“The PLA (People’s Liberation Army of Communist China) is also exploring satellite jammers, kinetic energy weapons, high-powered lasers, high-powered microwave weapons, particle beam weapons, and electromagnetic pulse weapons for counterspace application.” US Department of Defense, Annual Report to Congress: Military Power of the People’s Republic of China, 2008. The Chinese have already demonstrated their mastery of directed energy weapons (DEW) as a strategic spacewar capability by killing spy satellites in orbit. The PLA, aided by cynically mercenary experts from a catalog of nations including some US “allies,” is accelerating its program to develop and field ever more powerful and versatile DEW that are suitable for both strategic and tactical employment.

Same for the Russians – said by the Defense Intelligence Agency to have used vehicle mounted lethal power lasers in their Afghanistan debacle – who have been vigorously pushing the frontiers of science for decades in building efficient particle beam, laser and microwave weapons.

Serious discussion and planning throughout the US Department of Defense points to an official certainty that a range of advanced weapons beyond traditional kinetic energy types (hard projectile pushers) will be used by all combatant forces on the battlefields of the near future.

“Death Rays” Revealed

A useful introduction to the three major classes of DEW is provided here, courtesy of the Chinese themselves, who are clearly watching what’s being done in the West to parallel their own efforts.

“Directed energy weapons are new-generation weapons developed on the basis of the new concept of replacing conventional bullets with high-energy beams. Technically, directed energy weapons can be divided into three branches, namely (1) laser weapons, which can destroy or destabilize targets by using electromagnetic radiation energy beams with a wavelength of less than 1 millimeter; (2) radio-frequency weapons, which can destroy or destabilize targets with electromagnetic energy within the radio spectrum range (wavelength is more than 1 millimeter and radio frequency less than 300 gigahertz); (3) particle beam weapons, which are capable of destroying or destabilizing targets with neutral high-energy atomic particle beams (usually hydrogen, deuterium and tritium) or charged high-energy atomic or subatomic particle beams.” Zhang Yaping, Peoples Republic of China Astronautics and Missilery

As laser and microwave systems are most prominent among presently workable DEWs, it is essential to understand that both types are electromagnetic radiation but are different in their wavelength.

We’ll dispense with the scientific explanations and just say that many types of laser emissions are visible to the human eye but microwaves are not. Lasers begin burning the outside of an object while microwaves “cook” from the inside. More detailed information may be found in the resources listed at the end of this feature.

DEW Proliferation

China and Russia are not alone among America’s likely adversaries with current or emerging DEW capabilities. Numerous US government, military and industry documents that are readily available to anyone on the internet confirm the obvious.

A case in point is the December 2007 report to the US Secretary of Defense by the Defense Science Board Task Force on Directed Energy Weapons. Even after being carefully scrubbed of classified information, its chapter on current and emerging threats reveals a chilling likelihood. Addressing vulnerabilities recognized in sophisticated electronic command and control systems – extending from orbiting satellites to tactical team individual radios – the task force zeroes in on the threat posed by laser systems and high power microwave technologies: “They are particularly susceptible to the types of directed energy systems that are believed to be feasible for a wide range of potential adversaries … including non-state actors.” (Emphasis added)

Translated from typically overcautious bureaucratese, this means that all levels of the US-Allied “digital battlefield” can be too easily rendered blind, deaf and mute by devices available now to many countries and their terrorist surrogates (non-state actors). Just one example of this may be found in Iran, which buys high tech weapons from Russia, China and elsewhere, then funnels them to al Qaeda and other “insurgent” forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What is going to happen when the free world’s many enemies begin employing DEW not only against US and Allied C3I (Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence), but its soldiers as well?

Laser Sniping

We don’t need to wait until fully lethal DE weapons become widely available. Just enough power and range to blind will work just fine for those with no regard for the so-called laws of warfare and the civilized world’s condemnation.

This fits quite well the long-standing military maxim that inflicting incapacitating wounds is more tactically useful than killing the enemy because evacuating and caring for a badly wounded soldier distracts more of his fighting comrades from their primary battlefield mission.

Frying eyes with surprisingly low-powered lasers is a capability that is real and right now, a sobering thought for anyone whose job includes peering through weapon scopes, binoculars, AFV periscopes, and other optical devices.

The ZM-87, China’s Portable Laser Disturber, is a tripod-mounted weapon that can be carried and used by a crew of two. Its utility as a blinding weapon has been demonstrated in documented attacks.

Similarly, a laser “range finder” aboard the Russian spy ship Kapitan Man is known to have caused retina burns on a US Navy officer aboard an allied maritime surveillance helicopter in 1997.

The Federation of American Scientists reports that, “during the Iran-Iraq War, Iranian soldiers suffered over 4,000 documented eye casualties from Iraqi laser systems….” The injuries were described as retinal burns and hemorrhages, most of which were likely caused by deliberate antipersonnel use of the laser rangefinders in Saddam Hussein’s Communist-bloc tanks.

But that’s just the beginning. Ever popped corn in a microwave? Or used a magnifying glass to start a fire? Directed energy weapons are poppers and burners on a massive scale.

Uncle Sam’s DEW Programs

We are relieved to note that the United States and a few allies are well along the way in energy beam weapons programs, some dating back to the 1970s. Countering the very real threat of the Soviet Union’s massive arsenal of thermonuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles drove both high power laser and particle beam development. These reached a degree of practicality that readily transitioned in the 1980s to the Strategic Defense Initiative, popularly known as “Star Wars.”

In the decades that have followed, the strategic and tactical capabilities of these and other DE technologies have accelerated in work by a veritable alphabet soup of government and military programs. Just a sampling of these includes DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), SMDC (Space and Missile Defense Command), AFRL (Air Force Research Laboratory), and ONR (Office of Naval Research). Their many partners in the defense industry and academic institutions extend the roster of DEW players to virtually every state in the union.

Astronomical funding levels have paid off with astonishing capabilities. DEW in various forms are tracking and killing not only massive intercontinental ballistic missiles, but also multiple mortar rounds in flight. They’re melting electronic brains in the smartest of “smart weapons.” Shipborne DE systems can zap sea-skimming missiles. Airborne lasers can instantaneously fry individual terrorists with surgical precision that eliminates the usual “collateral damage” imagery that Al Jazeera and others delight in broadcasting.

Lasers

There are several different ways that the photon beams of lasers are generated in DEW, with major categories being chemical, free electron, bundled optical fiber, and solid state. This last is the simplest, typified by the battery powered pointer-illuminators now clamped to just about every M4 carbine in Uncle Sam’s military and extending to some experimental vehicle-mounted anti-materiel systems.

Included in the grouping of relatively low powered lasers are “dazzlers,” so called for their ability to distract and disorient their human targets using carefully controlled beam intensity that won’t cause lasting eye damage.

AFRL’s ScorpWorks has built a particularly novel dazzler with a name that invokes memories of the science fiction television series Star Trek. Their PHaSR (Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response) is a rifle-sized, non-lethal device in a futuristic housing. It projects two laser wavelengths with an effect “temporarily impairing individuals and their ability to see the laser source.”

Ground vehicle mounted systems are the next step up, quickly gaining in power and tactical potential. ZEUS, SMDC’s high energy solid state laser riding on a HMMWV, has been successfully field tested as a killer of IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) in Afghanistan. Effectiveness of this and similar pilot program systems has spurred development of more powerful and tactically mobile High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrators. These are already showing the ability to counter a wide variety of battlefield threats including rockets, artillery shells and mortar rounds.

A Bolt from the Blue

There is plenty of evidence that the demand for DEW is increasing throughout the US Armed Forces, driven in particular by current operational realities in the Global War on Terror. A compelling example of this may be found in US Special Operations Command’s (USSOCOM) Technology Development Objectives, briefed at NDIA’s Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict symposium in 2008.

Among other eyebrow-raising requirements is their intention to “pursue a greater variety of integrated, tunable weapons – non-lethal weapons with a tunable destructive potential – to accommodate a broad variety of missions while limiting collateral damage and casualties.”

Keep your eye on that part about “tunable destructive potential” because that’s the most exciting possibility for DEW of the near future. And some possibilities are already flying.

When vastly more power is needed for destructive lasing to greater range and effect, scientists have devised some supremely clever ways to create and hurl man-made “lightning bolts.” Particularly dramatic evidence of the progress of this weaponry may be found in the US Air Force’s Airborne Laser, flying now in a modified 747. Its megawatt-class Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser (COIL) has repeatedly demonstrated the air-to-air capability of destroying ballistic missiles in flight.

This success has inspired US Special Operations Command to order an air-to-ground version, called the Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL), with an eye toward eventually replacing its fleet of aging AC-130 Spectre and Spooky gunships. Their conventional kinetic-energy weapons will be supplemented at first by a COIL, then completely replaced, enabling engagement of a variety of ground and air targets with previously unattainable precision and instantaneous effect. If the project stays on track, first operational use of the new ATL may occur before the end of 2009.

An apparently authentic Coalition Forces (CF) document, widely circulated on the internet, touts the many desirable characteristics of the ATL under its USMC name Precision Airborne Standoff Directed Energy Weapon (PASDEW). These include “application of graduated effects” (tuning the beam to less-lethal or selectively aiming the full power beam) for such important tasks as stopping vehicles by flash melting the tires.

It also predicts mind-boggling PSYOPS (psychological operations) advantages of the ATL and similar beam devices in uncharacteristically graphic terms:

“In an anti-personnel mode, DEWs can be compared to long range blow torches or precision flame throwers …. A precision engagement of a PID (positively identified) insurgent by a DEW will be a highly surgical and impressively violent event. Target effects will include instantaneous burst-combustion of insurgent clothing, a rapid death through violent trauma, and more probably a morbid combination of both. It is estimated that the aftermath of a sub-second engagement … will also be an observable event leaving an impression of terrifyingly precise CF attribution in the minds of all witnesses.”

Microwaves

While microwaves – radio waves of extremely short length – have been around since WWII, their use in weapons has only recently emerged. Unmatched in their ability to penetrate deep inside even heavily shielded electronic devices, microwaves can melt circuits and instantly turn a multimillion dollar gadget into a great big smoking box of junk.

And just as your ordinary microwave oven heats food, a tunable military HPM (high powered microwave) emitter can readily “dial-an-effect” on various targets ranging from tingling to toasting.

The tingling end of this range is of particular interest to DoD’s Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate for applications where the objective is to disrupt and disperse hostile crowds without resorting to messy traditional means like tear gas, rubber bullets and the like.

This alternative is nicely realized in Air Force Research Laboratory’s Active Denial System (ADS), a counter-personnel, non-lethal, directed energy weapon that projects a focused beam of millimeter waves toward a designated individual or group. An invisible beam, traveling at the speed of light, penetrates clothing and reaches a skin depth of about 1/64th of an inch, the equivalent of three sheets of ordinary copy paper. Test subjects report that an intense heat sensation results, growing intolerable within seconds and forcing the targets to instinctively flee.

Although another desirable attribute is not usually listed in ADS program promotional materials, the invisible internal effects of the invisible microwave beam actively deny hostile media the inflammatory video imagery that is their stock in trade. And don’t forget its tunable/scalable capability that just might tempt the on-site commander to fry the electronic circuitry of all video equipment anywhere in range.

The first mobile configuration ADS is characterized by a large octagonal antenna mounted on a sturdy HMMWV that carries its power and microwave generating apparatus. Development has matured to the point of deployment with USAF Security Forces and prime contractor Raytheon has recently delivered ADS II, a more powerful, enhanced and ruggedized version mounted on the massive HEMETT vehicle.

DE at JSSAP?

The Joint Service Small Arms Program (JSSAP), part of the Army’s enormous Armaments Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC), identifies and develops cutting edge concepts in weapons and ammunition to the point of transition leading to large scale fielding. In other words, these are the “go to guys” to find out what’s currently on conveyor belts that run ten years or more into the future.

JSSAP recently published a solicitation that welcomes “non-traditional technology” for next generation small arms systems. The following excerpt shows that serious proposals from the DE community are apparently welcome:

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SUPPORTING FUNDED R&D EFFORTS FOR LETHALITY AND ADVANCED FIRE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CONCENTRATIONS FY 2008 – 2010 W15QKN-08-R-0449 

2.7.9. New Concepts & Applications. This research area includes non traditional technology leading to leaps in capability, such as (1) non kinetic energy lethality mechanisms or energy systems that can be scaled from lethal to less than lethal; (2) warheads or projectiles that can offer lethal and less than lethal capability; and (3) systems that automate the target acquisition and take weapon aiming out of the hands of the soldier. Unique and untried approaches to defeating targets in defilade also fit within this technology/research area.

Joel Goldman heads up JSSAP, so we asked him to let us know what’s going on there with DEW. He pointed us in two directions, first to a fascinating working group that JSSAP had recently convened and then to another component of ARDEC that is specifically involved in such things.

Before moving on we spoke at some length with Goldman, who told us he’s been closely following developments in directed energy for quite some time. And his well-informed opinion on the central question of this feature: When will the first fully scalable, hand-held DEW be fielded?

“Based on the periodic technology assessments that JSSAP has conducted,” the 63 year old, government gun guru with 38 years service declared, “not in my lifetime.”

The Fusion of Science and Science Fiction 

In part of its search for far-reaching concepts that are worthy of serious consideration, JSSAP has periodically convened meetings to survey the state of the art of a broad range of technologies that might have relevance to small arms. Beginning in the mid-1980s, JSSAP has consistently involved science fiction writers in these brainstorming and assessment activities. The latest instance of this decidedly unconventional approach occurred as the first of a two-part activity held in March and early May 2008 in support of “Future Small Arms Technology Plan Development” efforts. In the first meeting, JSSAP brought together a select group of nine prominent science fiction writers to brainstorm the frontier of scientific possibilities. Their mission was to propose “leap-ahead technologies” and – with the help of select representatives from industry, academia, the national laboratories, and government – to assess their possible practical potential. 74 concepts resulted, sorted into five categories; intelligence gathering, human factors, survivability, battlefield impact, and firepower.

Their ideas, one of which called for tapping energy from the quantum vacuum, were then given a hard, cold look by a team of science, engineering and military experts during the second meeting. While at this writing the report is still in preparation and its specifics not available for release, Goldman told us that at least twenty concepts have emerged.

“These are viable, relevant and will find a place,” Goldman explained, “in a technology investment strategy for small arms systems capable of overwhelmingly defeating any enemy combatant of the future.”

As SAR is most interested in firepower, we tracked down a couple of participants who, in our opinion, bring particular credibility based on their professional work outside of sci-fi.

John Hemry, a retired US Navy lieutenant commander, is the author of the notable STARK’S WAR series and, under the pen name Jack Campbell, the LOST FLEET series. Speaking of his working group, he reports that “no one thought there would be huge or dramatic breakthroughs in small arms in the near future.”

Instead, Hemry’s own suggestions to JSSAP centered on target recognition and engagement. “The best way to enhance weapon effectiveness in the near future,” he believes, “is to improve the ability of the shooter to identify and target the enemy.”

Doctor Arlan Andrews, Sr., another member of the group, suggests a different track. Notable not only for service in the White House Science Office, Sandia National laboratories and more, Andrews founded an eclectic group of sci-fi writers comprising the SIGMA group. Now well into its second decade of advising government agencies and the military on what the future may hold, SIGMA is most recently known for work with the Department of Homeland Security on innovative ways to combat terrorism.

Andrews enthusiastically responded to SAR’s request for input on his suggestions to JSSAP, sending us a copy of his elaborate PowerPoint presentation to the working group. Entitled “Nanotech-Enabled Weaponry and Features,” it is worthy of a full article in itself. Alas, since it concerns devilishly smart kinetic energy weapons and variable power ammo – but no beam devices in sight – we’ll defer elaboration and go right for the reply he sent us in response to the title question of this article.

The good Doctor Andrews, refreshingly unconcerned it seems with diplomatic sensitivities and likely influenced by conversations with personal contacts in the academic branches of DEW, pulls no punches in his prediction on the US military’s first full-featured ray gun for individual soldiers:

“I would estimate that it will be a pulsed-energy weapon, probably powered by a backpack power system, looking much like today’s flame throwers. After successful small-scale operational tests by special operations forces in occupied Iran (the non-radioactive areas) ca. 2011, they will be more massively deployed by our troops along the perimeter of conflict between the USA and the irregular forces of the secessionist northern Mexican provinces, which is to say between Corpus Christi and the cartel-occupied cities of Laredo and Brownsville,” Andrews replied.

AEAD

Among ARDEC’s many components is one that Goldman advised was particularly relevant to this feature. He kindly assisted our journey back through official channels to contact his counterpart Ben Lagasca, head of Advanced Energy Armaments Division (AEAD).

Because SAR is fully supportive of the cautious process that keeps classified information away from freedom’s many foes, we offered to submit our questions via email. This was accepted and replies came back in kind. Some relevant excerpts:

SAR: At NDIA’s Small Arms Conference in 2000, ARDEC’s Harry Moore gave a presentation on the impressive potential of the Pulsed Impulsive Kill Laser (PIKL). Is this being applied to current DEW projects at AEAD?

AEAD: The Army SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research) program/effort started in FY05 with Stellar Photonics was intended to build from the PIKL effort. With the advancement of solid state lasers it was believed that the potential existed to improve the PIKL technology known as Laser Supported Detonation (LSD) or Dynamic Pulse Detonation (DPD). Stellar was tasked to investigate the optimal parameters for creating LSD or DPD that could be useful for military applications. The study was unsuccessful (but) did evolve into possibly using the technology as a non-lethal visual deterrent. This effort is congressionally funded at approximately $1 million per year (out) to 2010, basic research to look at the potential of Synchronized Photopulse Detonation…. Stellar has constructed a prototype device and demonstrated their technology only in a lab environment. The Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) has shown interest in this technology as a potential part of their non-lethal weapons program; however the effectiveness of the system has yet to be determined by Government or Independent evaluators.

SAR: Applied Energetics recently announced a $4.5 million contract with ARDEC for development and advancement of its proprietary Laser Guided Energy (LGE), “a transformational weapon technology by which a controllable high voltage electric charge can be precisely guided by a laser through the atmosphere to produce a range of controllable effects against a variety of potential military and security targets.” Comment on this being used to counter improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and any other applications.

AEAD: Applied Energetics has a lab demo scheduled for March 2009 developing DE technologies to defeat anti-material targets. AE has the patent on certain aspects of this technology and much of this work is classified.

SAR: ARDEC’s official web page linked at www.pica.army.mil lists an impressive range of “advanced technologies” said to be used in its DEW work. While most are self-explanatory, please comment on work with acoustics and nanotechnology.

AEAD: ARDEC works a wide range of advanced energy weapon systems across (its) many departments. (We) can only comment on the efforts of the Advanced Energy Armaments Division (which includes the Directed Energy Branch) to say that AEAD has no ongoing efforts in nanotechnology. In addition, any acoustic work performed by AEAD is on evaluating non-lethal Commercial Off-the-Shelf devices that are considered to be “hailing and warning devices” and are not considered as “weapons.” Examples include the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD), etc.

SAR: What is Mr. Lagasca’s prediction on the first fielding of a scalable non-lethal to lethal DE weapon that can be carried and used by one man?

Lagasca: “Hand held Non-Lethal Laser Dazzlers have already been fielded and are currently available. These systems are mainly used as a non-lethal means to ‘warn’ and/or get the attention of people. These lasers are not considered weapons. Weaponization of lasers for lethal applications into a ‘hand-held’ form factor are a long way away. Currently there are no laser technologies or programs that I am aware of that could be weaponized into hand held size within say 10 years. Breakthroughs in laser and power source technologies would be required to realize laser weapons in this class. It should also be noted that all lethal laser development programs are focused on counter materiel applications and not counter personnel (at least the ones that I am aware of). Any laser weapon designed for lethal and/or non-lethal counter personnel use would have to undergo considerable legal policy review to assure conformance with applicable international treaties such as prohibition on blinding weapons.”

Electric Ships

The United States Navy’s future surface warships are under development right now and they represent the nearly ideal mobile platforms for utilizing all types of directed energy weaponry. These massive, oceangoing, all-electric vessels will have plenty of room on board for complicated apparatus and vast reserves of energy from the latest generation high-yield nuclear power plants.

Office of Naval Research (ONR) has long been interested in the potential of directed energy weapons for shipboard defense at the speed of light and, among other initiatives, is well underway with perfecting the “high average power infrared free electron laser.” FEL for short, it provides particularly intense beams that can be tuned to atmosphere-penetrating wavelengths. This tuning is an essential capability in conditions of thick fog, heavy rain and snow, making FEL weapons lethal in all weather against threat aircraft, watercraft, sea skimming missiles, and more.

And the practicality of including specialized kinetic energy weaponry on these future warships hasn’t been overlooked. Because there are times when slinging steel is the best solution to specific situations, the ONR is also hard at work on EMRGs (electromagnetic railguns). These exotic projectile pushers dispense with traditional chemical propellants or rocket motors in favor an electrically generated magnetic field that “levitates” a specialized metallic slug, launching it down track-like rails at previously unattainable speed.

Successful test firings have been conducted, with one demonstrating a mind-boggling muzzle velocity of 1.56 miles per second. With anticipated fielding some 15 years away, the Navy expects its EMRGs to fire 6 to 10 internally guided projectiles per minute with astonishing precision at ranges in excess of 200 nautical miles, about the distance from New York City to Boston.

KE/DE Combo

In retrospect, it was a bit unfair to ask the experts to predict fielding of an individual weapon using only directed energy to provide fully tunable effects from dazzle to death. Most respondents were quick to point out that a combination of a standard kinetic energy (KE) assault rifle, coupled with a “scalable effects” less-lethal directed energy (DE) device, is the most practical and logical interim step.

Indeed, when one takes into account such possible couplings as XADS’ Stun Strike Close Quarters Shock Rifle clamped to an M4 carbine, we’re getting there now.

More exotic hardware is in the works that promises to extend the reach of the DE module’s less lethal but incapacitating effects to eventually approximate the effective range of the decidedly lethal KE host weapon. The AEWS/Stellar Photonics’ “Synchronized Photo-pulse Detonation” may be one of these, said to employ two synchronized lasers that project an atmospheric shock wave of superheated plasma.

Lest one be tempted to dismiss this and similar efforts as quantum quackery, their development is being fueled by millions of defense dollars, awarded only after rigorous scientific review has validated their potential. Many firms have ongoing contracts and are working on classified counter-IED and other projects under supervision of various Department of Defense entities.

Because these will certainly get smaller, lighter and more powerful in the near future, your individual-issue ray gun seems inevitable. Thus, if Doctor Andrews’ startlingly bold prediction proves right, the first of USSOCOM’s elite warriors will be combat testing their one-man-portable “non-lethal weapons with a tunable destructive potential” in about three years.

The E-Bomb

“After more than two decades of research, the United States is on the verge of deploying a new generation of weapons that discharge light-wave energy, the same spectrum of energy found in your microwave, or in your TV remote control. They’re called ‘directed-energy weapons’ – lasers, high-powered microwaves, and particle beams – and they signal a revolution in weaponry, perhaps more profound than the atomic bomb.” (E-Bomb book jacket notes)

Published in 2005, this fascinating book carries the bold subtitle, “How America’s new directed energy weapons will change the way future wars are fought.” It has served quite well as our primary reference source for this feature, detailing the scientific concepts and evolving hardware of DE. While including plenty of formulas and diagrams for the more scientific-minded readers, these are accompanied by simple explanations and straightforward presentations, making it easily understood by the rest of us.

Its author, a retired USAF Colonel with a Doctorate in Physics, has particular credibility as a result of more than thirty years of experience, from conducting basic research to directing applied-science programs and formulating national policy. J. Douglas Beason’s last active duty assignment was Deputy Director for Directed Energy at the Air Force Research Laboratory.

He is currently the Associate Laboratory Director for Threat Reduction at Los Alamos National Laboratory, responsible for programs that reduce the global threat of weapons of mass destruction.

Doctor Beason graciously responded to our request for a prediction on the first fielding of a scalable non-lethal to lethal DE weapon that can be carried and used by one man. It is presented here in its entirety:

“Small arms Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) will provide the warfighter with the best of all worlds – speed of light engagement, little (if any) collateral damage, near-infinite precision, the ability to induce “graduated” effects (dial-an-effect), and best of all, not be constrained by ballistics or windage. In the near future, as technology matures and DEWs become smaller and capable of being fielded by individuals, a revolution will occur as DEWs move from strategic to tactical applications.

“The first use of small arms DEWs has been in the form of non-lethal weapons, for example dazzlers. As power supplies shrink and sub-THz (teraHertz) sources become more efficient, hand-held active denial units the size of back packs will become available.

“Because of technology limitations, it will take much longer to field a small arms lethal laser capability; but until then, the tactics and doctrine of using DEWs on the battlefield – and most importantly, the evolution of a national DEW policy – will mature.”

Find Out More

The following internet links are listed in their order of presentation in this feature:

Report: Defense Science Board Task Force on Directed Energy Weapons www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2007-12-Directed_Energy_Report.pdf

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency: www.darpa.mil

US Army Space and Missile Defense Command: www.smdc.army.mil

US Air Force Research Laboratory: www.afrl.af.mil

US Navy Office of Naval Research: www.onr.navy.mil

Department of Defense Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate: https://www.jnlwp.com

US Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center: www.pica.army.mil

FBI Academy Advanced Weapons Subject Bibliography: http://fbilibrary.fbiacademy.edu/bibliographies/advancedweapons.htm

Book: The E-Bomb www.dougbeason.com

This year’s Small Arms System Symposium and Firing Demonstration, hosted by the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA), was heated by more than just the Texas sun. The event, an international and joint services forum, saw a variety of topics related to small arms, often with opposing viewpoints. Participants ranged from the regular Defense Industry and Military Procurement personnel, a Senatorial aid, and even an Israeli Defense Forces officer fresh from an obscure Jerusalem base. What brought these small arms professionals to the Fairmont Hotel and Convention Center in Dallas is that the NDIA symposium is the one place to see relevant equipment, evaluate new products, and hear a multitude of professional presentations about the current status of the nation’s small arms industry. Many came to look to the horizon and gain a sense of future requirements, others came to stay informed on what their industry partners and the military services are doing, while others came simply to step back and observe what would come from the amalgamation of so many ideas.

The symposium objective was simple: bring together all aspects of the small arms community in order to bring the best small arms enhancements to the warfighter, whether it be “incremental enhancements to fielded legacy small arms systems to enabling technologies, such as fire control improvements, use of robotics, and digitization of small arms systems on the battlefield.” The major contention point, however, became the focus on defining the meaning and importance of the symposium objective and trying to sort out the relationship between incremental changes and leap ahead technology. This lead to some very interesting insight from every point of view imaginable as a simple guiding theme turned the 2008 NDIA event into a hotbed of debate that had some walking on eggshells from the event’s opening remarks.

The Beginning

The NDIA Small Arms Symposium historically has drawn many of the finest and most respected personalities in the defense community as speakers and this year was no different. The Honorable James R. Ambrose, former Under Secretary of the Army (October 1981-February 1988) was the keynote speaker following the initial opening announcements. Seasoned with experience and flavored with modest humor, Ambrose commented on his personal experiences as Under Secretary during the turbulent Cold War years of President Reagan’s administration. While touching on the relevancy of the past and the importance of communication between the military and industry, Under Secretary Ambrose preempted the week’s forum with a tremendous thought: the Soldiers on the ground are a wealth of operational knowledge to keep in consideration when planning, a point that would surface again and again. Under Secretary Ambrose himself specifically mentioned the professionalism and skill of the Army’s NCO Corps and made it clear that despite some of the thinking he encountered in some during his time in office, the Soldier is more than a “pack animal.” As he left the stage he was saluted with a standing ovation.

Following the Under Secretary’s words was a brief but potent address by Mr. Bryan O’Leary, Legislative Assistant for Military Affairs representing the office of Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK). Senator Coburn has become a common name in the small arms community after becoming an aggressive advocate for open competition among carbine manufacturers. Sen. Coburn’s office has often expressed concerns that United States service men and women may not be armed with the best available individual weapon. Though there are varied interpretations of test data and questions of relevancy, especially from the Army, Mr. O’Leary assured the industry and military attendees that in a competition, “We don’t care who wins.” referring to Senator Coburn and his staff. “In the end the taxpayers are going to win and the Soldiers are going to win and they are going to be carrying the best weapon you can produce.” Mr. O’ Leary further elaborated that the issue of small arms is largely neglected by Congress because of a variety of factors including constituency concerns and small unit price. O’Leary’s opening remarks brought the spotlight on an issue that would linger peripherally around the symposium hall for the duration of the event.

The Vision of the Services

At the beginning of the first session, the Joint Services Small Arms Synchronization Team (JSSAST) took the podium consisting of a chief representative from the four branches of service as well as the Coast Guard. Each member of the panel took an opportunity to address industry and military personnel on the current status of small arms programs and the future of vision of their organization. Col. Robert Radcliffe, representing the U.S. Army Infantry Center (USAIC) kicked things off with the longest portion of the session.

Col. Radcliffe quickly enforced the Army’s position on the current M4 carbine calling it, in his view, “a world class weapon” and suggested the Army may be contemplating “pure fleeting” the carbine to replace M16 variants currently in circulation. Citing post combat surveys that show soldier satisfaction with the M4, Col. Radcliffe focused most of his time explaining how the Infantry Center develops combat requirements for small arms using a five point method of assessment known as “Soldier as a System” (SAS) that addresses the soldier, training, weapon, optic, and ammunition as an entire package. As presented, the USAIC has, and continues to be, heavily focused on training, optics, and ammunition as substantial combat multipliers and Col. Radcliffe stated that of the five factors applied in SAS, their findings suggest the weapon is the least important at this time.

The USAIC presentation emphasized the combatant demand for heavy and general purpose machine guns identifying the renowned M2 .50 cal. and M240B as the two weapons topping the charts with Soldiers in post combat surveys. The demand for such weapon systems has lead to further developments including the M2 Enhanced Gun and the XM312 Lightweight .50. Both weapons were developed to address long identified issues with the M2 such as the need to set headspace and timing after barrel changes and hefty weight when dismounted. While the M2 Enhanced offers the M2 package with a quick change barrel and fixed headspace and timing, the XM312 is of particular interest, especially to light infantry and small team units. With a system weight of 53 pounds including the full ground mount system, half of the comparable configuration weight for the M2, the XM312 has the potential to add a whole new level of lethal capability to the dismounted warfighter.

Col. Radcliffe put substantial emphasis on precision fire capability and capability gaps. One focal point is a Squad Designated Marksman (SDM) rifle that is a “carbine look-a-like.” The premise is that an SDM rifle that mimics that standard carbine will not draw attention to the DM who, despite his roll as a marksman capable of precision well aimed fire, is still primarily an Infantry Rifleman. Currently the Army fields a hodge-podge of different solutions for the SDM that vary from unit to unit and are mostly based on the M14 and a few Army Marksmanship Unit built 5.56mm weapons. The M14 EBR, selected for accuracy and modified with a sage stock, is currently being fielded to fulfill the SDM capability and may bring some standardization across the service. When coupled with a good optic and proper training, the EBR is quite accurate at range but ergonomically challenging in close quarters.

The brief further addressed the M110 SASS (Semi Automatic Sniper System); a 7.62mm self-loading sniper rifle based on the Knight’s Armament SR-25, and identified it as an example of successful Army small arms fielding. The M110 is currently being fielded to augment and possibly fully replace the venerable M24 bolt action sniper systems currently filling most sniper roles in the Army. According to LTC (USMC ret) David Lutz of Knight’s Armament, the M110 recently performed well in a random lot sample test in which over 5,000 rounds were fired without a failure. A sniper capability gap was also identified demanding the requirement for a longer range anti-personnel sniper weapon out to 1,500 meters. Radcliffe also refined the requirement for a “sub compact” weapon system emphasizing an effective range of 150m-200m from a 5.56mm NATO platform.

Following the Army was the USMC’s LTC Tracy Tafolla who gave a focused no nonsense look at what Marine Corps Systems Command has in sight for the future. Among the more interesting goals, the Marines will be gathering a consensus of opinion on a possible replacement rifle caliber, a talking point that had many heads turning during the brief. The USMC has also been working towards completion of a sniper rifle document for a weapon system that has a 1,500-1,800 meter anti-personnel capability. LTC Tafolla also gave a detailed brief on the highly successful Marine Corps 60mm and 81mm mortar upgrades that have utilized state of the art materials and technology to cut system weights by nearly one third while maintaining previous capabilities at a lower cost. In the realm of heavy weapons in the light infantry, ounces make pounds, and mortar men across the Marine Corps are benefiting greatly from what would seem a trivial engineering improvement to those outside of the infantry community, but prized within.

Surprising many was the vigor seen in the US Air Force (USAF) as the current search for a new Modular Handgun System was detailed. Colonel Charles Beck explained that despite the Army being the overall executive agent, the Air Force is providing the requirement characteristics that will capitalize on emerging technologies in order to provide a weapon that will “ensure the combat needs of all USAF users.” Some of the more interesting features in the Air Force requirement are mandates that include a larger wound channel than produced using M882 (9mm NATO) from an FMJ non-expanding ball round, interchangeable modular hand grips, incorporated M1913 rails, external safety controls on the receiver, and a minimum service life of 25,000 rounds. One more unique note on the USAF weapon was that it must be a commercially available off the shelf item and not a start-from-scratch internal development program leaving the possibilities broad. One thing is for sure, the current service pistol does not make the cut lacking several key features listed in the requirement document. At 100,600 weapons, it is no small order and certainly has the eye of numerous manufacturers. The full solicitation can be found at www.fbo.gov.

Other JSSAST presenters included Capt. Pat Sullivan of the Navy, Capt Scott Genovese of the Coast Guard, and Mr. Kevin Swenson of the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD). Mostly, these briefs followed ground work previously laid in the past and did not shine light on any major new developments. Of interest however was an update on the Coast Guard Transition from the M9 Beretta 9mm to SIGARMS P229R-DAK in .40 caliber. The Coast Guard projects full transition to the SIG by 2010. The Coast Guard is making other incremental changes as well to include adoption of the Barrett M107 semiautomatic .50 cal. rifle with a shortened barrel to replace the Robar RC50 Bolt Action; transition from the aged M60 machine Gun to the M240, and introducing the M14T to the inventory in support of the airborne use of force role. Despite the significant change in the Coast Guard line up, the USCG has no plans to replace the current issue service rifle/carbine.

The JSSAST session set the tone for the rest of the symposium. It was not difficult when exploring the exhibition floor to see the results of industry’s response to the services needs. Many of the items briefed by the JSSAST were present in various forms in the vendor booths, even recently identified requirements. Many other indicators of industry’s ability to respond to the needs of the warfighter could be seen by the many fine examples of currently fielded incrementally improved equipment. The theme of the conference transitioned well into the exhibition hall and demonstration range as if it had been meticulously scripted.

A Break for Awards

Every year’s symposium has a special time when men and women of the international defense community are recognized for substantial contributions above and beyond the call of duty. This year’s awards, the Hathcock and Chinn, were presented by NDIA to well deserving recipients FBI Special Agent Buford Boone and Mr. Troy Smith of the Navy’s Crane Special Warfare Center. They joined a long list of notable recipients over the years including C. Reed Knight (Chinn 96), L. James Sullivan (Chinn 01), Larry Vickers (Hathcock 03), and USA MSG Steve Holland (Hathcock 04). The pool of professionals in the small arms community that exemplify selfless service and achievement is not a small one and the recipients are selected only after a nomination and voting process by the NDIA Small Arms Division Executive Board. The board assesses the character and contributions of all nominees before arriving at what is some times a difficult decision.

The Hathcock award is named after USMC Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock, the famed sniper and respected trainer. The award that bears his name recognizes an individual who “has made significant contributions in operational employment and tactics of small arms weapons systems which have impacted the readiness and capabilities of the U.S. Military or Law Enforcement.” Special Agent Boone undoubtedly meets the criteria with countless man-hours dedicated to ballistic analysis at the FBI Ballistics Lab at Quantico, VA. Fruit of SA Boone’s work go well beyond Federal Law Enforcement and has impacted both the Armed Forces and local law enforcement communities by influencing improvements in body armor and ammunition performance.

The Chinn award, named after LTC (USMC) George Chinn, noted for his passion for machine guns, is presented to an individual that “has made significant contributions to the field of small arms and/or infantry weapons systems.” This year’s award was received by Mr. Troy Smith, SOF Weapons Program Manager for US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). Mr. Smith has played a major role in fielding notable weapons to the Special Warfare community in a timely manner and often in response to unique needs. Weapons and accessories like the MK46 and MK48 machine guns, the SCAR series, and the well used SOPMOD system for the M4 carbine have all been directly associated with his efforts. It is certain that much of what the special operations and conventional operators rely upon today have been influenced by Mr. Smith whether it is the newest SF carbine or some real estate for the line grunt to hang his sure-fire on.

Also presented was the Ambrose Award, which recognized St. Marks Powder in the small arms community for their industrial excellence, and is annually given to an industrial firm that stands out in contributions to the defense community. The Ambrose Award recipient is selected in a similar manner as the individual awards and considers areas such as technology development, delivery of superior material, enhancement of production capabilities, and innovative weapons integration and concepts. St. Marks in particular has been a major contributor when meeting the demand for various propellants demanded in the Global War on Terror.

Face to Face on the Vendor Floor

The convention center ball room at the Fairmont was filled with display boards and hardware as the site of the vendor exhibition booths. After only a few minutes any new spectator would find that this is a far cry from the hustle and bustle of SHOT Show. The vendors at NDIA are faced with a well informed and experienced group from all over the international small arms community. The relatively small size when compared to larger events makes NDIA the ideal place to engage in prolonged networking and fact finding about products, and many of the vendor representatives coming from a military background themselves, communicate fluidly – professionalism at its best.

As with any show, the new products get the most attention, and certainly getting its share of it was the new prototype Masood 7.62mm rifle developed by Magpul, Industries. Similar in appearance to the company’s Adaptive Combat Rifle (ACR), the Masood was built with functionality first and foremost in mind. “We were trying to make a rifle to fit the purpose,” explained Magpul’s Drake Clark, “and not be linked to interchangeable parts.” This development concept means that the interchangeability between the Masood and its 5.56mm little brother may not be as prevalent as with similar weapon families, but allows for the weapon to be designed from the ground up for optimum performance. Currently, the Masood is in preliminary development and only time will tell where Magpul will take their 7.62 rifle. The first range reports from Magpul representatives suggest the Masood is a performer, and a very early stage concept for a M1913 tri-rail has been discussed as an addition to the design. As for the ACR, current projections for commercial availability are not until first quarter of 2009. Mr. Clark enthusiastically commented on the wait: “We want it to be right the first time, even if it means delaying production a couple of months.”

Another 7.62 NATO system on the floor fit very well into the USAIC vision for a carbine look-a-like designated marksman rifle. Based on the SR-25 design and built with ninety percent interchangeability with the Army’s new M110 SASS sniper rifle was the Knight’s Armament M-110 Squad Designated Marksman (SDM) Rifle. The weapon features an M4 type collapsible stock and an 18 inch barrel making it ergonomically fit for general use, yet with its free float quad M1913 rail, 7.62mm projectile, and ability to mate with the M110 suppressor suite, the SDM rifle is fully capable of filling the gap as a precision fire weapon. David Lutz of Knight’s Armament was enthusiastic about the project, especially in light of an aforementioned requirement.

With precision fire and bigger bullets featuring so prominently on the showroom floor it was easy to find a company with their eyes set on the capability for a long range anti-personnel system. Ashbury International Group, Inc. is poised to contend with their impressive precision rifle suite. The Asymmetric Warrior, the SXL-A2 being the latest of their unique rifle and component line, incorporates state of the art materials and operator input into a rigid and usable platform. Ashbury representative Richard Hall discussed the features of Asymmetric Warrior line citing an average weight of 18.5 pounds per system and consistent 1/2 MOA accuracy with top quality match ammunition. The Ashbury weapons utilize a proprietary chamber designed for the .338 LAPUA cartridge giving the Asymmetric Warrior a potent long distance capability in a small package similar in size to most 7.62 systems. Ashbury also produces a chassis system to upgrade weapons built on the Remington 700 Long Action.

On the modern battlefield, no weapon system seems complete without optical and laser devices that enhance the user’s lethality. Looking past the realm of their famous Comp series military sights and the small compact package of their new micro, Aimpoint unveiled a new and unusual optic that focuses on the often neglected realm of 40mm launcher fired grenades and other area weapons. Known as the BR-8 Self Contained Laser Range Finder System, Aimpoint President Mr. Lennart Ljungfelt exhibited the prototype during a personal demonstration. The optic is designed to be mounted on the standard M1913 rail, and as the name describes, features an internal laser rangefinder. The BR-8 projects the common Aimpoint red dot for rifle and can range targets at the push of a button. The sight then projects a second flashing dot as the aiming aide for the secondary weapon, in this case the M203. The more unusual feature of this system in the side viewed display as opposed to the typical top view, which was necessary to achieve a field of view that exploits the system’s enhanced aiming capabilities when mounted on a standard carbine platform. Other characteristics of the BR-8 include a rechargeable battery as well as the ability to program the system with other ballistic data like that of the 84mm Carl Gustaf. As the BR-8 is still a prototype there was still much left unsaid, but when asked when to expect the system to come to complete fruition Mr. Ljungfelt wasted no time replying, “I believe in doing things fast. It’s crucial that a product make you more dangerous to the enemy.”

Also notable from Aimpoint, though not so new, is the System-of-Systems, or SoS. This modular system incorporates mounting attachments for the PVS-14 Night Vision Monocular, Aimpoint 3x magnifier, and the Concealed Engagement Unit (CEU), into one quickly interchangeable package incorporated with the standard Aimpoint reflex sight. Using a simple male and female portioned twist-to-lock bracket an operator has the ability to switch between night vision, precision fire, and shooting around corners while concealed in a matter of seconds. Taking a more primitive and lighter approach to the hi-tech bulk of Land Warrior, and requiring no extra batteries, the System-of-Systems is a not so difficult solution to quickly optimizing one’s platform for the conditions at hand; an example of incremental improvement to an existing capability.

Many other eye catchers that represented incremental change were on display, including the XM307 and M2 Enhanced .50 from General Dynamics as well as FN’s light weight M240E6 and the now well known SCAR series. The Army’s developmental LSAT machine gun from AAI, Smith & Wesson’s new mid size .45 caliber M&P pistol, and the newly released 7.62mm C-MAG designed for use with M14/M1A or AR-10 platforms also merit mention. One thing is clear to the attendee: the commercial side of the Defense Small Arms community is ready and capable of producing high quality products to meet the demand of ever changing missions.

At the Range

The NDIA Firepower demonstration gives vendors and attendees alike a chance to put lead on steel and this year the firing line was full. Nearly a two hour drive from Dallas, the Tac Pro Shooting Center proved to be an excellent facility and its proprietor Mr. Bill Davison an animated and appropriate host. Mr. Sal Fanelli of the USMC was the mastermind for the 2008 demonstration and graciously imparted his time as OIC for the duration. Also praise worthy was the donation of nearly 35,000 rounds of small arms ammunition by ATK systems, which insured more than enough for vendors to keep hungry weapons from running dry. Already aware of the products available, attendees selected vendors and the shooting began. Safety was paramount: marking tape and vigilant RSOs, as well as keen participants kept the demonstration running smooth.

Of the nearly thirty vendors some were familiar favorites like Colt with their M4 carbine, while others like Command Action Arms (CAA) with their line of AR type weapons and accessories are fairly new to the spotlight. Attention getters this year included a hefty interest in Fabrique Nationale with the MK16 (SCAR-L) and MK17 (SCAR-H), Milkor USA’s rotary 40mm grenade launcher (firing training ammunition at the demonstration), and Talley Defense Systems’ upgraded M72 training launcher that accurately portrays the concussion, noise, and back-blast of the real thing while sending a training round down range.

Drake Clark and Nick Booras of Magpul Industries took the opportunity to run an unofficial test on the P-MAG incorporated with the M249 SAW. Over 5,000 rounds were fired with zero failures to feed and only one misfire (literally a primer failed to detonate when struck). The Polymer magazine held up well and showed no signs of succumbing to hard use and heat, which is quite impressive on a belt fed weapon not renowned for its reliability feeding from magazines. Certainly this kind of unofficial test is not empirical data, but it is an interesting gauge of the product’s performance.

In the optics arena, NVS Systems with their Medium Thermal Weapons Sight (MTWS), modeled on the Army’s AN/PAS-13D MWTS, saw heavy use. The sights replicate the systems currently replacing the bulky and cumbersome PAS-13B in Army BCTs and provide a marked ergonomic advantage due to their compact size. The medium weight model was utilized mounted on a 7.62mm MK48 machine gun throughout the demonstration and never missed a beat. The simple push pad on top of the sight simplifies operations that were difficult with the previous PAS-13Bs and allows a soldier to switch from white to black hot, adjust contrast, and change aiming reticles all from a centralized location on the device. Battery size is also nearly half of the original PAS-13B system with an improved life span. With an all-weather day and night aiming ability, the MTWS is a valuable battlefield asset whether used for engagement or observation and a shining example of incremental improvement when compared to its predecessors of only a few short years ago.

After the demonstration was well underway, some observers would have noted a mysterious white van and the large metal container it delivered surrounded by franticly busy representatives from Israel Weapons Industry. As soon as a break in firing occurred, the containers imprisoned contents found its way to the firing line despite a delay at U.S. customs. The Negev and Tavor had arrived at the range. The low recoil and innovative Negev was a show stealer attracting attendees from across the range that were drawn to the first few sustained one hundred round burst fired by an ambitious Israeli operator. Easily maintained on target even from the shoulder the open bolt, select-fire Negev produces a distinctive report reminiscent of an MG42. Complimented by IWI’s TA21 Tavor and MicroTavor Bullpup assault rifles which were both handy and accurate, the Israeli contingent featured an impressive suite.

The Professional Paper Presentations

Possibly the biggest draw to the NDIA Small Arms Symposium is the variety of professional papers delivered during the forum sessions. Besides the aforementioned JSSAST update, this year’s event saw industry professionals from the military and commercial side of the house deliver a salvo of topical briefs highlighting emerging technology in arms and ammunition, critical analysis of the testing and acquisition process, and statuses of current programs. Topics ranged from one end of the spectrum to the other and had relevant information for developer and user alike. The push for both leap ahead and incremental technology gains was clearly demonstrated with presentations like “ JSSAP’s Future Technology Plan: The Fusion of Science and Science Fiction,” which touched the outer fringes of sci-fi writers in order to glean information for weapons programs contrasted others like “Time for a Change: U.S. Incremental Small Arms Fielding-Failures and Solutions.” The latter supports rapid fielding of currently available superior small arms technology while the question of where military small arms acquisition is and should head lingered as an underlying issue throughout the sessions. Comments and PowerPoint bullets drew both eerie silence and fiery criticism depending on how they addressed any relevance to the ad hoc main issue, most often put into context by the now infamous carbine controversy.

The debate stirred high emotions for some during a brief by Col. Walter Mattes, USAF, of the Comparative Testing Office, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, after commentary during his brief suggested merit in the idea of a comparative small arms testing. With references to the SCAR program, Col. Mattes’ comments proved the high water mark drawing a passionate response from MG (ret) James Battaglini of Colt Defense LLC, maker of the M4 carbine. Battaglini’s comments addressed several parties in the current debate and stated that results from a recent Aberdeen Proving Ground Extreme Sand and Dust Test had been spun by what he called, “those that have an agenda.” MG (ret) Battaglini also offered criticism towards The Army Times newspaper, which has covered the debate extensively in the past 18 months and preemptively addressed the “Time for a Change” brief by Mr. Jim Schatz and Dr. Gary Roberts scheduled for later in the day. Battaglini has been vocal in his concerns that the current issue carbine be accurately represented and previously detailed his opinions in an editorial featured in The Army Times. Despite the sharp words, Col Mattes held to his previous convictions before the crowd.

Another sticking point related to the big debate was Mr. Schatz’s previously mentioned “Time for a Change” paper. Extensive in its composition, and touted by the author as his personal educated opinion, the paper meticulously documented the historical timeline of failures to field superior small arms by the United States from the period of the American Revolution until the present. Going further, he elaborated on the current status of U.S. small arms acquisition and noted the similarities to historical failures while pointing out the underlying issues are not related to a specific vendor or weapon type. Using the example of the brewing carbine debate and citing three Sand and Dust Tests conducted by the Army at Aberdeen Proving Ground as well as the 2006 CNAC study “Soldier Perspectives on Small Arms”, Mr. Schatz made his case that as a military and nation we are at a critical juncture where superior small arms exist that the United States has not adopted for conventional units despite other countries and Special Operations Forces fielding the incremental improvements available and that this is a repeating trend in our nation’s small arms history. He finished by offering solutions to the audience while encouraging listeners to actively fix the “system dysfunction” that he believes hinders supplying superior weapons to the end user.

Dr. Gary Roberts DDS, using DoD/DoT ballistic studies in which he was personally involved, presented a joint session as part of “Time for a Change” relaying data about the debate between intermediate calibers such as 6.8mm SPC and 5.56mm NATO. Dr. Roberts left little doubt that he believed 6.8mm SPC offers the warfighter significant advantages and presented a slew of graphs, data, and photos from ballistic gelatin testing. Mr. Roberts also criticized the ammunition restrictions of the Hague convention while highlighting the ability of modern ammunition types to make soldiers more effective while contributing more to the overall humane objective of the Hague convention than standard ball ammunition does.

Regardless of the outcome of future events it is certain that the carbine debate is simply a picture of a larger discussion about the way the industry functions both on the military and commercial side. Despite being an emotional topic for some, there is no doubt the presentation accomplished the end of stimulating more interest in the issue. To this day, the topic remains one that inspires many otherwise bashful people to state strong and confident opinions. Only time will tell what the next development will be. At the moment, the ball is in both courts.

Despite the over shadowing carbine controversy, other papers had a large impact, but probably none so much as LTC Michael Hartman’s presentation on the development of the Negev light machine. LTC Hartman gave a dirty boot presentation in true infantry soldier fashion. As a former NCO turned officer, Hartman’s background is steeped in experience as a member of the Israel Defense Force’s Givati Infantry Brigade. In regards to the Negev, Hartman illustrated the features of the weapon and the combat demands that inspired them noting it was only developed after extensive comparative testing of available LMG’s to include the Minimi. This development approach lead to the weapon’s prominent features including a low profile feed tray cover half the length of the M249, which allows a soldier to stay more covered and concealed while utilizing the weapon, a selector switch enabling semiautomatic fire inspired by unique Israeli small unit tactics, and a high but controllable cyclic rate empowering Negev gunners to advance through near ambush scenarios. Other features of the Negev include a left folding stock for vehicle use, a built-in diagonal mounted assault handle providing troops a second control point, rifle grenade compatibility, ability to fire less-than-lethal ammunition, a quick change barrel, an adjustable gas regulator, and an internal safety that prevents the bolt from closing from any position other than fully cocked. After the presentation LTC Hartman took the time to elaborate further in a one-on-one discussion explaining that part of the goal in the Negev’s development was to create a durable, light, and effective LMG that can also serve in the assault rifle role if need be. Emphasis was given to ease of use and maintenance for the operator while making the weapon light, short, and reliable.

Hartman followed the Negev brief with yet another unique weapon, the Israel Weapons Industry (IWI) MicroTavor, Israel’s latest assault rifle configuration. With the standard Tavor-21 assault rifle already replacing Israel’s mixed fleet of M16 and M4 type weapons, the MicroTavor is a smaller, more ergonomically friendly version of the current Tavor design. The Tavor captured the interest of the crowd particularly because of the relevance of a combat proven army replacing their current systems with a new long stroke gas piston Bullpup design. During his brief, LTC Hartman explained, “We love the M4, our country would not exist with out it.” but noted the weapon was a stop gap measure until the IDF and Israeli industry could produce a weapon specific to the nation’s needs. Hartman emphasized smaller and lighter has become the focus of the IDF infantry which often fights in confined battle spaces. “There are no more long weapons in Israel, we take the old M16s and make them into short weapons.” he added. The Tavor and MicroTavor are only three quarters the length of the M16 and M4 comparatively yet maintain nearly equal barrel lengths. Hartman also cited increasing stoppages with the older weapons in the inventory as an indicator it was time for a replacement.

A rapid departure from the conventional platform, the IDF integrates the Tavor Bullpup on the initial training level to recruits. This method has born fruit as it avoids building habits that must be changed when switching from a conventional platform to a Bullpup. LTC Hartman noted that the change over to the Tavor has proceeded smoothly and, once retrained, soldiers and commanders alike praise the weapon and its performance. The MicroTavor itself was developed for specialized use and can be converted from the standard 5.56mm configuration into a 9mm select-fire submachine gun. A true modular system, the Tavor incorporates the optics mounting platform integrated with the barrel as a one-piece unit assuring zero retention when devices are remounted. Israel Weapons Industry (IWI) sought to address the commonly known faults with Bullpup designs by producing a weapon that takes minutes to change from left and right hand configuration and incorporating a thumb actuated ambidextrous bolt catch just behind the magazine well combining magazine changes and rechambering the weapon into one smooth motion. The MicroTavor even incorporates a feature most American users would immediately appreciate: a magazine release button operable by the firing hand while holding the weapon, which when paired with the location of the MicroTavor selector, give the weapon’s ergonomics a familiar M16 feel. Over all, the Israeli small arms upgrade seems to be a fine example of soldier inspired incremental improvements while the tiny nation of Israel is fielding one of the most modern and mission relevant squad level small arms fleets in the world.

It should be noted that the staff of NDIA small arms did a fantastic job preparing and providing support to the briefing. Other presentations were delivered throughout the duration of the symposium besides those mentioned here, far too many to address, especially with any detail. A full listing of presentations and their associated visual aids can be found on-line at NDIA’s website. It is important when planning for this event to utilize the NDIA supplied program to manage your time. Between time on the exhibition floor with the vendors, the firepower demonstration, and professional papers, there is little room for anything else.

Closing

At the end of the week, as participants headed home, there was a sense that high intensity topics at this years Small Arms Symposium had turned up as many new questions as they had new answers. Spawning dialogue is exactly what this forum is about. It’s unquestionable that this event is influential in molding the nation’s small arms vision and provides the basis for coordinating military and commercial assets to achieve the most important goal as stated on the 2008 symposium program, “Enhancing Small Arms Effectiveness in Current and Future Operations.” It is interesting to see the “system” in action and the many committed people, both military and civilian, both developer and operator, all united for the common interest of giving the dirty boot warfighter what he needs to do the job of defending freedom across the globe.