for U.S. collectors and shooters. Although by the 1980s the FN-FAL was obsolete as a military weapon, FN of Belgium offered the rifle to an enthusiastic U.S. market. The only drawback was that the FN-FAL, now designated as the FN-LAR (Light Automatic Rifle), had a very high asking price and thus was passed over by many buyers for less expensive weapons.

Selected manufacturers suggested list prices circa 1983:

•Colt AR-15 $533.00, (5.56mm)

•Fabrique Nationale FNC $695.00, (5.56mm)

•H&K Model 91 $699.00 (7.62 NATO)

•Springfield Armory M1A1 $775.00 (7.62 NATO)

•Steyr Aug $1275.00 (5.56mm)

•Fabrique Nationale FN-LAR $1695.00 (7.62 NATO)

Importers began searching the globe for more affordable versions of the FN-FAL. Soon reasonably priced semi-automatic FAL rifles built under license in Argentina by FMAP DM Rosario were being imported into the United States. Armscorp of Maryland imported a number of FAL parts kits from Israel and assembled them on new manufacture semi-automatic receivers. Brazilian FALs were being imported by Springfield Armory and offered as the SAR-48. Even a small number of rare inch-pattern Lithgow L1A1 rifles were imported from Australia. Looking back one can honestly say, “Those were the days”.

The FAL today

Because of laws passed in recent years, many new categories of semi-automatic firearms have emerged. Today phrases such as sporter, pre-ban, post-ban, pre 1989, etc. are common parlance. Essentially all that these new laws have done is raise prices of the pre-ban guns to the point to where they have become expensive collector’s items. After the 1989 ban new “sporter” models of assault rifles began to appear. These guns were mechanically similar to the original guns, but equipped with thumbhole stocks, and without flash-hiders, bayonet lugs or separate pistol grips. While certainly adequate shooters, the rifles had lost a lot of their appeal to the more serious enthusiast.

More recently FN-FAL parts kits from a variety of countries have become available at very reasonable prices. These kits are generally in very good condition and complete, except of course, for the receiver. New manufacture receivers are also currently being offered. One of the earliest semi-auto-only receivers was manufactured by Imbel of Brazil, who had been manufacturing the FN FAL rifle for a number of years under license. Unfortunately these receivers where banned form further importation in 1997-98. Currently there are several U.S. based companies manufacturing FAL receivers: Hesse Ltd., Entréprise Arms and DSA Inc. In addition to receivers, there are several U.S. companies manufacturing FAL parts. Installation of at least 7 U.S. made parts in a FN-FAL places them in a category that allows a separate pistol grip and stock to be utilized. Although flash hiders are still disallowed, permanently attached muzzle brakes are permitted. FALs in this configuration are more appealing and can be obtained at a very reasonable cost. The availability of these “kit guns” has caused quite a resurgence of shooter interest in the classic FAL.

NOTE: Assembly of a FAL parts kit to a new receiver requires the services of a qualified gunsmith who is familiar with the weapon. In addition, be absolutely certain that you will be in compliance with all federal and local laws before undertaking such a project. There are several suppliers offering the FALs already assembled in various configurations.

As you read this article you can begin to get an idea of just how much our second amendment rights have deteriorated over the past decade. What will the next decade bring? Protect your rights, register and vote.

Sources for FAL receivers and part sets:

DSA Inc. 847-277-7258

Entreprise Arms 626-962-8712

Hesse Arms 651-455-5760

Inter-Ordnance 704-225-8843

SARCO Inc. 908-647-3800