The SAW; the “Squad Automatic Weapon.” Looking at the photo above, astute observers will note, “Dan, that’s not the SAW, it’s an M240.”

Actually, the M240 is a squad automatic weapon… from the old school definition. In the 10- to 12-man infantry squad, there were mostly riflemen, variously one or two automatic riflemen (the 1918 BAR guys who later were the guys with the full auto switch on their M14), grenadiers, and each rifleman usually had secondary responsibilities. Historically, there’s no squad automatic weapon (machine gun) in the military table of organization and equipment (TOE) at the squad level. The weapons platoon provided the machine gun and lighter mortar support to the squads, as directed. This meant the M1917A1, M1919A4 and A6, M2HB, and later the M60 general purpose machine gun, then the M240G and B variants were all part of the weapons platoon, not the infantry squad.

So, why did we call them Squad Automatic Weapons? Basically, these were support weapons for specially trained machine gunners to deploy in support of the squad, at order from the platoon or company, and had to perform suppressive fire missions and other machine gunner jobs at 1000 meters plus, as well as in closer fighting. 7.62mm was considered the minimum caliber for that. During the Vietnam War, the M60 drifted into more squad level usage, and by the 1970s when the Squad Automatic Weapon program began, a smaller caliber firearm had been decided on with 5.56x45mm round, the same as used by the M16A1 being the final choice. By 1980, the FN Minimi was chosen in the (X)M249 configuration and after various Product Improvement Programs, in 1986 the M249 began integration to the infantry squad. This allowed a belt fed machine gun in every squad, albeit in a smaller caliber with diminished range and capability compared to the 7.62mm machine guns. My personal opinion was that it was more of a belt-fed rifle than a SAW, but the 5.56x45mm M249 has proven itself on the battlefield many times.

In a 1980s parallel development, the U.S. military wanted to replace the M60 GPMG. Saco Defense had the M60E3 then the lighter M60E4, which failed in competition with the M240G, which was the dismounted version of the M240 tank guns. The 240G was, basically, the Belgian MAG-58 that was in use by many nation’s militaries. Don’t confuse the M60E4 of those 1980s trials, with the actual M60E4-issue gun made by U.S. Ordnance today, which is a much more evolved and proven system.

The M240 series guns are large machine guns, larger than the M60 GPMG, but considerably more reliable, and with a longer life. The M60 was designed in the 1950s as a 100,000 round maximum gun. We spoke with the designers back in the 1980s and had a lesson on that issue. They never intended it to be more than a 100,000-round gun. In Vietnam, a door gunner might do more than that in a month of hammering treelines around hot LZs. Thus, the unique receiver stretch gauge… and the advent of the M240G & B series machine guns.

U.S. Ordnance is well known around the world as the manufacturer of the U.S. M2HB and M2A1 machine guns, MK19 Mod 3 grenade machine guns, the M240 series, and the M60E4 and M60E6. So why would they add the M249 “SAW” to their pallet of machine guns?

There is definitely a supply void for the M249 system. There are at least a dozen countries that count on the Minimi/M249 system, and many others that have smaller user populations but larger needs. There are many requirements in the defense industry for M249 as well as support for existing guns.

U.S. Ordnance is an agile company, they are able to focus quickly on a problem, and move into reliable production. We’ve been involved in many machine gun programs, several involving M249 production, and our confidence level in the expertise at U.S. Ordnance is very high. The welding of sheet metal requires very experienced fixture designers, as warpage is always a big issue. I recently toured the facility again, and went through the production lines for the M249 with their production manager.

U.S. Ordnance is bringing their full engineering capability to the table. Their ability to quickly produce machine guns in volume, with high quality and very reliable function, is legendary in today’s market. I reviewed the production line, examined the end products, and as in the past, when I’ve tested their M240 and M60E6 with military spec live firing, we plan to do a 25,000 round live fire program very soon. SADJ will report on this as soon as we have finished. It would seem that adding the M249 machine gun, the Para variant, and support/parts capability to U.S. Ordnance’s production would be a very good fit. We’ll follow up with the full mil-spec test report as soon as it’s done.    

M249 MACHINE GUN SPECS

Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO
Weight: 17.06lb (7.73kg) w/bipod & tools
Length: 32.875- 35.25 inches (835-895mm) Complete M249
Barrel Length: 21in or 18in (533mm or 457mm)
Rifling Twist Rate: 1:7in RH
Cyclic Rate of Fire: 700-900 RPM

By Andrew Thomas

Our fighting soldiers – the recon units and scouts and expeditionary fighting forces that carry all of their equipment on their backs in and out of operations have learned this lesson well: ounces equal pounds. Soldiers have made an art of dropping unnecessary weight while in theater. They unpack their MREs just to ditch the large outer plastic bag. They forego conveniences and luxuries like an extra pair of briefs. They discard expensive equipment in the field; radios, gas masks and med kits; equipment they may need. Some cut their toothbrush in half – if they carry one at all. Sometimes they choose to carry less than they should of essentials like food, water, and ammunition. These combined efforts can result in dozens of pounds less to hump in a pack. Government contracted arms manufacturers have spent millions in research and development in attempts to lighten the load of our soldiers. The LSAT weapon project is a good example by cutting the weight the M249 SAW gunner had to carry nearly in half. It is based loosely on the M249 envelope, and uses caseless ammunition. Long before that, in the mid-1960s, Colt made the Model 608 Survival Rifle, based on the M16. They managed to whittle off unnecessary weight to bring it from 6 down to 4.8 pounds. It was intended to be carried in aircraft, in case of a crash, so flight crews could fight their way back to friendly lines. Before that, the M1 .30 carbine was the answer to the Garand’s size and weight; it was 25% shorter and 40% lighter than the Garand. It was ideal for personnel that were engaged in tasks other than direct combat. Mortar, tank, artillery, transport and support personnel found its size and weight preferable, and its capability sufficient. “Lightweight” is not a matter of convenience; it’s becoming quite necessary. This is the kind of thinking that spawned what is currently the world’s lightest AR-15 rifle, which weighs under four pounds.

It’s called the OIP (ounces is pounds) and it is indeed the lightest AR-15 carbine manufactured today. It is a full size carbine – not an SBR (short barrel rifle) and not a pistol. It’s built up to a standard; not stripped down to a compromise. The grip is the only plastic on the gun. The receivers and buttstock and buffer assembly are made of 7075 T6 tempered aluminum that is type III hard anodized on all surfaces. The upper features a dri-lube film inside. The muzzle brake and gas block and pins and screws and bolt carrier are bare heat treated titanium. The forearm is filament-wound carbon fiber. The barrel is nitrocarburized ordnance steel. There is no next generation rare earth element found on this gun. It’s not the product of quantum chemistry or other witchery. It’s the result of a “basic” AR-15 being stripped of the inferior and upgraded with the superior. It’s what happened when some mad gunsmiths got together and decided to affect a shift in the way we think about firearms.

The “blue sky” thinkers we refer to are the men of Bentwood Gunsmithing, in Henderson, Nevada. Bentwood is for the most part a general repair shop. They indeed offer service and repair on guns to walk-in customers. They can also authoritatively build, create, modify, and improve weapons of all platforms; for all purposes. They sponsor a few of the world’s top action shooters; the guns wielded by those champions are made at Bentwood. They build and maintain duty and service weapons for many departments and agencies; foreign and domestic. It’s not enough to say that Bentwood’s staff is factory trained: it is actual fact that security, police, and military agencies and firearm manufacturers send their technicians to receive armory training from the man in charge at Bentwood Gunsmithing, Matthew J. Babb. Through experience, interaction, and feedback from such a broad industry sample, Bentwood’s Gunsmiths have learned what is required of a gun; and where the gun falls short of fulfilling its role.

The first prototypes of the OIP project began in 2009 at the request of an Army Ranger that returned home from Afghanistan. This Ranger had carried a MK48 machine gun for several years in theater. It was heavy and unwieldy. The Ranger offered up the idea to Dave Lake, one of Bentwood’s Gunsmiths, to build a rifle that was “just a rifle.” Those were his words. He wanted a rifle that consisted only of what’s necessary to fire bullets safely, reliably, and accurately. The Ranger wanted a rifle that he could carry while biking or jogging in the woods. This idea of ultimate simplicity in a rifle became Dave’s mission. The early versions were built on vintage Colt AR-15 receivers – the old uppers without forward assist and shell deflector, and lowers without pivot pin plungers and fences. These receivers were fitted to pencil thin, shortened barrels. Thin wall tubing was welded on the muzzle to make legal length. Later versions of the lightweight project involved skeletonizing the receivers. Instead of using commercially available buffer and stock assemblies, the buffer from a carbine was used, as it weighs less than that of a rifle; while the tube from a rifle was used, as it weighs less than that of a carbine. A hollow plastic spacer below the buffer assembly is all that was needed to make this combination work. The barrel was aggressively fluted – more flute than barrel and a lightweight carrier installed. The takedown pins and selector barrel were hollowed out. The gas block was condensed to one fourth the bulk of the lightest commercial option. Even the hammer and trigger were ground down to a third their original thickness while preserving proper function. Sometimes each new effort would show a loss of an ounce or two; though sometimes progress came only in fractions of an ounce.

In the summer of 2013, Bentwood Gunsmithing partnered with Battle Arms Development to create an ultra-lightweight receiver set dedicated to this project. The result bore the compelling strut-and-web design seen here. Careful engineering created a receiver set slightly stronger than a basic forged receiver set, and 30% lighter. The barrel was optimized by incorporating a unique machine dimpled surface. This patented feature is used under license granted by Knight’s Armament Corporation. The dimpling process retains most of the barrel’s rigidity while cutting the barrel’s weight from the typical 28 ounces to a scant 18 ounces. During its development, as the rifle dropped below the 5 pound mark, there were resultant negative side effects. Recoil was uncomfortable and handling during fire became strained. The OIP’s control and firing characteristics would need to be improved, while maintaining a net weight loss.

The OIP, in its final revision, weighs just under 4 pounds dry. More effort is required to pull the trigger on a Glock pistol than lift this rifle. This lack of inertial mass makes a brusque recoil impulse and there were corrective measures applied to the gun to keep it under control. First, and most obvious, is the muzzle brake. It’s machined from titanium bar stock. Its weight is half that of a steel brake. The porting and internal geometry are not random. The design is the product of thorough testing, study, and experimentation. There is no equation that can be applied to calculate the dynamics of a muzzle brake; and no broad definition to quantify the effect. Caliber, chamber, bullet weight, barrel length, gun weight, gun geometry, shooter weight and stance and method of holding the gun all skew the result. Empirical data was gathered from many prototype brakes as over 1,000 rounds of M855 ball were fired in front of a slow motion camera from a “recoil machine,” a fixture built by Bentwood specifically for this project. During their work, Bentwood discovered that a muzzle brake works by two principles. They are described as the flow and foul of a gas (exiting the muzzle). More of the “flow” effect built into a brake’s baffles and chambers results in a slower; albeit still present, recoil impulse. This style returns less overall effective recoil attenuation for small calibers. It works well with heavier weapons, and larger cartridges. The property of flow can be exploited as directional control, to counteract muzzle rise for instance. The “foul” effect can create highly effective recoil control; sometimes too much. In the case of this 4-pound rifle, one overly effective brake originally used for testing actually yanked the rifle forward – away from the shooter – making follow up shots next to impossible. A “fouling” brake also makes for an overwhelming blast impulse back to the shooter. The result of these efforts is a brake that is balanced in its effect to work optimally with this rifle.

More recoil mitigating features are found on the other end of the gun. The proportion of the stock assembly is the result of some trial and error and some consultation with some experienced professional shooters. It is an accepted fact that there is a proper way to “saddle” a rifle. By doing so, the shooter effectively gains more control over that rifle. This method asks that the shooter mount the rifle low in the shoulder, while keeping the body square to the direction of fire. The head should remain upright and rest forward and atop the stock. The length and drop of the OIP’s stock were devised to encourage correct shooting form; and as part of its design, is meant to cause discomfort if the rifle is held incorrectly. The pistol grip also plays its part. As it is nearly vertical, it encourages the arm to swing farther forward, resulting in a better “pocket” in the shoulder for the stock to lock into. It also lets the hand and wrist relax more than a rearward swept grip; facilitating better trigger control. Other secrets lie inside the OIP’s buffer tube. The buffer’s design has been enhanced from the standard configuration. The details of these structures will not be illustrated here; suffice to say that cyclic function and recoil impulse are optimized while achieving an overall weight savings. The recoil spring system, called the “Flatline” is available as an accessory to be used in any AR-15. It is perhaps the smartest part on this rifle. It replaces a conventional buffer spring with 3 new components; 2 springs and a little plastic ring. It’s so simple but so effective. The motion of the recoiling mass of the bolt group and buffer is attenuated by multiple springs that slow and reverse motion at multiple rates. The result is a rifle that operates near the constant recoil principle, with enhanced reliability, and with almost no recoil energy passed on to the shooter.

The OIP is offered for sale only as kit, though some of the developments will be for sale as accessory items later this year. The kit includes an optic, optic mount, sling, magazines and a discreet carrying case. The optic is the Aimpoint H1. It is not the lightest red-dot on the market; it was chosen for being the best red-dot that is light. Weight savings was a goal in the OIP project, but it never came at a compromise to the rifle’s function. The magazines included are made by Lancer Systems. They are indeed lighter than any metal magazines and come at a weight savings while maintaining reliability. Lancer Systems magazines are transparent polymer, and feature a metal top section that includes the feed lips and notch for the latch. Here again, weight was dropped without sacrificing function. The case was chosen for its utility as a multipurpose pack. It does not look like a gun case. It can be carried in the hand or slung over shoulder or across the back. It’s meant to blend in among gym bags and backpacks we might see attached to joggers, bikers, and commuters these days. It features padded exterior walls, many compartments and a place for a hydration bladder. The rifle is stowed in a broken-down state in the main compartment. The sling is an elastic single point style without padding; it’s simply not required. This rifle could be carried comfortably on a single strand of para-cord.

The small bits on the OIP are all very special as well. The titanium gas block is almost not there – it weighs less than the gas tube. The forearm is glued to the barrel nut as screws would be too heavy. The takedown and pivot pins are titanium and available from Battle Arms Development as the TiEPS. The screws that hold the grip and buttplate are also titanium. The selector lever is another Battle Arms part; their short throw modular unit; though the OIP variant is made of skeletonized aluminum. JP Rifles supplies the OIP with its trigger mechanism. It offers a 4 pound pull with adjustable sear engagement, pre travel and over-travel. It’s also the thinnest trigger on the market, thus it is the lightest trigger on the market. The bolt carrier is machined from solid titanium. The bolt and gas key are nickel boron coated, magnetic particle inspected, Carpenter 158 steel. The entire assembly is of premium quality and workmanship. This bolt carrier group weighs 4 ounces less than a regular steel bolt group.

The OIP is somewhat limited in its mission adaptability. It cannot accept forward Picatinny rail sections. It is not compatible with M-lok or Keymod accessories. The only upgrade is an optional flashlight mount that connects to the Fortis Scope base. By locating the light just ahead of the receiver and atop the forearm, the rifle’s balance remains manageable, and gives the user’s thumb direct access to the light controls. Through its evolution, the OIP has become a narrowly focused weapon. It’s built for long term carry, rapid deployment, and the aggressive use against armed threats. It really belongs to those who need to carry a weapon all the time – security guards, standing a post or traveling with a VIP, police officers on bicycles, and even the Secret Service. Any of the alphabet agencies could use it to good effect. Law enforcement and anti-terrorism groups are encountering an ever- growing domestic threat. The convenience and concealability of the handgun is becoming overshadowed by its limited range and power. Those that serve in our defense need real firepower at their side. There is a demand for, and a growing supply of small, potent weapons that punch above their weight and bridge the gap between pistols and assault rifles; known generally as PDWs. The poster child of this type of weapon is the Heckler and Koch MP7. It ignores the line between the sidearm and the assault rifle, is lethal up to 200 meters and boasts armor-piercing capabilities. It carries a 30-round magazine of hi-velocity .18 caliber projectiles, and can fire them in full auto at 950 rpm with no appreciable recoil. The operator does require extensive training and familiarization to put the MP-7 to good use. It is roughly twice the size and weight of the average service pistol; it weighs 4.2 pounds empty. Well then, we see now that there is a balance to be reached between size and weight and firepower and practicality. The OIP weighs 4.2 pounds with the aimpoint attached. The 5.56mm ammunition is well proven; and the AR-15 platform is well known. The AR-15 platform requires no new level of training, no new armory certification, and can use common parts and common ammunition. The 5.56 cartridge doubles the range and effect of the 4.6mm round used in the MP-7. In a world where insurgents often present with submachine guns and assault rifles, our counterinsurgent forces should, if at all possible, out-gun the bad guys. “Too much gun” is just a negative way of saying, “decisive application of force.” Comparatively then, the only drawback to the OIP is its size; a flaw easy to overlook when weighed against the advantages the OIP affords its user.

Our evaluation at the range did not disappoint. We were quickly mobbed by other shooters and range staff; all very curious about the rifle. They were all caught completely off-guard when we passed the rifle around for close-inspection. The “gallery” we had attracted became abuzz in comment about the OIP’s feather-lite feel and perfect balance. For some, the looks of the gun caught them; it was love at first sight. There were members of this crowd that were skeptical, so we gave them all a chance to fire it. One way or another, by holding, firing, or merely looking at the OIP, everybody at the range that day became a believer. After we shot the gun, any dubious feelings we had about the OIP were put to rest as well. Bentwood’s claims of superior balance, ergonomics, firing and handling characteristics are all very true. If we didn’t know any better, we would swear that every bit of R&D went into making this thing perform. The exquisite form the rifle has taken could just be a fortunate side effect. And what’s satisfying is that it’s not made of techno-fluff and rainbows like some boutique AR-15s can be these days. The OIP is a real player. It meets or exceeds accuracy standards set forth for the M4 carbine. Our test rifle came fitted with an Aimpoint H1 red-dot. There is no place for a magnifier on the receiver, so our long range accuracy results would be achieved without magnification. Standing unsupported at ranges up to 300 yards, we could easily deliver all hits “in the black” on an NRA B27 silhouette target. At 100 yards from a rest, using M855 ball ammunition, our best groups averaged 3-inches on target. For close-in rapid fire results we used a shot timer set to a par time of 1 second per target placed downrange. Even on targets out to 50 yards, we were able to make our hits and transitions within our timed goals. This speaks to the rifle’s superb handling traits. Moving the OIP from target to target is really as easy as looking at the next target. The rifle instinctively follows and there’s so little effort required to move it with zero recovery time between shots. This kind of speed and handling is just what 3-gunners are seeking. The properties of all metal parts and surface coatings exceed our military’s operational standards for wear, abuse, and normal operation. After over 1,200 rounds at the range over two days, including all the shooting by the folks at the gun range, there were no jams, failures, or malfunctions of any kind. Our evaluation took two days because of the severe weather of the Nevada desert in fall. The first day saw high winds and dust, followed by torrential rain that combined with the dust to form mud. Perfect opportunity to tempt fate; the gun was not cleaned before day 2 yet we finished our range testing without a hitch. This does not suggest that the OIP is superior in this capacity as the limits of the AR-15’s ability to survive abuse have been long established on the battlefield. We don’t suggest that Las Vegas is as bad as Afghanistan or Panama, but it is one of the harshest places in North America, and that’s a good enough test for most of us. So the OIP is as good as any other good AR-15 at roughing it in the elements. If we must complain about something, we will complain about the very hot forearm. During fire, the black carbon fiber tube absorbed radiant heat from the barrel and the desert sun like a charcoal briquette. We urge the use of a glove for sustained fire, or use the “magwell” grip with the front hand. At our inquiry, we were told by Bentwood Gunsmithing to expect other versions and caliber options in the future. They declined to let slip any dates or details. We’ll cross our fingers for a 300 Blackout or even a pistol variant. It would be selfish to hope for an AR-10 to receive the OIP treatment.

The OIP is produced in very limited numbers, and each rifle is assembled by one man and inspected by the other at Bentwood Gunsmithing. The OIP is unique, exclusive, beautiful, and powerful. It’s a rare thing that is as intriguing to see and hold as it is to shoot. It’s like a greyhound; skin and bone and muscle that was built to run. This rifle begs to be taken to task. But like most of your guns, you don’t buy them out of necessity. You’ll buy the OIP to make your shooting buddies jealous. You want to be the object of envy at the shooting range. You don’t have to carry a badge and wear a suit and sunglasses and an ear bud and speak into your cuff to justify buying it; but if you are lucky enough to get an OIP, you’re welcome to don the sunglasses and ear bud.

“Today’s soldiers are equipped with the best weapons that industry has to offer, resulting in decisive overmatch capability through increased lethality and range, as well as decreased weight.” PEO Soldier

Program Executive Officer Soldier was created by the Army in 2002 with the primary purpose of developing the best equipment and then fielding it as quickly as possible. Prominent among these are the best protective clothing, the best communications systems and the finest individual and crew served weaponry. Equipped and armed on the cutting edge of technology, the American fighter will remain second to none in missions that span the full spectrum of military operations.

PEO Soldier oversees several specialized Program Manager (PM) groups, most notably PM Soldier Warrior, PM Soldier Equipment, and PM Soldier Weapons, the focus of this report.

PM Soldier Weapons supports soldiers through the development, production and procurement of future and current weapons systems, ammunition and associated target acquisition/fire control products. Two Product Managers drive this mission – one each for Individual Weapons and Crew Served Weapons.

These offices have been turning out plenty of good stuff for the good guys and some notable items have recently been profiled in depth for SAR’s readers. Status reports on Knight’s Armament’s 7.62mm XM110 Semiautomatic Sniper System and C-More’s 12 gauge XM26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System have provided exciting previews of weapons planned for fielding in the near future.

Unfortunately, the good news about these and other combat multipliers doesn’t seem to be getting out to the American public and to others worldwide. So the Army decided it was time to call in some reporters and put on a show.

Nearly a dozen media representatives were treated to exciting live fire demonstrations of six systems, plus the opportunity to speak directly with program officials and then a chance to personally send some metal downrange.

Colonel Carl Lipsit, PM Soldier Weapons, introduced key officers of his staff, who provided introductory briefings on the role and capability of each weapon, setting the stage for the live fire portion of the event.

CROWS on the Fly

Instead of sticking your head out the top of a vehicle to shoot its heavy armament, why not sit comfortably inside and do the job with a video screen, joystick and all weather sensors? That’s just what the Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS) does for Hummvee gun trucks and other vehicles on patrol and in convoys.

Designed to mount on a variety of vehicle platforms, CROWS supports the 40mm MK19 and MK46 grenade chunkers as well as belt fed machine guns from 5.56mm to .50 caliber. Cradling and moving the weapon on a three-axis stabilized mount that also carries the ultra-sophisticated sensor suite, it allows on-the-move target detection and first burst hits at extreme range.

A daytime video camera, thermal imaging camera, laser rangefinder, and programmable ballistic computer combine to give gunners super powers in all weather conditions day and night.

Safety restrictions limited the CROWS demonstration at Aberdeen to short runs downrange and engagement on the move of marker panels on each side of the road. But this didn’t diminish the impressive sight and sound of the Hummvee’s .50 M2HB swinging around and locking down on its targets, punching thumb sized holes with burst after burst.

A “victory run” followed, with an unloaded and cleared weapon station spinning 360 degrees in each direction while elevating and dropping the muzzle with uncanny smoothness and stability. Little imagination is required to understand how this capability translates to fast and accurate fire as a speeding vehicle moves through an urban ambush or a rural firefight.

.50 Caliber Sniping

The .50 caliber M107 Semiautomatic Long Range Sniper Rifle has been in service for several years now, but its awesome launch signature with extreme reach and target penetration commanded a place on the stage at Aberdeen. Cover your ears tightly, open your mouth to equalize overpressure, and stand way back when Sergeant Nathaniel Cianno cuts loose with this shoulder cannon.

Independently developed by Barrett Rifles and quickly finding favor in various special operations units, it is now proudly serving throughout the US Army as an anti-materiel/counter sniper, precision engagement weapon.

The weapon’s standard issue variable power Leupold day scope was mounted on top for the demonstration, allowing highly accurate shooting out to 2,000 meters. Optional thermal or image intensifier night scopes give the sniper dominance over hundreds of meters of the battlefield in low light situations.

Semiautomatic operation allows fast follow-up shots when needed and detachable 10-round box magazines facilitate switching ammo types for efficient neutralization of different types of targets.

7.62mm Semiauto Sniping

It has taken the Army several years to get around to fielding a modern semiautomatic rifle that is chambered for the efficient .308 caliber/7.62mm NATO standard rifle and machine gun cartridge.

Responding to the tactical realities of multiple targets at long range that have arisen in Operation Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, the first response was to pull Vietnam War era M14 rifles out of storage. Meanwhile, special operations units were having much better success with MK11 semiautomatic sniper rifles from Knight’s Armament.

PM Soldier Weapons got the message and sponsored further development of the MK11, resulting in the new M110 Semiautomatic Sniper System (SASS). Similar in configuration and operation to the M16 family of rifles, these fast-firing, hardy and highly accurate new 7.62mm rifles are used for anti-personnel and light anti-materiel applications out to 800 meters.

The apparent decision by Major Mark Meeker, Assistant Product Manager for Soldier Weapons, to demonstrate this weapon with its sausage-like sound and flash suppressor in place proved to be highly impressive. It reduced the perceived firing noise to levels easily tolerable without hearing protection when Sergeant First Class Reginald Freeman started firing. This quick mount standard accessory, we were told, helps to hide the sniper from enemy detection day and night.

Long runs of Mil-Std 1913 rails on top, sides and underneath allow attachment of various day and night scopes, laser aiming devices, and other accessories in any number of combinations. Detachable box magazines loaded with different types of cartridges may be instantly swapped to suit specialized targets.

Stubby Shotgun

Venerable 12 gauge pump action shotguns, unchanged in form and function for more than a century, are still in Army service for urban combat use by “breachers” who specialize in blowing locks off doors and clearing the rooms behind them. This will soon change, M26 Product Manager Thomas Vass told reporters, with fielding of the new M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System (MASS).

“Modular” means that it is equally at home clamped under an M4 carbine or rigged as a stand-alone weapon with a special buttstock. Its straight pull bolt contributes to high reliability under all conditions and allows fast manual cycling of the action after each shot. It handily feeds and fires any variety of 12 gauge cartridge, so it is well suited for use with less-lethal riot control loads. A detachable polymer box magazine means fast reloads and flexibility in ammo type.

Sergeant First Class William Kone showed how light and handy the new scattergun is by firing both underslung and stand alone versions of the M26.

A Better “Bloop Tube”

40mm grenade launchers, nicknamed “bloop tubes” for their distinctive noise on firing, were introduced in the Vietnam War and the Army’s current M203 dates back to the latter years of that conflict. Clamped underneath an M16 rifle or M4 carbine, this single shot weapon is slow to reload and unable to handle the newest long case munitions.

Many 203s are slated for replacement soon by another single shooter, but one with more efficient side loading, a double action trigger and integral day/night sighting system. This is the M320 Grenade Launcher Module, independently developed by the German firm of Heckler & Koch and further refined in a PM Soldier Weapons program.

The M320 will also ride nicely under M16s and M4s, but can also be configured as a stand-alone weapon with a skeletonized buttstock. The weapon’s integral electronic day/night sighting system, developed by Insight Technology, has a backup ladder sight and is located on the side of the launcher to avoid interference with the host weapon’s sights.

The Aberdeen demonstration was done only with the stand alone version, but Sergeant First Class James Edington proved to be quite proficient with this handy little rig.

Buzz SAW

The 5.56mm belt fed M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW) has also been around for quite awhile, providing infantry squads with high volume firepower at close to medium range. This Belgian designed gun, now made in the US by FN Manufacturing, is relatively light and acceptably reliable when properly maintained.

Plenty of 249s are in the thick of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and many of the GIs who carry them have asked for some modifications to increase combat efficiency. A length of Mil-Std 1913 rail is now standard atop the SAW’s receiver, allowing attachment of a variety of day and night sights. This point was emphasized by designated gunner Staff Sergeant Eric Hines, who showed how the demonstration 249 could be quickly fitted with either a 4 power ACOG or a zero magnification M68 red dot sight.

He also pointed out that PM Soldier Weapons has fielded several new accessories including a short barrel, improved bipod, beefy M4 style telescoping buttstock, and a soft side 200 round magazine.

With the puzzling omission of the soft pouch, these weapon enhancements were readily apparent and appreciated during the live fire that followed. Hines, aided by an electronic red dot M68 Close Combat Optic (Aimpoint Comp M) clamped on top, hammered belt after belt downrange, ruthlessly knocking down sets of silhouettes at various ranges.

CROWS Technical Specifications

Weapons capability: 40mm to 5.56mm
Traverse: Continuous 360 degrees
Elevation: -20 to +60 degrees
Fire control: Three axis vector stabilization with auto tracker, auto lead and auto scan
Weight: 305 pounds w/o weapon and ammunition
Status: Operational now

M107 Technical Specifications

Caliber: .50 caliber BMG cartridge
Operation: Short recoil operated, semiautomatic
Weight: 35 pounds combat ready
Length: 57 inches
Status: Operational now

M110 Technical Specifications

Caliber: 7.62mm NATO (.308 caliber)
Operation: Direct gas operated, semiautomatic
Weight: 17.3 pounds combat ready
Length: 46.5 inches with suppressor in place
Status: Initial fielding has begun

M26 Technical Specifications

Caliber: 12 gauge
Operation: Manual straight pull, single shot
Weight: 3 pounds in underbarrel configuration
Length: 16.5 inches
Status: Ready for fielding

M320 Technical Specifications

Caliber: 40mm
Operation: Manual, single shot
Weight: 3.3 pounds stand alone
Length: 13.7 inches
Status: Ready for fielding

M249 Technical Specifications

Caliber: 5.56mm
Operation: Gas piston, full automatic
Weight: 22 pounds combat ready
Length: 31 inches with short barrel
Status: Operational now

“You’ve got Rangers all over … doing the exact same thing for God and country, that never see each other. When we go to fight the war we fight in small elements. It’s a rare opportunity you get to see your brethren and take time to get to know one another and celebrate all that you’ve done….” Major Rob Schultz of Headquarters, 75th Ranger Regiment, in a USASOC news release

When nearly a thousand of your best buddies drop in one evening for a visit, you can bet one helluva party is gonna follow.

This is just what happened on the 6th of August, 2007 at historic Fort Benning, Georgia, home of the US Army’s Infantry Branch and headquarters of the 75th Ranger Regiment. The next three days were filled with all the rugged Ranger-theme competitions, events and activities that have come to characterize Ranger Rendezvous over a period of twenty years. Not a party in the way most folks define the word, but an officially sanctioned biennial gathering of elite US Army Rangers past, present and even some likely future Rangers.

Intended to foster esprit de corps within this proud warrior brotherhood that traces its lineage back more than three centuries, well before Robert Rogers’ Rangers of the French and Indian War, the Rendezvous also provides outsiders with unique opportunities. Because most Rendezvous activities are open to the public, it is a rare chance for non-Rangers to get a close look at these necessarily secretive men, along with their highly lethal weapons and exotic, specialized equipment.

So SAR made attendance a priority, courtesy of an invitation from the 75th Ranger Regiment and personally escorted by Carol Darby-Jones, US Army Special Operations Command’s Public Affairs Officer, as well as Tracy Bailey, the Regimental PAO. Thanks to special arrangements by these friendly and energetic ladies, we were privileged to get right in the middle of the action and to speak “on the record” with some selected Rangers.

Vertical Envelopment

Ranger Rendezvous 2007 kicked off on Monday evening with a spectacular mass tactical airborne operation over Benning’s Fryar Drop Zone. Not for show, mind you, but for tangible training value to everyone involved including highly professional USAF aircrews and all varieties of Airborne Rangers from the Regiment’s 1st and 3rd Battalions. 2nd Battalion, with home base at Fort Lewis, Washington, is currently deployed at undisclosed locations overseas in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Diving headfirst out of a turboprop MC-130P Hercules Combat Shadow provided by the US Air Force’s 9th Special Operations Command, Ranger Pathfinders HALO’d in under crescent shaped ram-air chutes nimbly steered to pinpoint landings, quickly setting up ground-to-air communications. It was their job to begin directing waves of the Air Force’s giant C-17 Globemaster transports, as well as more C-130s, each crammed with Rangers in full battle gear. Flying at precise intervals and trailing at altitudes set like ascending stair steps, the lumbering aircraft efficiently disgorged more than 700 Rangers in short order, filling the hot and thickly humid evening air with translucent green canopies.

Once on the ground, the Rangers lost no time rolling up their parachutes and moving out smartly to designated rally points at the perimeter of the enormous DZ, just like in a real combat operation. Sure, doctrine calls for all this to be done under cover of darkness, but where would they get enough night vision goggles for the enormous crowd of spectators and news media reps who all wanted to see the drop?

Regimental Run

The next day started in typical Ranger fashion at the proverbial “O Dark-Thirty” with a Regimental formation on Peyden Field. Gone are the bad old days of running in fatigues and jump boots. Uniformly clad in distinctive black shorts and RANGER tee shirts with running shoes of their personal choice, companies and battalions formed up in the steaming pre-dawn darkness for the prescribed limbering up exercises then took off at a faster than double time pace for a three mile run. The long, living ribbon of Rangers snaked through Benning to the sound of traditional cadence calls, reinforcing warrior spirit in the chanters and providing something of a warning to those who would foolishly tangle with these superbly conditioned and highly motivated fighters.

The Army’s Premier Raid Force
By 75th Ranger Regiment Public Affairs Office

The 75th Ranger Regiment is a lethal, agile and flexible force, capable of executing a myriad of complex, joint special operations missions in support of US policy and objectives. Today’s Ranger Regiment is the Army’s premier raid force. Each of the three geographically dispersed Ranger Battalions is always combat ready, mentally and physically tough and prepared to fight the Long War. Their capabilities include air assault and direct action raids seizing key terrain such as airfields, destroying strategic facilities, and capturing or killing enemies of the Nation. Rangers are capable of conducting squad through regimental size operations using a variety of infiltration techniques including airborne, air assault and ground platforms. The Regiment remains an all-volunteer force with an intensive screening and selection process followed by combat-focused training. Rangers are resourced to maintain exceptional proficiency, experience and readiness. The 75th Ranger Regiment is a proud unit and a team of teams serving the nation – Rangers lead the way.

Run, Sweat, Shoot, and Drag

There was no rest for the weary afterward, at least among those who were competitors in the Stress Shoot. Arguably the most Ranger-like event of the gathering’s several competitions, this demanding test of physical conditioning and marksmanship skills harshly measures each team’s performance under simulated combat conditions.

Because the typically brutal Georgia summer heat and humidity were forecast to top 100 degrees by noon, the Stress Shoot began way earlier than scheduled. By 0800 hours, many of the Regiment’s three man teams had already completed the prescribed run, sweat, shoot and drag.

Our Ranger host for this event, Sergeant Myles Grantham of Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 3rd Battalion, told us that the timed and scored event has its start point way back in the Regimental area, a mile from where we were on Farnsworth Range, site of the live fire portion. The clock starts on each team in turn as they take off at a dead run, burdened by the “battle rattle” of weapons, body armor and gear.

Not surprisingly, all the teams we observed arrived at the range with lungs heaving and sweat pouring, moving right up to the first set of a series of three plywood barriers simulating various typical fighting positions. Closely supervised by fellow Rangers acting as lane coaches, they slammed magazines into their special M4A1 SOPMOD carbines, now lethally loaded with standard green tipped ball 5.56mm M855 ammo. Then, taking up required shooting stances from standing to prone, they do their best to put well aimed shots into stationary E-Type silhouettes set a various distances.

It’s up to each Ranger to decide what day sight he wants to use from among the standard issue types, Grantham noted, including traditional iron aperture and post, no-magnification electronic red dot, or the four power ACOG. Each has advantages and disadvantages given the nature of the shooting conditions and we saw all types in use.

All members of the team must have finished firing the allotted number of rounds and cleared their weapons before they are allowed to run forward, pressing their simulated assault from the next set of plywood positions. Grantham pointed out the tough tradeoff between elapsed time and hits on target, but also noted the core Ranger value of teamwork as a major factor. Some are fast and others are precise. Together they get the job done.

Immediately after the last rounds are fired and magazines removed, each Ranger’s carbine gets a cleaning rod down the barrel to verify it as clear and safe. The team runs to the side of the range and each man harnesses up the pull ropes of a SKEDCO drag bag, heavily burdened with several 5 gallon cans of water to simulate the weight of a wounded comrade. The finish line is 50 meters away and the pull requires a tremendous amount of leg strength and stamina. The unrelenting stopwatch doesn’t halt until the last of the three makes it across the line.

We are pleased to announce that the winning team for this year’s Stress Shoot represents C Company, 3rd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment. Their hard work and skill were rewarded with a trophy.

Guns and Gear

Early completion of the Stress Shoot worked out fine for us because we got extra time at the Ranger Open House, set up outside the impressive headquarters building for the 75th Ranger Regiment. This display was a 24 karat gold mine for the specialized guns and gear that are usually hidden from public view and jealously guarded from the prying eyes of the news media and other suspected or known adversaries.

But, under the watchful eye of USASOC PAO Carol Darby-Jones, we were given nearly free rein to photograph the real stuff on display and to talk with the stalwart Rangers who had brought their workplace tools to the show. Our earlier conversations back at the Stress Shoot with Ranger Sergeant Myles Grantham, a combat-experienced sniper, sent us on a beeline for the precision rifles table, ably manned by a pair of his sniper buddies from HHC of the 3rd Battalion.

Sergeants Jake Attebery and Staff Sergeant Robert Shoup good-naturedly displayed their .50 caliber Barrett M107, a 7.62mm Knight’s MK11 Mod 0, and the exotic MK13, custom built around a Remington 700 bolt action receiver chambered for the undeniably efficient .300 Win Mag cartridge. Their day sights, night sights, suppressors, spotting scopes, and plenty more were right there on display, prompting more than one visiting Ranger veteran to offer observations on how things have certainly changed for the better since way back when.

Less precise in application but far more lethal on a wider scale and longer range are the Regiment’s mortars, sized from 60mm to a whopping 120mm. This is all the Regiment has in the way of organic artillery, necessarily so given mobility requirements. If heavier firepower is needed then backup is usually supplied by various supporting aircraft that are part of a combined arms force tailored for particular missions.

The 40mm Mark 19 grenade machine gun, a veteran of the Vietnam War, has been recently replaced in the Regiment by the 40mm MK47 Advanced Lightweight Grenade Launcher, a high tech bomblet chunker boasting a computerized fire control system with integrated day and night sights for much greater first round and subsequent hit probability day or night.

Conspicuously absent from the display were the 84mm M3 Carl Gustav multipurpose recoilless rifle, the Javelin antiarmor system and the Stinger antiaircraft missile launcher. Each of these tactical tubes is uniquely suited for specialized tasks by the fast moving and hard-hitting Rangers, representing essential offensive and defensive capabilities for a wide variety of missions. It’s not as if there were secrets to keep as all are listed on publicly posted fact sheets.

The ubiquitous and highly regarded .50 caliber M2HB and 7.62mm M240B machine guns, standard throughout the US Armed Forces, were prominently mounted on a brand spanking new M1113 Special Operations Ground Mobility Vehicle. This is an even more robust and powerful version of the workhorse HMMWV, newly fitted with a turbocharged diesel engine and custom configured with plenty of extra stowage racks for all that ammo, fuel, water, food and gear needed in deep penetration raids.

Because both of the belt guns on the GMV are too heavy for efficient dismounted missions, today’s Rangers are blessed with a pair of machine guns that were developed by US Special Operations Command specifically for the Navy’s SEAL teams. Replacing the Army’s standard M249 SAW in the Regiment is the 5.56mm MK46, a smaller, lighter, more rugged and reliable upgrade of the same weapon. And for times when it is desirable to have a 7.62mm belt gun that can be carried by one man, the MK48 is now in the Ranger arsenal. Often called a “SAW on steroids,” the 48 is essentially a beefed-up version of the MK46 to handle the heavier-hitting, longer-ranging round.

Sidearms and shotguns were also laid out for inspection, inviting a closer look at the pairing of a standard 9mm Beretta M9 next to the unmistakably boxy profile of a Glock 19 sporting a day tactical light. Seems “certain Rangers” get the Glock – surprisingly chambered for the same puny 9mm round – while most others carry Berettas. Our guess is that this has something to do with reliability since terminal effects with GI issue ball ammo are the same. All this could change in the not too distant future when and if USSOCOM makes good on its on-again, off-again intent to find and field the best new handgun and cartridge combo.

Rangers are believed to be the only ones in the Army to have been issued the M1014 shotgun, originally intended to replace nearly all 12 gauge scatterguns in the US Armed Forces. No sign of the M1014 at the display but that’s OK because there was a really mean looking chopped down scattergun complete with Pachmayr Vindicator pistol grip, Picatinny rail on top and sidesaddle shell carrier. This ultra compact breaching blaster is one of the handiest versions we’ve seen of Remington’s superlative 870 slide action classic.

SCAR Sighting

Seems the Regiment is in the process of evaluating the 5.56mm FN SCAR-L, recently fielded with Navy Special Warfare units including elite SEAL teams. Someone thought it would be a nice touch to bring one of the test guns over for the Open House display; most likely because anything “new and improved” ought to be proudly shown.

The SCAR-L dispenses with the hot and dirty direct gas system of the M16 family in favor of a cool and clean gas piston.

If the 75th decides at some point to replace its M4s with SCAR-L, or the HK416, known to be in use by the Army’s officially non-existent Operational Detachment Delta, that will be BIG news throughout the US Armed Forces and beyond.

Commo Check

We’re gun guys, not real smart but at least smart enough to know that C3I – command, control, communications, and intelligence – are absolutely essential combat multipliers. Reluctantly leaving the weapons displays behind, we moved over to check out the really high tech stuff. Imagine joining the Rangers, going through all that parachute qualification, snake eating, mud crawling, and other character building qualification training, then getting assigned to sit behind a computer screen. Cushy job? Think again….

Sure, a high level Ranger operation uses a bunch of really impressive stuff like SATCOM rigs, hardened computers, whiz-bang digital battlefield displays, encrypted burst long range transceivers, and much more. But they’re designed to travel light, fast and rough, and be used in what is euphemistically known as “austere environments.” So your dream job as a Ranger REMF has the hard reality of freezing cold, blazing heat, driving rain, ravenous insects, cold MREs, round-the-clock operation with no sleep, and the very real possibility of getting your butt shot off while tapping on a keyboard. Still interested?

Our favorite high tech gear among the gadget goodies on display was the little RQ-11 Raven, a battery powered miniature spy plane that sends back radio-linked real-time video to a laptop computer. Its Ranger “pilot” uses a video-game joystick controller to fly the thing out for a bird’s eye peek at what the bad guys are doing, simultaneously sending the imagery to any of several levels of command. Yes, it’s been around for awhile and the Regiment has some other eye in the sky recon robots that they didn’t choose to reveal, but that doesn’t minimize its value in real-world operations.

Ranger Sports

While we were getting our guns ‘n gear fix in the shade of the canopy covered display, one helluva lot of Rangers were out “playing,” most in the direct sun and hundred degree heat. On athletic fields at various locations around the Regimental area groups of Rangers faced off in friendly but fierce competition, representing their units in traditional sports like football, softball and tug-of-war. All in a day’s work for these men who take tremendous pride in physical and mental toughness in any environment.

But the biggest crowds gathered later that afternoon in Hanger 301 at Lawson Airfield for the Combatives Tournament, a Ranger smackdown with all the ferocious intensity of Ultimate Fighting but geared toward motivating military warriors. While the Army has long promoted hand-to-hand combat training using a variety of martial arts techniques, Combatives takes the concept to its highest level. Instead of teaching specific techniques in a controlled situation, Ranger-style Combatives puts the emphasis on real fights between individuals. Yeah, they’re supposed to hold back just a little bit so as not to seriously injure each other, but few see much evidence of that.

Cheered on by nearly 2,000 spectators, Rangers in six weight classes tore into each other with relentless punches, kicks, elbows and choke holds. Winners emerged decisively when their opponents had been brought to the mat, sometimes bloodied but, amazingly, fit enough to fight again.

Sergeant Treybutt Hull, quoted in a USASOC news report from the Rendezvous, reflected on emerging as Regimental champion in the 140 pound weight class. “You know it’s all about farther, faster and fight harder!” the 1st Battalion Ranger said.

Honors and Ceremonies

While it is hard for outsiders to fully appreciate the importance of formal ceremonies to those in the military brotherhood, even clueless onlookers were moved by the solemnity and reverence that accompanied several events on Wednesday and Thursday. The first, recognizing outstanding accomplishments while assigned to the Regiment or providing it support, saw induction of seven Distinguished and three Honorary members of the 75th Ranger Regiment. This was soon followed by another to induct fifteen Distinguished and two Honorary members of the Ranger Hall of Fame.

Thursday, the last day of the Rendezvous, dawned with more of the same typically hot, muggy and hazy Georgia summer weather. The ultimate sacrifice paid by Ranger brothers of the distant, more recent and immediate past was honored that morning at the Ranger Memorial with the laying of floral wreaths, three precision volleys of blank fire, and somber reflection during the haunting and mournful bugle notes of “Taps.”

Finally, in the lengthening shadows of early evening at Sergeant Alvin York Field, the Regiment formed up for a Change of Command. There, precisely adhering to ceremony dictated by hundreds of years of US Army tradition and protocol, Colonel Richard D. Clarke accepted the Regimental Colors, taking command of the 75th Ranger Regiment following the distinguished service of Colonel Paul J. LaCamera.

Find Out More

No man can know with certainty what will happen in the 75th Ranger Regiment over the two years that will pass before Ranger Rendezvous 2009. But let there be no doubt that these brave and dedicated men are determined to uphold tradition and gather once again. We suggest the following internet references for detailed information on the Regiment and, at some point in the future, an announcement of dates and location of the next Rendezvous:

• 75th Ranger Regiment Official Website: www.benning.army.mil/75thranger/index.asp
• Ranger Recruiting: www.goarmy.com/ranger/index.jsp
• 75th Ranger Regiment Association: 75thrra.com
• US Army Ranger Association: www.ranger.org

Next Month

The US Army’s 75th Ranger Regiment, under operational control of the US Special Operations Command, is a unique combat asset, proven absolutely necessary and undeniably effective in a long list of wartime and covert missions. In the next issue we’ll take a close look at Ranger training, weapons and equipment.

By Robert Bruce

“The M60E4 is a great weapon and definitely fills the gap between vehicle mounted M240B and dismounted M249 SAW. Scout teams have been taking them out to overwatch and support the snipers, occupying OPs near them and carrying the M60E4 because it is small enough to hump a good distance and has great firepower. Some comments directly from soldiers: The M60E4 is small enough to maneuver in tight places, it allows for easy access entering and exiting vehicles and aircraft, can be shoulder fired in short bursts accurately, does not require a complete crew to operate effectively.” Email to US Ordnance from an officer of 101st Airborne Division in Operation Iraqi Freedom

What’s not to like about a real machine gun that’s significantly lighter than a chunky M240, about the same size as a puny SAW, pumps out powerful 7.62mm rounds with reliability and accuracy, and has long been a force multiplier in elite Navy SEAL Teams? GIs who’ve tried ‘em love ‘em, they’re comparable in price to buy and sustain as the FN guns, they’ve been in the logistics and combat doctrine chains for ever, and they’re 100 percent American designed and built. Slam dunk? Sorry.

The “Screaming Eagles” in Iraq only had a few of the newest Sixties, provided free of charge by US Ordnance in response to their urgent request while forward deployed for the Global War on Terror. US Ord sent a crate full of MK43s (M60E4), spare barrels and spare parts to Fort Campbell and the Army delivered it to Iraq.

Subsequent use in the unforgiving arena of intense urban combat resulted in a number of enthusiastic responses leaking out, but any formalized after action report has apparently been kept on close hold. We are unaware of any plans by the Army for further evaluation and PM Soldier Weapons is moving out at double time to develop a lighter and shorter version of the M240.

Meanwhile, production of M240s and 249s at FN’s South Carolina plant continues at breakneck pace but there remains a substantial backlog. This necessitates keeping large numbers of existing M60s in service with all branches of the US Armed Forces. But these guns are mostly old and tired veterans of decades of hard service and victims of poor maintenance with shoddy and cannibalized parts. What’s going on here?

Life and Times of the M60

Developed in the aftermath of WWII and fielded in 1957, the light and handy 7.62mm NATO caliber M60 General Purpose Machine Gun (GPMG) has been alternately praised and cursed by GIs who have carried it combat from Vietnam to Iraq and beyond.

Inspired by the WWII German MG42, the M60 was intentionally designed for mass production – cheap and fast on a stamped sheet metal receiver that houses a clever gas operated, carrier-cammed bolt mechanism first seen in the Lewis Gun of WWI. It replaced the Browning-designed M1919 series, built on heavy riveted steel receivers with lots of machining required for its beefy, recoil operated internals.

When the original M60 is good, it is very good; appreciated for its compact size, good handling, mechanical simplicity, quick change barrel, and effective operation from shoulder, hip, bipod, tripod, or vehicle/watercraft/aircraft mounting.

But when it’s bad it deserves its ‘Nam nickname “The Pig.” Punishing combat use in Vietnam’s tropical climate was hard on men and unforgiving of their weapons, adversely affecting all US arms which had been designed primarily for land warfare in Europe. The M60 was lightweight, but correspondingly flimsy, prone to damage and relatively quick to wear out critical parts like the bolt and op rod.

Special emphasis on parts is called for here. With spares and replacements supplied in later decades by unevenly performing, lowest-bid subcontractors, the gun itself can’t be blamed for problems arising mostly from user abuse, poor maintenance and extreme environmental conditions.

Despite its handicaps, the Sixty performed rather well when light weight and mechanical simplicity were preferred vs. the heavy M1919 series .30 caliber guns. Determined to phase out all those old Brownings, the Army began a series of modifications to the basic M60. The M60D came first, a helicopter door gun characterized by its spade grips and prominent ring sight. The solenoid-fired M60E2 was developed about the same time, a coaxial gun for tanks and helo gunships.

The M60E3 followed, dropping five pounds in a major overhaul demanded by the Marine Corps. Easily recognized by pistol grips fore and aft and a receiver mounted bipod freed from the barrel, the weight loss unfortunately came with poor durability and reduced performance.

Over on the Navy side, SEALs liked their regular M60s, used since ‘Nam with sawed-off barrels and no front sights. Some even utilized clever backpacks fitted with flexible feed chutes, capable of delivering a thousand rounds or more when things got particularly hairy. Yeah, the 5.56mm Stoner LMG and the M249 SAW had their place, but there’s no substitute for hard-hitting 7.62mm rounds. Unfortunately, the troubled E3 wasn’t up to the job.

In the early 1990s, SACO responded to Navy Special Warfare’s unique requirements and specifications, developing a retrofit parts package they called M60E4. Quantity deliveries of new guns and E4 parts kits to SEALs and other NAVSPECWAR units began in late 1994, receiving the Navy designation MK43 Mod 0.

Still reasonably light but significantly more reliable and durable than the despised E3, SEAL Team MK43s can be recognized by a distinctive “duckbill” flash suppressor and a positive lock gas cylinder extension that is stubbier and thicker.

SAWing Off The Sixty

Over on the Army side, the 5.56mm M249 Squad Automatic Weapon began taking the automatic rifle’s place in regular infantry units in the mid-1980s. This boost in firepower resulted in official Army doctrine being modified to reduce the number of M60s used in the traditional role of “General Purpose Machine Gun” in most infantry formations. On the other hand, vehicle and aircraft 60s were unaffected by this ruling and continued soldiering on.

While there have been and continue to be fierce debates about the wisdom of all aspects of this, Infantry Board documentation from the period asserts that the Belgian- designed mini machine gun would make up for lack of reach and penetration with one-man portability and high volume of fire.

It is no exaggeration to say that this radical change wasn’t warmly received by all members of the infantry community.

Yes, bootborne movement to contact in offensive operations is faster with the lighter SAW, but once the firefight begins there is little to recommend using anything smaller than 7.62mm. Same deal in defensive operations where bipod and tripodmounted Sixties have significantly superior accuracy at longer range and decidedly deadlier terminal effect than the M249.

At the same time, users of multitudes of aging M60s in tanks, helos and other tactical platforms were developing serious envy for their counterparts in the US Marine Corps. Leathernecks were beginning to get another Belgian designed weapon, the 7.62mm M240, marveling at its astonishing reliability and durability.

Against this background, sufficient pressure was brought to bear in favor of retaining a 7.62mm belt fed weapon for infantry combat. But the burning question was which medium machine gun would be best?

The process of finding an answer began with Fort Benning’s Dismounted Battlespace Battle Lab (DBBL, commonly pronounced “dibble”) preparing a detailed list of what the ideal weapon would have to do. This drove specific requirements for technical testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground and more general operational testing at Fort Campbell.

Trial by Fire: Sixty vs. 240

The Army’s big 7.62 belt fed shootout kicked off in January 1994 under the interesting program title of Medium Machine Gun Upgrade Kit. This name actually fits rather well because the only two significant competitors – M60s and M240s – were modified versions of weapons currently in the Army inventory.

SACO’s “Enhanced” M60E3 guns were fitted with a number of product improved parts and the FN 240s were coaxial guns from M1 Abrams tanks, converted for dismounted ground combat with buttstocks, bipods and such; hence the “Upgrade Kit” moniker for both.

Each manufacturer submitted eighteen guns and more than a year of technical torture and tactical trials ensued. This ended in December 1995 when the Army declared the M240 victorious.

Not surprisingly, there were strong critics of the decision then and now, raising objections and citing shortcomings in the process with varying degrees of credibility. Sadly, by keeping a close hold on details of the test regimen and tabulated results, the Army hasn’t helped dispel inevitable misinformation.

What is a matter of public record is the much-cited test results table quantifying two key performance areas; Mean Rounds Between Stoppages (MRBS) and Mean Rounds Between Failures (MRBF). Stoppages are jams and failures are parts breaking – both are essential indicators of combat serviceability.

50,000 rounds were fired through both the M60 and the M240. The 240 was a runaway winner in averaging 2,962 MRBS and 6,442 MRBF. The Sixty limped along at 846 MRBS and 1,669 MRBF.

Determined to find and report more facts of the matter, SAR went right to source, Program Manager Soldier Weapons at Picatinny Arsenal. Naturally, our first request was for hard copy of test documentation.

Sorry, came the official answer, “We can’t release any test paperwork until SAR’s request goes through legal.” Seems the specter of defamation lawsuits still looms darkly even after a dozen years have past and even where tabulated test results speak for themselves.

OK, we pressed, how about an interview with Ed Malatesta, the individual who was Product Director/Program Manager for the process? Although since retired from government service, as luck would have it he’s now an independent contractor working at PMSW. A phone interview was agreed to and arranged by officials in surprisingly short order.

In a conference call and subsequent email exchange Malatesta was very emphatic on the following:

SAR: What major factor(s), in your opinion, led to the decision to phase out the M60 in favor of the M240?

Malatesta: Reliability was by far the major factor. The M60s were always breaking and this doomed them almost from the beginning.

SAR: How is this shown in program documentation?

Malatesta: In data reporting the various test results. Based on this, the Army Source Selection Authority, a general officer, wrote in summary, “In view of the above discussions (Reliability, Probability of Hit, Human Factors and Price) and based on an integrated assessment of the above findings (Developmental Tests, Operational Tests, Human Engineering Testing and a Price Assessment), I conclude that Saco (M60) has no reasonable chance for award and should be eliminated from the competitive range, and that a competitive range of one, Fabrique Nationale Manufacturing, Inc. (M240) be established.”

SAR’s candid discussion with Malatesta, coupled with additional research, clearly shows the fundamental problem that, in his words, “doomed” the Sixty. Put aside all the “Enhanced” M60E3’s niceties of lighter weight, portability, balance, controllability in assault fire, easy to parachute with, already in the inventory, tons of spare parts, existing instructional materials, lots of experienced armorers, etc., etc.: SACO’s Sixties broke down way too often while FN’s 240s didn’t.

And the Army moved out smartly to fully equip the force with a new machine gun that – despite being considerably heavier – was vastly more reliable. When you need it to shoot, it shoots.Passing a Sputtering Torch

Prior to its last-ditch effort in the “Upgrade Kit” trials, M60 production had long been the exclusive domain of Saco Defense, where a skilled force of dedicated craftsmen had been turning out hundreds of thousands of these guns in various configurations. But for some reason the level of quality seems to have dropped.

This is particularly puzzling given Navy Special Warfare’s apparent satisfaction with their measurably improved M60E4/ MK43s of about the same time frame.

It must be left to others to explain the reasons for the abysmal performance of the eighteen guns SACO brought to the Army’s gunfight in 1994. SAR’s numerous phone calls – with detailed messages left for a certain individual who had been identified to us as a key player on the industry side of the trials – were not returned.

Market forces being what they are, SACO was acquired by defense industry giant General Dynamics in 2000. No secret that the Sixty was by then a neglected stepchild as Big Army transitioned to the M240 and it would have slowly faded away if it weren’t for a visionary named Curtis Debord.

We contacted Steve Helzer, General Manager of US Ordnance, Inc., located in Reno, Nevada, to get the straight story on how the M60 was saved from a lingering but certain death. What follows is based on telephone conversations and email exchanges.

SAR: Who is primarily responsible for acquiring the M60 rights from SACO and what was his reason for pursuing this?

Helzer: In 2000, Curtis Debord recognized that there was a business opportunity for a small arms manufacturer in acquiring the original tooling, technical data packages, processes, and procedures necessary to make a MIL-SPEC M60. General Dynamics (GD) was just completing the purchase of SACO Defense and recognized that they had an obligation to ensure the availability of spare parts for the M60 for the next five to ten years. But GD wanted out of the 7.62mm General Purpose Machine Gun business so a licensing agreement between US Ordnance and Saco Defense/GD was a logical conclusion. It ensured the availability of spare parts and ensured that the M60 remained in production. Spare parts and complete weapon systems would be available, and design improvement work could continue.

SAR: We have seen plenty of evidence to convince us that US Ordnance’s M60E4 – initially fielded by Navy Special Warfare as the MK43 Mod 0 and now the Mod 1 – represent significant ‘design improvements’ over all previous versions. Will you take our readers through its mechanical upgrades?

Helzer: US Ordnance’s MK43s feature twenty-two key improvements. I’ll list them roughly from muzzle to buttstock, not necessarily in order of importance —

1. Redesigned flash suppressor. It’s shorter, more effective and not prone to breaking like the ‘duck bill’ variant used in early SEAL team guns.
2. Adjustable front sight allows for zeroing of spare and primary barrel prior to mission operation. The old design required the gunner during combat to remember to adjust the rear sight for each barrel change. A small relief cut in the new front sight base decreases the chance of losing the front sight in the field.
3. Bipod moved from barrel to receiver. This has reduced the weight of the spare barrel and keeps the receiver stable, off the ground away from debris and pointed down range during barrel changes.
4. Bipod is strengthened and simplified, one hand operated and has ambidextrous legs to ease maintenance and spares.
5. Improved forward handguard with increased heat shielding that protects the operator from barrel heat, plus a forward pistol grip for better control.
6. Mod 1 variant has a Rail Interface Handguard with removable/repositionable pistol grip. This accommodates different sized soldiers and allows mounting of the gun to most all existing platforms. Three rails (both sides and underneath) allow mounting of multiple items like lasers and aiming devices.
7. Carry handle is mounted on the barrel to facilitate hot barrel change and offset so it won’t get in the way of the sights.
8. Improved gas system is “soldier proof” reversible. The old system was one direction only and if assembled wrong the gun would fire once and not cycle.
9. Gas tube on the barrel is simplified with three fewer parts than the old standard.
10. Both the Mod 0 and Mod 1 come with an aluminum rail top cover to facilitate the mounting of optics.
11. A new spring loaded feed cam allows loading of the weapon with the bolt forward (safe position) or rearward (charged) without damaging the feed cam assembly.
12. A redesigned feed cam, feed pawl assembly, and cartridge retaining pawl for 30% improved belt pull to overcome misaligned ammo and debris.
13. Two sear notches on the operating rod help prevent run away gun in extreme operating environments.
14. The operating rod tube is now hard chrome plated for corrosion resistance and to facilitate cleaning. Its fore end is induction hardened to resist mechanical wear from the forward sling mount.
15. A new captured pin prevents accidental detachment and loss of the trigger group.
16. Improved trigger grip housing that is stronger and redesigned to prevent trigger pin from being installed backwards in unsafe position.
17. Ambidextrous safety.
18. A trigger guard that hinges down to allow trigger finger access wearing thick winter mitts or NBC protective gloves.
19. Nyloc safety nut on cocking handle retainer holds tight despite vibration and allows for multiple assembly and disassembly with no degradation.
20. The ammunition hanger is now rigidly mounted to the side of the receiver – unlike the previous version, where the hanger was mounted to the feed try. Now, when checking the chamber, the gunner doesn’t have to lift a belt of heavy ammunition and also risk dumping it out of the bandoleer.
21. Improved polymer buttstock that is lighter and stronger while retaining the hinged shoulder rest feature.
22. Overall weapon length (fitted with short barrel) is 5 inches shorter then the Standard M60 and almost 4 pounds lighter

SAR: When we interviewed Dale McClellan at STS he said there were some other improvements in the works. (Editor’s Note: SAR’s interview with McClellan, a former SEAL M60 gunner and now president of STS, is a fascinating perspective on development of the MK43 Mod 1 and slow death of the Sixty in the US Navy. It is scheduled to run in an upcoming issue)

Helzer: That’s right. Our improved short fluted barrel is currently available and is based on the ones that STS did the 850 round demos with. Still in the RDT&E (research, development, test and engineering) stages are the improved cocking handle, bolt with new metallurgy, and a modification to the feed tray. We’re always working to improve our M60 family of guns and there are a couple of other things that maybe we can talk about in a few months.

SAR: What US military/government/law enforcement entities have purchased at least several guns and/or quantity orders for spares in the last couple of years?

Helzer: We have sold to numerous Sheriff Departments to assist with their new role in Homeland Security. Primarily for Maritime Security escort duty for tankers carrying oil or LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) in states with ocean access ports. We would prefer not to mention their names as this might be somewhat sensitive. It is safe to say we have ongoing programs on both coasts and in with the gulf coast states to arm their various patrol boats with Mk43s.

The US Army Tank and Automotive Command in Rock Island, Illinois (TACOM-RI) is our largest customer. TACOM-RI purchases are primarily for Foreign Military Sales. We have also received US Government purchase orders for spare parts from TACOM-RI, Defense Supply Center Columbus (DSCC) and Defense Supply Center Philadelphia (DSCP) for use by our own soldiers. These have primarily been spare barrels and sub assemblies for complete weapons.

And, we just delivered a small quantity of complete MK43 Mod 1s to the US Navy.

SAR: What foreign countries have gotten guns in quantity over the last two years?

Helzer: Colombian Navy and Army, Czech Republic for their 601st Special Forces, Philippine Air Force, Spanish Air Force, Italian Navy, Chilean Air Force, and Thai Navy. The M60 family of weapons is still very popular around the free world.

SAR: What’s the price of the MK43 retrofit parts kit?

Helzer: Anyone with a serviceable M60 receiver can have what amounts to a brandnew MK43 for about 60 percent of the cost of a complete new gun. Or, we’ll be happy to sell them a complete MK43 Mod 1 for $11,200 (domestic suggested retail price). That’s less than commercial price for FN’s M240 and significantly less than their MK48 guns. Our MK43s are in stock and ready for delivery to US Government and law enforcement pending ATF transfer approval.

SAR: We know that US Ord used to sell semiauto M60s that were civilian legal with no special paperwork. But now, the website says resumption of sales is delayed indefinitely. Comment?

Helzer: The Global War on Terror has caused a dramatic impact on the small arms industry. As our government orders ramped up we pulled our employees from the semi-auto production line and converted that area in our shop to military and law enforcement. This was a difficult decision because of the large and loyal civilian M60 following but a necessary one to support the warfighter and our coalition partners. Sales are still delayed indefinitely.

SAR: How many semiauto US Ord Sixties are out there now?

Helzer: There are more than 150 of the M60, M60E3 and a small number (10-20) of factory M60E4/Mk43 Mod 0 and Mod 1 semi autos in civilian hands.

Live Firing the MK43

The scope of this feature is not intended to include a hands-on evaluation of the new Sixties from US Ordnance. This has been well done by others, most notably Kent Lomont, the highly respected tactical small arms guru and SAR-certified “RKI.”

In a recent telephone conversation, Lomont told us he has put more than 70,000 rounds of “every kind of ammo” through his US Ord MK43 with excellent results. In no uncertain terms he declared, “It’s a goddamn good gun! For the first time there’s a Sixty you can bet your life on.”

Lomont’s salty and straightforward endorsement tracks with what we have repeatedly heard from law enforcement and military users. To the point, the MK43 has proven itself over recent years in hard training and combat operations by Navy SEALs and other elite formations such as the “Screaming Eagles” in Iraq.

We have personally observed the situation where one US Ordnance MK43 Mod 1 was run without incident for several thousand rounds in the industry demo and participant live fire opportunity at NDIA Small Arms 2006. Then, in our day on the range with students of Navy Center for Security Forces’ Crew Served Weapons Instructor Course, no problems occurred with either of two US Ord MK43 guns that were hard-used all afternoon by a dozen Sailors.

Those who are still skeptical are invited to see for themselves some real torture tests of the MK43. A couple different 850 round continuous burst videos are linked on the Special Tactical Services’ website at www.spectacserv.com. Click VIDEOS on the navigation bar, then select MACHINE GUNS. Plenty more folks have accessed and marveled the one at Blackwater that is posted on YouTube.

MK43 Mod 1 Technical Specifications
Source: US Ordnance Product Documentation

Caliber: 7.62 x 51mm NATO
Operation: Gas piston with 2-lug turning bolt
Weight: 20.5 pounds with short barrel
Length: 37 inches with short (16.5 in.) barrel
Barrel options: Short (16.5 in.), Assault (17.5 in.) and Long (21.5 in.)
Cyclic Rate: 500 to 600 rounds per minute
Max. effective range: 1100 meters
Notes: The latest product improvement of M60E4/MK43 is quickly recognized by Rail Interface System (RIS) forearm assembly with integrated Mil-Std 1913 rail system for mounting laser and lighting systems, plus improved control with a repositionable pistol grip. Also, one-piece milled aluminum feed tray cover with optional/integral RIS for mounting virtually any scope, night vision or electrooptic system. The Conversion Kit is available for all M60 variants that is 100% backwards compatible with all pre-existing M60’s. All components and parts of the MK43 Mod 1 are built to exceed original mil-spec standards.

Find Out More
US Ordnance, Inc.: www.usord.com
Special Tactical Services, LLC:
www.spectacserv.com
Link to 850 round demonstration video:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBNGguOqGIQ

Although the Mk 46 Mod 0 superficially resembles FN’s Para and SPW Models, it is again different from these Minimi versions. The modifications to the Mk 46 Mod 0 reduced its weight by 3.9 lbs in comparison to a standard M249. The major differences between the Mk 46 Mod 0 and the standard M249 are as follows:

• The Mk 46 Mod 0 barrel is much shorter than that of the M249.
• The Mk 46 Mod 0 lacks the magazine feed of the M249.
• There is no provision for vehicle or tripod mounting.
• The gas regulation system has been eliminated and replaced with a simplified “monobloc” system.
• There are MIL-STD-1913 rails atop the receiver and a rail system is fitted to the handguard for mounting accessories.
• The Mk 46 Mod 0 flash suppressor is identical to that of the M4 SOPMOD Carbine. This flash suppressor accepts standard military issue noise suppressors (silencers).
• The carrying handle has been eliminated.
• The Mk 46 Mod 0 is Teflon coated for corrosion resistance and to provide dry lubrication.
• The rear sling attachment point has been moved forward to facilitate “across the chest” carry.

We visited FN Manufacturing in Columbia, South Carolina to test fire the Mk46 and were very favorably impressed with the latest addition to the US military’s small arms inventory. Eliminating the requirement for magazine feed apparently significantly increased the reliability of the FN light machine gun. We did not experience a single stoppage while firing approximately 1,000 rounds of ammunition. Changing belts was as simple as sliding a new container into place and positioning the new belt in the feed tray. As mentioned, there is no provision to manually remove the barrels; they will simply be dropped under operational conditions.

Firing the Mk 46 was uneventful and thus quite enjoyable, although muzzle blast was pronounced, as can be expected from any short barreled weapon. Since the Mk 46 is equipped to accept the Navy’s standard suppressor, (From Knight’s Armament Company), however, this probably will not be an operational problem, as the gun will almost certainly be deployed with suppressor in place. The Mk 46 was easy to control; bursts were easily kept in the five to seven round range and muzzle rise was minimal. Although fieldstripping is somewhat lengthy in terms of the number of steps involved, the task is actually quite simple in practice.

In sum, our time spent with the new Mark 46 version of FN’s MINIMI was a very pleasant experience. The gun was lightweight, simple and easy to use and absolutely reliable during our brief experience with it. It seems that the U.S. Navy has a winner!

Today’s USMC Rifle Company is arguably the most lethal in Corps history. Packing a variety of weapons from the 9mm M9 pistol to the 83mm SMAW, its six officers and 176 enlisted men are well equipped to deal with a whole catalog of battlefield threats. The company’s three Rifle Platoons are armed with M16A2 assault rifles, M203 grenade launchers, and the compact, fast-firing M249 Squad Automatic Weapon, giving them a kill zone out to 600 meters or more. These combat proven weapons are relatively light, providing highly effective firepower to dismounted infantrymen whose best chance for survival and mission success is to move fast and hit hard.

Weapons Platoon

The big bite that “Devil Dog” grunts can deliver comes from their own Weapons Platoon; 47 Marines specially trained in the efficient employment of machine guns, mortars and rocket launchers. This interesting mix gives the company commander the ability to respond quickly and decisively to many of the challenges that are likely to be encountered in both offensive and defensive situations.

Usually under command of a 1st Lieutenant, the Weapons Platoon is organized into three sections with distinct but sometimes overlapping capabilities. First, the Machine Gun Section has Six M240G general purpose machine guns that can pump 7.62mm NATO rounds out to a maximum effective range of some 1800 meters with significantly more punch and sustained volume of fire than the 5.56mm SAW. The M240G is based on the highly respected Belgian MAG58, and replaces the fragile and trouble prone M60E3. Although somewhat heavier than the “Sixty”, the “Two-Forty Golf” is virtually indestructible and uncannily reliable under the worst conditions. These machine guns are particularly effective when fired from tripod mounts, dealing with enemy troops and light vehicles with both direct and indirect fire capability as the rifle platoons do their job. (See tech specs at end of article)

Then, the Mortar Section is home for three 60mm M224 light mortars. They put bigger and more effective high explosive, illumination, and smoke rounds way beyond the reach of those shoulder-fired 40mm M203 grenade launchers found in the rifle squads. These mortars are the company commander’s “hip pocket artillery”, immediately on call to wreak havoc day or night on enemy formations during offensive and defensive operations. (See tech specs at end of article)

The Assault Section is the Weapons Platoon’s third element, with six MK153 Shoulder Launched Multipurpose Assault Weapons, usually called “SMAWs.” These awesome 83mm rocket launchers are direct-fire weapons that are capable of dealing with a variety of targets including armored fighting vehicles and earth/log bunkers. Also, supporting the increasing emphasis on fighting in urban areas, the SMAW is astonishingly effective even against reinforced concrete buildings. You wouldn’t want to be hiding behind a wall when the SMAW’s High Explosive Dual Purpose round slams into it, instantly turning your squad into unrecognizable pulp from blast and fragments. The assault section also provides demolitions support as required with bangalore torpedoes, satchel charges and mines. (See tech specs at end of article)

Now, as fantastically capable as each of these heavy weapons can be, the company commander must employ them with skill and savvy to maximize their combined effect as a combat multiplier. While all of the factors that he must consider are way beyond the scope of this article, they obviously incorporate the basic triad of enemy, weather and terrain. Each of these must be taken into account as to how they will affect the desired outcome of either offensive (moving on the enemy) or defensive (luring him into your kill zone) operations with the least number of friendly casualties.

To this end, the commander relies to a large extent on advice from his Weapons Platoon commander — a very big responsibility for what is typically a lieutenant with only a year or two of real experience. How, then, does the Marine Corps ensure that this relatively green young man is equal to the job?

Infantry Officer Course

This challenge is met with a combination of formal schooling and on-the-job experience for a special breed of leader. While there is ample evidence that other components of the US Armed Forces are unevenly applying standards for officer selection and training in order to achieve social engineering “goals,” this doesn’t yet seem to be the case with the Marine Corps.

Always forward-deployed and with the strongest traditions of promotion based on merit and combat performance, the Corps remains committed to ensuring that its leaders are the best that America can provide. Marine officers, we are told, still get the kind of tough, uncompromising, and realistic training that keeps the Corps ready to fight anywhere in the world.

This is the responsibility of MCCDC, the Marine Corps Combat Development Command, located at the “Crossroads of the Corps” at Quantico, Virginia. There, newly-commissioned lieutenants who aspire to become infantry leaders jump from the frying pan of the Basic Officer Course to the fire of IOC; the Infantry Officer Course. This is an intense ten week full-immersion program of instruction in the theory and practice of bootborne combat.

At IOC these extraordinary young men have the opportunity to learn about and live fire most of the standard weapons of the Infantry Battalion from 9mm pistol to 81mm mortar. They also get thoroughly indoctrinated in the principles of offensive and defensive combat operations with and without support fire from tactical aircraft and artillery — including Naval gunfire. All along the way they have to consistently demonstrate that they have what it takes. This is measured through both individual performance and how they conduct themselves as student leaders in a multitude of tactical exercises and other situations – that they have what it takes. Yes, they are allowed to make mistakes, but only the ones who show that they have learned and corrected are allowed to continue.

According to Captain George Schreffler, IOC instructor, every lieutenant receives a solid grounding in infantry tactics while at the Basic Officer Course. This, in theory, prepares him to serve as a provisional rifle platoon commander if necessary. The staff at the BOC screens its graduates and assigns only about 35 out of a company of some 250 as infantry students.

“The grueling IOC program,” Schreffler says, “ensures that those without the necessary decision-making ability or physical attributes don’t graduate.”

This includes more than half of their 50 days in the field in all kinds of weather in a simulated combat environment. There are numerous tests of decision-making skills amid food and sleep deprivation, plus the physical strain from a series of long and challenging hikes.

Schreffler is quick to point out that, “Most graduates freely admit that IOC is the most physically and mentally difficult challenge they ever faced.”

Live Fire Exercise

One of many intense and demanding exercises at IOC is the Weapons Platoon Live Fire, typically scheduled near the end of the ten week course. MCCDC course materials state the purpose of this is “to successfully employ all crew-served weapons assets of the Marine Rifle Company in accordance with a ground scheme of maneuver.” While this may seem a straightforward tasking to the casual observer, there is a lot that goes into it.

First, there is the need to translate a formal Operations Order into a plan for both maneuver and fire support and to ensure that all players know what their responsibilities are. Then, the platoon must successfully move by both Amphibious Armored Assault Vehicle and by foot to take up planned positions on unfamiliar terrain. Finally, the various weapons must be fired on schedule and on targets both anticipated and unanticipated. Oh, by the way, there may be a few surprises here and there, courtesy of the IOC cadre….

With student lieutenants in all roles from weapons crewmen to platoon commander, the possibilities for both comedy and tragedy are seemingly endless.

I arrived on Quantico’s Range 6 on the morning of 23 Nov, as the Marine lieutenants of IOC Classs #1-100 prepared for the first of two full scale runs of the Live Fire exercise. The Battalion Commander’s Operations Order had already been given to the student acting as Weapons Platoon Commander and all of the various sections were busy with rehearsals and other preparations.

The canned Operations Order used for this exercise is plausibly based on real-life possibilities with a tactical scenario involving hostile forces in Bosnia. The mission of Fox Company’s Weapons Platoon is to move undetected into suitable positions then put fifteen minutes of suppressive fire on an enemy howitzer battery and the motorized rifle platoon that is protecting it. Properly executed, this will cover two of Fox Co.’s rifle platoons as they flank and assault the enemy positions, clearing the way for fast movement of follow-on forces.

For rehearsal purposes and later during actual movement and firing, each section was under direct supervision of a Marine non-commissioned officer who was an expert in tactical employment of that weapon. From what I observed, these corporals and sergeants were very professional and matter-of-fact with the lieutenants, providing lessons not only in how to use the weapons, but also how to interact with enlisted men whose experience and knowledge are always essential to mission success.

Meanwhile, support personnel were also busy with many tasks necessary to make the exercise work despite competing necessities of both safety and realism. This included an amazing variety of items from toilet paper to TOW missiles, with stacks of ammunition, several different tactical radios, and four big, hulking AAVP-7 (Assault Amphibian Vehicle Personnel) tracked vehicles.

Also, in addition to the standard crew-served arms found in the Weapons Platoon, exercise play would include some interesting assets from the Infantry Battalion’s Weapons Company. The student platoon commander would be able to call on support fire from 81mm mortars and 105mm howitzers, as well as a pair of tough and squat “Humm-Vees,” one mounting a TOW antiarmor missile, and the other a .50 caliber heavy machine gun. All of these, by the way, were crewed by experienced Marine enlisted men from the MCCDC’s Weapons Platoon, Combat Instructor Company, Instructor Battalion, The Basic School.

Had the weather cooperated the exercise would also have the dramatic advantage of close air support. This usually comes in the form of fast movers like the F/A-18 HORNET and the AV-8 HARRIER, or from attack helicopters. Now, before anybody gets upset that poor visibility kept the air support on the ground, let it be said that rules of combat are much different from rules of peacetime training. It doesn’t make sense to take a chance of crashing good aircraft and killing good pilots for a fairly routine ground training exercise.

“Move Out!”

By early afternoon everything seemed to be in order and the students loaded up into the AAVP-7s for the first phase of movement. These remarkable amphibious tracked vehicles serve as battle taxis, capable of delivering up to 18 Marine infantrymen in full gear from a seaborne assault ship to even miles inland if required. Although awkward and slow moving, they have a lethal sting in the form of an armored turret mounted with two belt-fed machine guns, one a .50 cal. M2 and the other a 40mm Mk19. (See tech specs)

The 60mm mortar section was the first group to disembark along the route of motor march. This allows them time to set up and be ready to provide indirect fire support from a position well hidden from enemy observation and protected from counterbattery fire.

AAVs make a lot of noise from both their diesel engines and the characteristic metallic squeal of most fully tracked vehicles. This meant that a few hundred meters further up the rough and narrow trail the machine gun and assault sections also had to jump out in order to be outside hearing range of the enemy’s presumed forward observation posts. Stealthy movement on foot of the men and their heavy burden of weapons and ammunition was required from here on as they put into practice many hours spent on land navigation and other infantry skills.

A bit of a surprise was in order as the platoon’s forward elements neared their predetermined fire positions. The “enemy” had placed a cluster of antitank mines right in the path the AAVs were supposed to take. Fortunately, the assault section had run several practice drills with just this in mind, and soon cleared the way. Unfortunately, as was embarrassingly pointed out later in the after action review, there was little thought given to providing the mine clearing team with covering fire just in case the mine field was sniper’s bait. This, the instructors often say, is “how we learn….”

Meanwhile, as the countermine efforts were still underway, the machine gun section was literally crawling up a gentle incline in the treeline to ensure they were in position and ready to shoot at H Hour. This protected them from enemy observation and put them into an excellent spot allowing unobstructed direct fire on a cluster of derelict target tanks. Situated some 800 meters away, deep in the enormous impact area of Range 7, these tanks represent BTR-60 wheeled armored cars of the enemy motorized rifle platoon as identified in the Operations Order.

Learning Curve

If things had gone exactly according to plan then all weapons would have been in place and simultaneously firing at the appointed time. As it happened, the M240 machine guns started right on schedule but there was a noticeable lag before the mortars began kicking in. Finally, the assault section, reinforced by a pair of M249 SAW’s to represent fire from two attached rifle squads, got into their position in a log crib to the left of the machine gunners, adding more noise and smoke to the “fog of war.” A note to armchair generals — this stuff isn’t easy to do, particularly when the Marine grunts are all new 2nd Lieutenants.

Ah, but when everything started popping away it was a sight to behold. The spacious impact area was crisscrossed with red laserlike tracers from the SAWs and the medium machine guns. Soon, plumes of smoke began to arise nearby on the grid coordinates occupied by the imaginary enemy artillery battery. These marked the impact of high explosive 60mm and 81mm mortar rounds, marched in by a student in the role of Forward Observer.

Exercise controllers soon added a bit more spice to the tactical play, directing the assault section leader to engage with DRAGON and SMAW a trio of target tanks with the closest two about 350 meters out and another approximately 500 meters away. The rocket teams jumped up from the protection of the log crib and scrambled to get into position. Despite their inexperience, it wasn’t long before three antiarmor weapons were ready. One SMAW was first to fire, rapidly popping off several 9mm spotter-tracer rounds until the gunner was sure of his sight picture. This was followed by a deafening blast and flying debris as the big antitank rocket left its launcher and streaked downrange, getting a near miss on the closest enemy armored fighting vehicle. The second SMAW finished the job, scoring a good center of mass hit.

The DRAGON gunner was taking his time, but when he finally hit the trigger bar his guided missile launcher erupted with similar earplug-packing blast and smoke. If there had been any actual bad guys downrange they damn sure knew from the launch signature exactly where these rockets were coming from!

Unlike the point and shoot/fire and forget SMAW, DRAGON is a a wire guided missile that the gunner “flies” to its target by keeping it squarely in crosshairs in his fire control system. Theoretically, this gives the DRAGON the capability of hitting even a fast moving tank. Alas, the missile ran out of wire before it got to its tank and promptly took a nose dive into the dirt. There is an important correlation between maximum range of the weapon and actual range to the target. “This is how we learn.”

By now the AAVs had driven up the free-of-mines trail, their noise of movement screened by the rude concert from multiple weapons. Coming on line, they quickly added to the excitement by pumping .50 caliber slugs and 40mm grenades into the ridgeline occupied by the luckless enemy BTRs. The Mark 19 grenade chucker is an excellent compliment to both the .50 cal and 7.62mm machine guns, literally carpeting the target area with high explosive bomblets. This weapon’s inherent long range effectiveness is particularly enhanced by the sturdy turret mount of the AAV and its highly precise ballistic computing optical sight.

To any enemy the required fifteen minutes of suppressive fire called for in the Operations Order would have been an eternity in Hell of fire and steel. However, as several of the Marine lieutenants later remarked, things on their end seemed to go remarkably fast. This was particularly true for the four M240G machine gunners, who had to make do with a relatively paltry 1200 rounds each and all ran out of ammo before running out of time.

Lessons Learned

As the last rounds were heading downrange the Weapons Platoon pulled back from the firing line to an established rendezvous point. If this had been an actual combat operation, they would then have jumped back into their AAVs and moved out to rejoin the rest of Fox Company, helping to consolidate the Battalion’s objective. But, since this was only a practical exercise, (and the impact area “objective” was full of lethal duds from countless years of firing) the next order of business was to gather around for a quick AAR — After Action Review.

This is the time for a no-bullshit examination of what went right and what went wrong. All participants are encouraged and expected to contribute with students, exercise controllers, safety officers, and weapons NCOs being as candid as possible. This is, after all, a much better way to learn without the unpleasant side effects of being — or causing others to be — wounded or killed.

It has been said that the making of a U.S. Marine Infantry Officer is an inexact science but one with which the Corps has a long history and much demonstrated success. Let us hope and pray that the way it is being done now at Quantico is the best way and will continue to forge the best America has to offer into technically and tactically proficient leaders with no compromises in standards.

Let all Americans of good conscience also demand that our elected representatives promptly and decisively reverse years of the Clinton administration’s politically calculated starvation, neglect and ill-concealed contempt for the Armed Forces. It is long past time for congress to reverse the dangerous slide in readiness and morale by restoring realistic funding levels and allowing a return to common sense rules for training and deploying the men and women soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who keep America’s many enemies at bay.