Dear SAR,

I have been enjoying your new publication, and wish it continued success. SAR is performing a great public service by bringing back the general format and several of the writers from the new defunct Machine Gun News. I would likely subscribe to your publication if I did not feel somewhat betrayed by MGN. You see I had just renewed my subscription to MGN when suddenly the publication folded, without any forewarning to it’s subscribers I’m afraid. I’m not bitter, just disappointed, and barring any assurances that SAR won’t suffer the same fate as MGN. I will have to save my hard earned pennies for things more tangible, like those AR-10 magazines which seem so elusive. In any event good luck and keep your powder dry.

Sincerely,

Chris Minedew

P.S. I am also saddened by the passing of Liem from T&L Guns in Reno. He was the individual responsible for sparking my interest in Class III, and it was my privilege to know him.

Dear Chris,

We’re happy you are enjoying the magazine. We can assure you that we will be around for a good long time, and would like to say that we are not the folks who ran MGN. If you ever overcome your apprehension to subscribe, we will gladly welcome you aboard!

As for the untimely death of Liem, he will be missed by many. He was well liked.

Ed

Dear SAR,

I am an owner and shooter of various semi-auto military-type rifles, including AR15s, FN-FALs, pre-ban AK’s, M1As, M1 Garands, M1 Carbines, etc. I am currently a Class III dream-to-be, as I would love to own a few select-fire favorites, but do not have the money to do so, maybe in a few years…My question is this: obviously your publication will be geared towards Class III firearms and NFA items, but will you be able to provide coverage of semi-auto military-type rifles and firearms also (aka AR15s, semi-auto FALs, HK91/93s, pre-ban Aks, etc.)? I would love to read more articles about the firearms that I own, and it would be great if your publication also covers the semi-auto military firearms and surplus community, as well as the Class III world. Will you in fact be covering semi-auto military rifles and firearms in your new publication? I hope it will, looking forward to your answer. Thank you.

Howard Feng
CPT, OD
USAR

Dear Howard,

It is our intention to cover ANY firearm that would be of interest to our readers, and we firmly believe that military style semi auto firearms fit in that category. It is important to remember that most shooters who curl their lip at the mention of a semi, had their interests seriously peaked by them in the begining.

Ed

Dear SAR,

I think that a lot of folks who got into the hobby recently would appreciate some articles on Thompsons. The articles on them in MGN were a bit ago, before I subscribed, and lots of folks have these guns.

Thanks,
Lou

FN Group Sold To Belgians

The long anticipated sale of the FN Group, consisting of Browning, Winchester licensee U.S. Repeating Arms Co. and Fabrique Nationale was completed November 21, 1997. The sale from French government-owned defense contractor GIAT Industries to the Walloon Region of Belgium gives them 100% ownership from their previous 8%.

The Walloon Region named Philippe Tenneson as chairman and chief executive officer. Don Gobel, previously president and chief executive officer of Browning, North America and U.S. Repeating Arms Co. is now in charge of the Worldwide Browning/ U.S. Repeating Arms Co. Products Business Unit.

“We are excited as we begin this new phase in our history,” said Gobel. “We will continue to provide our customers with superior products and customer service. Both Browning and Winchester are names that are synonymous with quality, value and longevity.”

New Colt Holding Corp., a business entity set up by Colt’s Manufacturing Co. had made an unsuccessful attempt to purchase the FN Group earlier in 1997.

Colt’s president Ronald Stewart says the firm is in the final stages of its grant application to the National Institute of Justice to obtain funding for its “Smart Gun” technology which will be built into a forthcoming new handgun intended for the police market. The electronic technology allows only a predetermined authorized user to fire the handgun and is intended to prevent criminals from using a handgun snatched from an officer. While Colt’s has shown prototype handguns equipped with a user recognition feature, the technology is expected to take two to three years of additional research to perfect.

Colt unveiled a polymer-framed pistol at the 1997 SHOT Show which it had dubbed the Law Enforcement Pistol and said it was developed to meet all the needs and concerns of officers in a duty sidearm. However, the firm has since moved away from that plastic framed design and is now working on a Law Enforcement Pistol, the frame of which, is apparently composed of other materials.

“When you look at what SIGARMS, Smith & Wesson, and others have done with composites, the way they are pricing their products,” Stewart revealed, “We are certainly interested in the police market -but not at a loss.”

Canadian Push

In other international news, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy recently announced that following his nation’s successful bid to ban anti-personnel land mines, the Canadian government is now turning its attention to “small arms.”

In a speech to the United Nations’ (UN) General Assembly, Axworthy labeled small arms as the “true weapons of mass terror…the proliferation of which undermines the security and developmental efforts of many developing countries.” The UN, he said, should use the expertise gained through the land mines treaty to take on the small arms issue. “All too often,” he said, “it is small arms…that cause the greatest bloodshed today.”

Ivan Gets His Gun

Under a new law, Russians are now allowed to buy rifles for self-defense, so long as they are kept at home. The law is an admission that crime in post-Soviet Russia is out of the control of the police. Only the insane, drug addicts, and convicted criminals may not own a gun.

Debate over the gun law split the Russian parliament along lines that were the opposite of that in America. Liberal democrats were the enthusiastic proponents of wider gun ownership, arguing that personal freedoms should include the right to bear arms. On the other hand, Russia’s conservatives, who count among their supporters the Communist and Agrarian parties, favored strict gun control, saying it is the government’s duty to preserve law and order and claiming wider gun ownership would lead to more violence.

“The state today is unable to defend its citizens,” admits Lt. Col. Yelena Shelkovnikova, a police lawyer. “Until the police are paid properly, the problem of armed crime is not going to be solved, and citizens will have to defend themselves.”

“The law means guns will be used in everyday quarrels,” said Nikolai Kharitonov, leader of the Agrarian Party in the Duma (lower house of parliament). “And it will create a situation where people will settle accounts between themselves without law or judge.”

The public has expressed a great deal of anxiety over the wave of lawlessness gripping the country since totalitarian controls imposed by Soviet authorities were relaxed. The number of crimes involving firearms rose more than fourfold, from 3,401 in the entire Soviet Union in 1986, to 12,150 in Russia alone in 1995, according to official figures, which police privately say underestimates the real scale of the problem.

“Criminals are armed to the teeth,” says Mikhail Myen, a liberal Duma deputy who
voted for the bill. “And if when God created us, He created us different, Mr. Colt made us equal,” he announced, paraphrasing the famous gun manufacturer’s slogan.

“I personally oppose the idea of any civilian except a hunter owning a gun,” says Sergei Chuganov, a Duma aide who helped draft the new law. “But on the other hand, when official organizations are unable to protect…private individuals must have the right to defend themselves.”

Chuganov, a former state prosecutor, points to another main aim of the legislation, tightening up on the number of military handguns and automatic weapons in circulation.

With the right connections, one can buy almost any weapon from corrupt Russian Army officers, whether a simple Makarov pistol, a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, or a land mine. All these weapons and more, have been used by hit-men in the past. Hardly a week goes by without news of another contract murder as organized gangs fight over business turf in the newly privatized Russian economy.

At the same time, previously enacted legislation allowed registered bodyguards to carry military arms. The Interior Ministry has no exact figures on how many such arms are in legal circulation, but they are known to number in the tens of thousands. Under the new law, bodyguards are required to hand in their Army-issue guns, which are now deemed offensive weapons, in exchange for less powerful models seen as merely defensive.

The factories making these lesser caliber guns will benefit from the new law. While limiting the import of some foreign guns, “The law is also designed to defend Russian arms manufacturers by stimulating demand,” Chuganov explains. “Liberalized access to guns will create jobs.”

Demand is set to rise even further if another draft law before parliament wins passage. That bill, drawing it’s inspiration from America’s Wild West past, takes the concept of citizens’ self-defense even further by legalizing the formation of volunteer posses of armed vigilantes.

Cops With Tanks

Newark, New Jersey, a city rife with scandal, crime and poverty, has acquired a 10,000-pound military tank courtesy of the U.S. Defense Department, as part of the city’s new crime fighting arsenal. Reuters reports the vehicle is of the type used in the assault by federal agents on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas in 1993.

“We will use the vehicle only in cases involving snipers and suspects who barricade themselves into buildings,” police department spokesman Sgt. Derek Glenn said. “It’s a piece of equipment that will provide police officers with better protection. “peacekeeper”, has seven gun ports, a machinegun turret, can carry up to five passengers, and travels at highway speeds. It was a gift to the city from the federal government after it was decommissioned.

The Newark City Council is considering whether to approve use of the tank. Councilman Ronald Rice, who opposes police use of the vehicle said, “Local police departments are focusing too much on military-type training and equipment. I don’t want it to look like we are patrolling the city streets with combat troops.”

Dealer News

Gun dealers who sell firearms to drunk customers can be found liable if those customers cause injuries, Florida’s high court has ruled. The decision came in the case of a former Tampa woman who sued Kmart Corp. for selling a rifle and ammunition to her former boyfriend. He shot her in the neck a half hour later, leaving her a quadriplegic. The Florida justices joined high courts in Mississippi and Washington in allowing negligence claims for selling firearms to intoxicated customers.

During the Florida trial, a Kmart clerk testified she didn’t believe Thomas Knapp was drunk when she sold him the rifle. She acknowledged, however, that he had so much difficulty writing that she had to fill out the 4473 firearms purchaser’s form for him. Knapp had consumed 24 beers and nearly 25 shots of whiskey during the day.

MG Ban Upheld

The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected two constitutional challenges to the federal laws regulating ownership and commercial trade in machineguns. The justices, without comment, turned away appeals from Pennsylvania and East Texas challenging Congress’ authority to enact the laws as part of its regulation of interstate commerce.

Both appeals relied on a 1995 Supreme Court ruling throwing out a federal ban on possession of firearms within 1,000 feet of a school. In that decision, the court said the 1990 Gun Free School Zones Act had “nothing to do with commerce or any sort of economic enterprise.” Congress may enact laws under its power to regulate interstate commerce only to control activity “substantially” affecting such commerce, the 1995 ruling said.

In the Pennsylvania gun case, Raymond Rybar, Jr. was convicted of possessing and transferring two machineguns at a Monroeville, Pennsylvania gun show in 1992. He was sentenced to 18 months in prison and fined $100. In the Texas case, William Kirk was convicted for violating federal law in 1988 by selling an M-16 near Dripping Springs, Texas. He was sentenced to a year and a day in prison and fined $3,000.

Both men challenged the constitutionality of the law used to convict them, but lower courts upheld the law in both cases. In his Supreme Court appeal, Rybar’s lawyers argued that the federal law restricting the possession or transfer of a machinegun fails the standard the Supreme Court set in 1995, since his sale to a fellow Pennsylvanian had no substantial effect on interstate commerce. The appeal said lower court rulings, “have been characterized by uncertainty, confusion and, in some instances, a downright hostile refusal to take the (1995) decision at face value.”

Kirk’s appeal contended the federal law wrongly usurps power from the states. The challenged federal law was upheld in the Pennsylvania case by a 2-1 vote of a three-judge panel for the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The Texas challenge was rejected by a 2-1 vote of a three-judge panel in the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

In urging the justices to reject the two appeals, Clinton Administration lawyers noted that the six federal appeals courts studying the law have upheld it. “In the absence of a conflict in the circuits, the…conclusion that the statute is constitutional does not warrant this court’s review,” the government lawyers said. The cases are: Rybar vs. US 96-1738 and Kirk vs. US 96-1759.

Charter Arms Back

Charter Arms handgun products are coming back on the market, according to Nick Ecker, a company principal. The new firm, known as Chartco 2000, has established a manufacturing facility in Shelton, CT and will shortly offer a new stainless steel version of its Off Duty .38 Special snub nose revolver. The famous .22 rimfire semi-auto, floating stock AR7 survival rifle is being brought back as well under the corporate entity of AR7 LLC, Ecker adds.

“Mechanical Engineers create weapons; Civil Engineers create targets”
– Old Engineer proverb

This month we have some interesting questions, and I was able to hustle up some photos to go with them- let’s keep it simple and get right into it:

Q1- I have heard people refer to several variations of the buffer on the HK33 rifles. They keep saying the “Buffer is on the bolt carrier” on older models. What do they mean by this- will this bolt carrier work in my converted HK 93?

A1- This question has been rolling around for years- I have unsuccessfully tried to explain it before, but lady luck smiled on me at the Phoenix show. Greg Needham purchased a 93 from a customer, and on disassembly, discovered the rare buffer system. No, the bolt carrier and buttstock will not work without each other- as a matter of fact, you can have a lot of problems from the wrong combination. If your buttstock does not have the buffer, you must have the buffer on the bolt carrier, and vice versa. These are not common parts. The typical .223 caliber HK rifle has the buffer in the buttstock, not on the bolt carrier. There are other differences between the full auto (HK33) and semi-auto (HK93) bolt carriers as well.

Q2- Just a couple of questions: I want to find a high capacity .22LR feed system for my suppressed M4 with a select-fire Ciener conversion unit. A real fun gun, and cheap to shoot, but not enough capacity. (I have already checked with Ciener). I hear rumors of pre-ban 50 rd. mag blanks similar to Ciener’s without the mag well block and catch in a single column stack. With these, I could use a block cut off of my existing 30 rd. Ciener units re-tigged to the 50 or better yet – come up with a double column arrangement to keep the length down. (How about a 5000 rd. ruck and trough setup?!!) Any advice on these 50’s or some drum configuration you are aware of ? The American 180 is the only drum-fed .22 I know of.

I am waiting on a Smith M76 transfer (NIB!) Gemtech SG-9 integral suppressor.. I would like to find a distributor for the Suomi 50 rd. mags mentioned in the Swedish K/Port Said article (Vol 1 No 1) if these are adaptable to the Smith & Wesson. Is mag well removal required for this installation? Also, how does the Smith stack up to the Swedish K in terms of performance? Any advice/ info would be most appreciated. I look forward to the next issue with great anticipation.

Phil Moldovan

A2- Another one of the 22 drum feds is the PPS-50 in it’s various incarnations. The AM-180 can work fairly reliably, but the PPS-50 is going to depend on “Who” did the conversion work. I keep thinking that you sound like a candidate for a hopper fed 22 caliber minigun on a sling. Raffica LIKES this idea! Unfortunately, most attempts at getting over 30 rounds in a magazine have been dismal failures. It has to do with the rim of the 22 cartridge, and the angle necessary for a smooth feed. You are also restricted by the width of the mag well on the M16- the 50 rounders for the 10-22 Ruger just won’t make it.

The S&W 76 should be a good shooter for you, but the Suomi 4 column 50 rounders are going to require mag well removal- and that is going to be a cutting job. Some versions of the Swedish K / Port Said had the removable well, and the Suomi magazine works fine. Reliability is not a problem on the 76, but you are going to have a hard time convincing the “K” shooters that it is as good a gun. I leave that discussion up to personal taste. Several of SAR’s advertisers have had those Suomi mags in stock- Omega has, Stan Andrewski has, as well as Ohio Ordnance.

Q3- I am a subscriber to your excellent magazine. I look forward to receiving my copy every month. My questions pertain to my H&K MP5. The lower is marked 0-1-A. The dealer I purchased this from said that it is a rare lower. Any comment would be most appreciated. I was thinking about changing this lower with a new navy ambi, picto lower and putting the 0-1-A in my 93. Which would be the most valuable set-up?

Bill

A3- As far as I know, the “0-1-A” was not original. These were aftermarket conversions. Many of the Class 2 manufacturers made their own 0-1-A lowers by removing the selector block on the original semi-auto housing, and inscribing the “A” for Auto in the third position. The front did not need to be cut and blocked to fit into a semi-auto receiver. You did not say whether your MP5 was a registered receiver gun, or if it was, if it had the “0-1-A” as a swing down lower. If it is either a “Registered sear” gun or a receiver gun with a clip on lower, installing any other trigger pack can be an arduous task, better left to professional Class 2 gunsmiths.

Q4- You referred to the “Sear being on the upper receiver assembly” of an AR-18 rifle. I have not seen any position for this on the AR-180 that I own- where would it be located?

JR

A4- One picture is worth a thousand words… The sear position is located at the arrows in the photo. The reason you can’t find a location on the AR-180 is because the manufacturers left this position off of the sheet metal on the upper on semi- automatics.

Questions to:

Dan Shea C/O SAR
223 Sugar Hill Road
Harmony, ME 04942
Fax: (207)683-2172
E-Mail: SAReview@aol.com

SADW is a monthly electronic publication from Nick Steadman Features. Nick, intrepid world traveling reporter for much of the arms industry, files this 40,000 to 50,000 word report once a month to his loyal subscribers. Those lucky ones pay a mere $50 (US) £32.50 (UK) per year for the privilege of getting the hot tips and insights from one of the industry’s insiders. Nick’s unique perspective is globally based, as is his wit. Each issue is full of insight and information for those with an interest in Small Arms, as well as his observations on world travel.

THE ULTIMATE GLOCK?

For those who think their Glock pistol is already quite enough fun, think on. Internationales Waffen-Magazin (IWM) in Switzerland carried a report on a new ‘Doppelglock’ machine pistol developed by one Hans-Peter Siggs, a gunmaker and developer in Jestetten, southern Germany. Imagine two compensated 9mm full-auto Glock 17L pistols with high-capacity Glock 18 magazines, the two weapons joined sideways at 180 degrees frame to frame by a bracket system which permits the slides to move freely, and with a red dot sight mounted between the two slides at 90 degrees to the guns.

Anyone who recalls the 9mm Champ machine pistol will get the picture. The Doppelglock is carried in a chest harness, held horizontally and aimed normally. Total rate of fire is 2,600 rpm. The IWM tester described the recoil as like that of a fire hose. Functioning was reportedly very good. Clearly, given the usual firing characteristics of the Glock 18, which climbs quite excitingly and (due to the length of the trigger pull) is hard to limit just to short bursts, bolting two full-auto Glocks together such that the jump of each muzzle is neutralised by the other is a very neat idea.

In fact, the Doppelglock stems from other work by Sigg to tame the Glock in full-auto, using a second handgrip (which appears designed possibly to accept a second magazine) on a selective-fire G17L at about 150 degrees to the grip frame. This concept reportedly allows Sigg’s ‘Glock 18C’ to group a 32-round magazine of ammo into a full-auto pattern the size of a football at ranges between five and 10 metres. Sights are located on a bar along the right side of the modified pistol, attached to the frame.

Sigg’s Glocks reportedly also incorporate modifications to the barrel locking system and the interface between the muzzle and compensator slots. A new fire selector has also been patented. There are clear messages here about the potential design of future machine pistols, a class of weapon generally notorious for its inability to deliver the goods beyond bedpost distance, except in the hands of the most experienced (and practiced!) users. We also hope to bring you news of the Champ in its latest manifestation quite soon.

BULLPUP AK FROM BULGARIA

A bullpupped Kalashnikov-pattern AKB rifle, in what appears to be 7.62x39mm calibre, has been developed in Bulgaria. We have seen a photo, but further details & technical specs are still being sought at this time.

NEARLY ZAPPED BY A CAMERA?

A Reuters report run by The Guardian said Aslan Abashidze, boss of the Adjaria autonomous region in Georgia, claimed there had been an attempt to assassinate him using a ‘camera’ emitting electromagnetic rays, shortly after which he had a heart attack. Abashidze said it was the 14th time assassins had tried to kill him.

NORTHERN WAR MUSEUM PLAN STYMIED

It had been planned to build a £40m North of England branch of the Imperial War Museum beside the Lowry Centre in Manchester, but the Times said the Heritage Lottery Fund, which allocates profits from the UK National Lottery to appropriate heritage schemes, had declined to provide the £22m it had been asked to find towards the project. Manchester has apparently already had £36m from the Fund for other cultural projects. The Imperial War Museum is appealing the decision.

.50 RIFLE BARRELS IN 416-R STAINLESS STEEL

In the US recently we heard some rather worrying things about 416-R stainless steel when used to make .50 BMG rifle barrels. Apparently these tubes are apt to give way at proof. This is evidently a long-standing problem, well-known to the US Navy small arms people, and was relayed to us quite openly by a very well-known .50 riflemaker who had himself experienced such a barrel failure. It presumably explains why stainless military barrels are not so popular in this calibre. We’re now aware some British .50 barrels have been made using this steel, so we endeavoured to secure more information.

The message to date is that there have apparently been no problems with the British tubes, and one UK riflemaker claims that no-one he has since spoken with in the US military claimed to know anything about a problem with 416-R. However, the original point was made to us in good faith by a very reliable source with first-hand experience of the matter, and we are duty bound to report it.

ROMANIAN AK-74s WITH TALIBANS

A recent photo of Taliban fighters in Afghanistan run by the Guardian showed a fixed-stock 5.45mm AK-74 variant with a 40-round magazine & a flash hider resembling that on the M60 GPMG. We’ve established from colleagues that this is most likely a Romanian export weapon, Model 010301, made by Ratmil. These do not have the groove in the buttstock characteristic of other AK-74s, nor the typical Romanian forward handgrip. Similar distinctive flash hiders are found on Romanian 7.62x39mm export AKs. Apparently the Romanian AKs are now the cheapest bar none, even those from NORINCO.

SADDAM FOR THE CHOP?

The Times said that former Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos considered the US should just go ahead and kill Saddam Hussein for the greater good, but ex-President Bush and General Norman Schwarzkopf apparently don’t think it’s a great idea. Hussein is very well-protected, runs a tight ship, and arbitrarily killing him could easily damage relations with allied nations.

There’s also the little problem of the Reagan-era Executive Order which banned assassination by US agencies, something formerly considered all part of the day’s work at the CIA – though they failed miserably with Fidel Castro, despite a highly creative box of tricks. As for Saddam conveniently pining away and dying of natural causes, forget it. Just remember – the devil looks after his own! For all it’s huffing & puffing, the West (the US included) doesn’t really have the stomach – or indeed the resources – to mount a Desert Storm Mk2 operation, or anything remotely resembling it.

So – for the time being – Iraq will continue to play silly devils, while cooking up Lord knows what in its weapon labs. And if it comes to air raids, Hussein will ensure enough civilians get in the way to milk it for every last drop of international sympathy. Unfortunately, unless he’s daft enough to take on the Israelis, who (under present management) would quite conceivably nuke him, Saddam’s going to get away with it.

AFCEA BELGIAN SHOW RAIDED!

Jane’s Defence Weekly reported that the AFCEA Technet 97 military electronics exhibition in Brussels was raided by Belgian Customs & Economic Ministry staff, who confiscated equipment on the pretext of investigating whether it breached Belgian arms legislation. The raid was apparently sparked off by court proceedings by the Peace Action Forum, who alleged breaches of arms sales restrictions, and came after the show was compelled to close before time after an earlier ‘inspection’ by officials.

Well, merde alors! This is really going to endear Brussels to military show organisers, isn’t it? If folks there get hot under the collar about a bunch of black boxes, we guess it’s definitely not the place for anything more gutsy. It was Belgium, remember, that wouldn’t help out the UK with ammunition for Desert Storm. Folks are perfectly entitled to demonstrate against arms shows if they feel like it, but when it comes to serious interference on this scale, it is surely getting into the realms of restraint of trade, on which Brussels itself (the EU, in this case) has stern things to say.

THREE GIRLS (SORRY – GUNS!) FOR EVERY GUY

In the process of the British government compiling a National Asset Register (aka Domesday Book 2), a 550-page document detailing property held by all departments, The Guardian says the UK MOD’s data reveals there are three rifles for every soldier in the British army. Before some wag suggests this is probably only an insurance policy against SA80 breakages, we’re sure that – if the figures are correct – a large factor must be force level cuts since 1985 when the 5.56mm systems were introduced.

In addition, there will be substantial war reserves, and we’re not even sure if the 3:1 calculation takes into account the other services & forces – RM, RN, RAF, Territorial Army and MOD Police, all of whom also have SA80. But even if the real figure is (say) nearer 2:1, it does point the finger at another global small arms problem – equipment surpluses thrown up by post-Cold War downsizing. Not only do many importing countries no longer need to buy any more rifles (since they can live off fat in the system), but those who decide to dump their surpluses on the world market create headaches for suppliers of new-build weapons.

Take South Africa, for example, which is trying to dispose of more than 450,000 surplus rifles just now, comprising some 200,000 7.62mm NATO R1s (FALs) and over 250,000 5.56mm R4s (Galil derivatives). We’re told the South African Police R1s are still packed in their original FN factory oiled wrapping, and all the R1s are in either new or exceptionally good used condition. The R4s are used, but in good condition – a bargain at $175 a pop – yet the SA government evidently believes it’s cheaper to sell rather than refurbish them. South African troops & police have already been supplied with new R4s from the country’s stockpiles, described as ‘ample’. If the surpluses cannot be found a new home, it is expected they will be melted down.

UK MOD MEDIUM SUPPORT WEAPON

The UK MOD has a requirement, for a new Medium Support Weapon to replace the 7.62mm NATO GPMG. Ideas being studied range from a new, more durable machine gun right up to 40mm grenade launchers, through .50 HMGs and 20-30mm cannon. The MOD has determined that the MAG 58 (UK – L7A1) GPMG is not robust enough for intensive sustained fire of the sort which was required during the Falklands/Malvinas conflict. However, it seems most likely to us that no single option on the MOD’s list for consideration could provide a sensible solution in every likely scenario, and at the end of the day we suspect two or more different weapons will be required.

At present, the 40mm Mk19 Mod 3 launcher is attracting close attention from the MOD. A few launchers have been in UK Special Forces service since the last Gulf War, and have evidently impressed procurement staff.

MACHINE PISTOLS TO KOSOVO

A brief item in The Times cited an upsurge in deliveries of weapons to ethnic Albanian fighters who’d like to annex the Kosovo region of Serbia. The report mentioned a consignment of machine pistols apparently due to arrive, courtesy of Albanian residents of Germany & Switzerland.

FT BRAGG MOUT FACILITY CANCELLED

According to Army Magazine, one of the items cut from the Sep 97 US defence budget when President Clinton exercised his new powers to delete individual line items was a $7.9m MOUT (urban) training facility at the army’s Fort Bragg special forces base in North Carolina.

NEW MINIMI VARIANT

One of our roving eyes at this years US Army Association show spotted a new Special Purpose Weapon (SPW) variant of the 5.56mm M249 Minimi, reportedly designed for US special forces. We’re told it weighs just 12.6 pounds, with a lighter 16” barrel. Interestingly, it is not provided with any magazine feed option or gas regulator, and has been equipped with Picatinny accessory rails around the barrel in lieu of the handguard, in the style of the Stoner 86 LMG. It also comes with a secondary vertical handgrip and bipod, both detachable.

BUNDESWEHR WILL COMPLETELY RE-EQUIP WITH G36/MG36

Following our Dec 97 story about Mauser’s future small arms study contract from the Bundeswehr, things got even more curious. We queried with Royal Ordnance a National Defence story that (rather oddly) implied there was a caseless ammunition option for the 5.56mm G36. We’d assumed the writer meant (as we also understood) that the G11 caseless project was – to one extent or another – still alive, and that the G36 being issued to rapid reaction forces could therefore possibly be regarded in some German circles as an interim option.

But now it has emerged that the entire Bundeswehr is apparently to be re-equipped with the G36 rifle and MG36 LSW in the period 1999-2005. This is stated by Heckler & Koch in Oberndorf in a reply to Royal Ordnance, and they should know.Though it is acknowledged that some elements of the German MOD R&D community still remain interested in caseless technology, issuing new 5.56mm weapons to the German forces across the board means there is absolutely no early prospect of any resuscitation of the G11 or anything along similar lines.

Indeed, with national small arms replacement programmes typically occurring only once every 25-30 years, by the time a successor to the G36/MG36 is logically sought, even the caseless G11 could be looking extremely long in the tooth, and might well have been obsoleted by other technologies. This also tends to place an even bigger question mark over the value of the Bundeswehr commissioning any long-term future small arms studies, from Mauser or anyone else, in the foreseeable future. The die, as they say, is already cast, and it is simply far too early to be worrying about the rifle after next.

It cannot have escaped readers either that, with quite a few other countries, some in NATO, also only now on the brink of adopting 5.56mm systems, that the US future small arms programme is likewise – speaking entirely objectively – a waste of money. Unless of course the US plans to do what it did with the M16, introducing an entirely new system in a new calibre with complete disregard for what the rest of NATO was doing – or rather not doing – at the time. Let’s not forget that 5.56mm was not actually accepted as a NATO calibre until the early 1980s, with the advent of the Belgian SS109 ammunition – and eventually the M16A2 rifle. The M16A1 by comparison was an entirely non-NATO venture.

In today’s terms, with no single threat to unify NATO – and some would say no other role for the Alliance either – this may matter much less, but, even so, the US Small Arms Master Plan has nevertheless still been adopted by NATO as its own objective, even if there is now no realistic chance of it ever bearing fruit.

AWC Thundertrap .30 Caliber Suppressor

The .30 caliber Thundertrap suppressor from AWC Systems Technology represents a fundamental change in technology that forced me to reevaluate my biases regarding suppressor design for sniper rifles. I’ve long preferred two-point mounts for centerfire rifles for several reasons: (1) they tend to be quieter since they feature a large primary expansion chamber which extends back over the barrel; (2) they tend to be less prone to loosening during prolonged shooting sessions; (3) they tend to provide better accuracy at long range, presumably because they are better at dampening barrel harmonics; and finally (4) they have the potential to provide better alignment with the bores of premium barrels that have excellent concentricity. Nevertheless, the Thundertrap created something of an epiphany for me, and I am now a fan of the single-point mount as manifested by the Thundertrap suppressor from AWC Systems Technology. The virtues of the Thundertrap are manifest: it is half the size of many .30 caliber suppressors with two-point mounts, it provides a very pleasing sound signature, and it provides superior accuracy to an unsuppressed heavy barrel rifle at 600 yards (549 meters). The Thundertrap is an excellent choice for both the armed professional and the serious sportsman.

AWC fabricated the Thundertrap entirely from 304 stainless steel, which is rather unusual in the industry. Manufacturers of stainless steel suppressors commonly use 304 stainless for the tube and 303 bar stock for the other components, because 303 stainless is easier to machine than 304. AWC Systems Technology uses 304 series bar stock because it takes a superior weld. All internal components of the Thundertrap suppressor are welded into place, making this a very robust system. The Thundertrap is 8.5 inches (21.5 cm) long and 1.6 inches (4.0 cm) in diameter. The suppressor evaluated in this study weighs 33.6 ounces (2.1 pounds; 953 grams). While the Thundertrap is commonly used on rifles chambered in .308 Winchester (7.62x51mm), the suppressor also performs well on rifles chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum (no international nomenclature). The suppressor is finished in a matte black powdercoat. Thread pitch of the mount is commonly 9/16×24 TPI, but other threading is available when appropriate.

Remarkably, the internal construction of the Thundertrap is reminiscent of the .22 rimfire Backdraft suppressor also made by AWC. A given baffle technology rarely works well for both low-velocity and high-velocity combustion gases; this represents an exception to the rule. The Thundertrap features seven thick (0.25 inch, 6.4 mm) machined baffles of slanted sidewall type. The slanted sidewall concept was developed at Qual-A-Tec and patented by Charles A. “Mickey” Finn. The slanted sidewall is covered by Finn’s U.S. patent number 4,588,043 as well as by patents in Europe, Australia, and South Africa. Lynn McWilliams licensed this technology when Qual-A-Tec closed its doors in 1990.

The slanted sidewall is a diagonal slot of similar radius to the bullet passage, centered on the bullet passage, that creates a diagonal channel going from one side of the rear surface to the opposing side on the front of the baffle. Each slanted sidewall baffle creates a gas jet to push against the stream of combustion gases following the bullet. The gas jet dumps significantly more energy inside the suppressor than the same number of similarly spaced conventional baffles.

Each Thundertrap baffle incorporates an integral, smooth conical spacer that features a mouse-hole adjacent to the forward edge of the slanted sidewall, which directs its gas jet into the coaxial expansion chamber formed by the spacer. This increases the effectiveness of that chamber. The front end cap, which is welded in place and features a recessed face to reduce weight, features a machined inside surface designed to maximize turbulence in the forward-most suppressor chamber. The primary expansion chamber is the smallest I’ve ever seen. While the first baffle reflects some gas into a small space surrounding the threaded portion of the rear end cap, which is welded in place, this chamber by itself does very little to lower the pressure of expanding combustion gases. The sophisticated nature of this overall design not only works the expanding combustion gases very hard, it also generates a substantial frequency shift in the sound signature. The altered frequency of the suppressed muzzle blast significantly enhances a human’s subjective evaluation of the sound signature. Suppressor cognoscenti are always impressed by the “sweet sound” produced by the Thundertrap.

Contrary to my early biases against two-point mounts for centerfire rifles, using a single-point mount for the Thundertrap was a wise decision. Admittedly, a two-point mount that actually stretches the barrel when tightened against a shoulder in the barrel (like the arrangement used in the Qual-A-Tec M89 suppressor) probably confers an accuracy advantage at 1,000 yards, but few of us work at this range. The single-point mount of the Thundertrap will probably deliver superior accuracy on most factory sniper rifles and some custom rifles over suppressors featuring a two-point mount and a bullet passage of similar diameter to the Thundertrap.

This is because rifles like the Remington PSS and comparable factory rifles without very expensive custom barrels typically have bores with surprisingly and significantly variable concentricity. This increases the likelihood of baffle kiss or baffle strike with a two-point mount unless the barrel is removed and turned between centers, at least as far back as the suppressor will extend. The bores of some factory sniper rifles are so out of true that even this labor-intensive mounting process may not be enough to avoid degraded accuracy.

Remember that a bullet wobbles about its axis when it leaves the bore, since its geometric center is never precisely the same as its center of gravity. A bullet won’t “go to sleep” until well down range. Therefore, suppressor alignment is a critical issue, especially with long bullets and suppressors that have relatively tight bullet passages.

It is important to realize that even many custom rifles can require this extra care of turning between centers, unless barrels of exceptional concentricity are used. Using a single-point mount eliminates the need to turn the last 6-9 inches (15-23 cm) of the barrel to ensure concentricity. Only the threaded portion of the barrel need be concentric. Of course, the shoulder behind the threads still needs to be absolutely perpendicular to the bore. Thus, the portion of the barrel to be threaded should still be trued between centers on a lathe.

Another important point when considering subsonic ammunition is that a boat tail bullet exiting the barrel at subsonic velocity wobbles more than a flat-based bullet. This makes suppressor alignment particularly critical if subsonic ammunition with boat tail bullets will be employed. Furthermore, only flat-based bullets should be used in subsonic rounds employed with suppressors that have a relatively tight bullet passage like the Thundertrap. Boat tail bullets driven at conventional supersonic speeds will work splendidly in the Thundertrap, however.

Whether one is using a single-point or a double-point mount, it is worth noting that a relatively short stiff barrel will generally provide superior accuracy with a suppressor compared to a long barrel. Avoid lightweight sporting barrels when suppressing a centerfire rifle. A stiff barrel common to sniping and varmint rifles of 18-20 inches (46-51 cm) can be expected to provide much better accuracy with a suppressor than the very same barrel left at 24-28 inches (61-71 cm). I prefer a 20 inch barrel for the very slight increase in velocity over a barrel of 18 inches, although the velocity difference is not really important for realistic law-enforcement applications.

The Thundertrap replaced the Spectrum 90 in AWC’s product line. Available for rifles chambered from .22 centerfire to .300 Winchester Magnum, the Spectrum 90 was also fabricated entirely from 304 stainless steels. It was 8.3 inches (20.9 cm) long and 1.6 inches (4.1 cm) in diameter. The Spectrum 90 weighed 26 ounces (720 grams) and was finished in a matte black chrome sulfide. It also featured a single-point mount.

I tested the performance of the Thundertrap using the specific equipment and testing protocol advocated at the end of Chapter 5 in the book Silencer History and Performance, Volume 1 (Paladin Press, P.O. Box 1307, Boulder, CO 80306; 800-392-2400). Testing conformed fully with MIL-STD-1474C. Sound pressure levels (SPLs) were measured 1 meter to the left of the muzzle and represent a mean (average) value of 10 shots. Velocities were measured using a P.A.C.T. MKIII timer/chronograph with MKV skyscreens set 24.0 inches apart and the start screen 8.0 feet from the muzzle (P.A.C.T., P.O. Box 531525, Grand Prairie, TX 75053; phone: 214-641-0049). Velocity data also represent the mean value of ten shots. The Thundertrap was tested with supersonic and subsonic ammunition at 93°F (34°C)

Since few people have an intuitive grasp of decibels, a few comments will help put these sound test data into perspective. Decibels are a logarithmic rather than a linear scale that approximates the response of the human ear much more closely than raw sound pressure levels as measured in Pascals. The threshold of human hearing is 0 decibels, a quiet conversation is about 56 dB, an IBM Selectric II typewriter is 84 dB, a Daisy Red Ryder BB Gun is 101 dB, an integrally suppressed Marlin 780 rifle from Jonathan Arthur Ciener is about 124 dB, a .22 CB is about 131 dB and a standard velocity long rifle is about 137 dB when shot from a bolt-action rifle, hearing damage begins at about 140 decibels, the pain threshold is about 141 decibels, an MP5 is about 157 dB, a .45 pistol is about 162 dB, an M16 is about 165 dB, a 122mm howitzer is about 183 dB, and death of the observer can occur in the neighborhood of 220 dB. Most adults can distinguish a 1 decibel difference between impulse sounds such as suppressed gunshots.

Purists will note that a conversation is continuous (RMS) sound, while the other values are impulse sound. And the body does respond differently to these two types of sound. For example, the pain threshold is commonly 140 dB for RMS sound and 141 dB for impulse sound. But including an RMS value in this series of benchmarks is still appropriate, since there are few impulse sounds in our common experience quieter than a BB gun.

It is important to note that the unsuppressed “sound signatures” (more properly called “sound pressure levels” or SPLs) may differ from test to test. This is because different atmospheric conditions (such as temperature, humidity and altitude) affect the burning characteristics of gunpowder. Even the speed of sound changes with the temperature. Therefore, the unsuppressed weapon signatures are always remeasured each day of testing, as a control or benchmark.

The best way to compare suppressors tested under different conditions is to subtract the suppressed sound signature from the unsuppressed sound signature, to get the AMOUNT of suppression. This more useful number is called the net sound reduction.

Using Federal 168 grain (10.9 gram) .308M JHP 7.62x51mm ammunition through a Remington Model 700 Varmint rifle with 20 inch (51 cm) barrel and 1 turn in 12 inch (30.5cm) rate of twist, the unsuppressed sound signature was 165 decibels and the muzzle velocity was 2,611 fps (796 mps). With the Thundertrap suppressor mounted on the rifle, the SPL dropped to 142 dB, for a net sound reduction of 23 dB. First-round pop was just 2 dB, and the .308M produced a muzzle velocity of 2,690 fps (820 mps). Thus projectile velocity was significantly greater with the suppressor installed, thanks to the pressurized and very small primary expansion chamber, and the relatively tight bullet passage inside the suppressor. This phenomenon is called freebore boost.

The Thundertrap was significantly quieter in an earlier test at 68°F (20°C) which employed the very low-flash Remington 150 grain (9.8 gram) JSP round. Using Remington fodder (which is good but nowhere near as accurate as the Federal .308M match ammunition in my experience), the unsuppressed SPL using a Remington PSS rifle was also 165 dB, but the unsuppressed sound signature was an impressive 138 dB, representing a net sound reduction of 27 dB. In both cases, the Thundertrap generated a substantial frequency shift, so the suppressed sound signature seemed a lot quieter than the numbers suggest. This can has a very pleasing sound for a .30 caliber suppressor using supersonic ammunition.

Using 7.62x51mm 180 grain (11.7 gram) SPT subsonic ammunition from Black Hills Shooters Supply (P.O. Box 4220, Rapid City, SD 57709; 800-289-2506), the Remington Model 700 Varmint rifle produced an unsuppressed sound signature of 157 decibels. When the Thundertrap suppressor was fitted to the rifle, the sound signature dropped to 127 dB, which is the same SPL produced by a factory original MP5 SD chambered for the 9x19mm cartridge. Using Black Hills 7.62x51mm ammo, the Thundertrap delivers an impressive 30 dB net sound reduction. First-round pop with the Black Hills ammo was 3 dB. Muzzle velocity was 1,086 fps (331 mps), and the speed of sound at the time of testing was 1,152 fps (351 mps). The Thundertrap did not generate freebore boost with subsonic ammunition. Figures 1 and 2 compare the external ballistics of the Federal .308M supersonic and Black Hills subsonic ammunition.

This was a very stealthy system with subsonic ammo. Accuracy was somewhat disappointing, however, since the Remington has a relatively slow rate of twist for long subsonic projectiles. A 1 in 8 to 1 in 10 twist rate would probably have provided better accuracy with the Black Hills subsonic ammunition. The Savage Tactical Rifle with its 1 in 10 rate of twist, for example, significantly outperforms the Remington PSS with subsonic ammunition in my experience. The one constant regardless of ammunition or rifle type is that the Thundertrap provides excellent performance with precision tactical and sporting arms of all persuasions.

It would not be an overstatement to say that the Thundertrap suppressor from AWC Systems Technology is an important achievement in the history of suppressor design. It is remarkably quiet to the ear, it actually enhances the accuracy of a good rifle by reducing barrel harmonics, and it seems to cut felt recoil nearly in half. Accuracy can be optimized by shortening factory sniper or varmint rifle barrels to approximately 20 inches, or by using a relatively short, stiff custom barrel. Finally, the Thundertrap features robust construction that is suitable for the most demanding applications of the armed professional or the serious sportsman. The Thundertrap is a classic, and I can recommend it without reservation.

AWC Systems Technology
P.O. Box 41938
Phoenix, AZ 85080-1938
phone 602-780-1050
fax 602-780-2967

The SKS Carbine

As interest in military firearms began to rapidly grow in the U.S. during the early 1980s, prices on popular models of “assault rifles” started to escalate, due mainly to supply and demand. Soon, government bans and new laws raised the prices even further, and created new terms like “pre ban” and “post ban” models. The popular Chinese SKS carbines prices, however, still remained low, primarily due to the seemingly unlimited supply. In the 1990s, with the collapse of Communism in Europe, new sources of SKSs soon emerged. Now formally rare Russian SKSs were available, as well as a limited supply of East German and Yugoslavian guns. These versions of the popular SKS were priced competitively with the prolific Chinese models. Recent laws and restrictions have stopped importation and now prices on these formerly plentiful carbines is rapidly climbing.

In 1990 new laws were enacted by our elected officials that prevented guns from being manufactured or imported if they were equipped with certain “undesirable” features. Some of these features were folding stocks and a bayonet or a bayonet lug. This law of course applied to the bayonet-equipped SKS carbines, placing them in the “dreaded assault rifle” category. All SKS carbines imported after September 1990 could not be equipped with bayonets and no bayonet could be added either. Doing so would be committing a federal crime.

The SKS

Those who served in the Vietnam conflict became familiar with the SKS carbine and its 7.62×39 cartridge long before they were common place in the United States. These carbines (along with AK47s and a proliferation of other combloc weapons) were used by the NVA and Viet Cong against U.S. Troops in Vietnam during the 1960s and 70s. Most of these weapons were of Chinese origin. Some of these SKSs were captured and brought home as war trophies by returning vets. The condition of many of these liberated carbines was rather poor due to exposure to the humid tropical climate of Southeast Asia. The 7.62×39 ammunition for these rifles was practically non existent in the U.S. until the mid 1980s when semiauto AKs and SKSs began to be imported in large quantities from China.

The typical Chinese or Russian SKS weighs 8.8 pounds, and has an overall length of 40.16”. The barrel length is 20.47”. The non-detachable magazine has a 10 round capacity, and was designed to be loaded through the receiver with stripper clips. The standard M43, 7.62×39 cartridge has a full metal jacket with a 123 grain projectile. The velocity reaches 2410 feet per second from the SKS barrel. Barrels are chrome-lined to resist the effects of corrosive primed service ammunition. The front sight is a hooded post, while the rear sight is the tangent type, graduated to 1000 meters.

THE RUSSIAN SKS45

A loose copy of the German assault rifle, the SKS45 carbine was designed in Russia by Sergei Simonov in the early 1940s. The very first limited production of the SKS was in the mid-1940s. The SKS carbines first saw service when they were sent for field testing to the ByeloRussian Front during the latter part of WWII. It was the first rifle produced that was chambered for the 7.62×39 M43 cartridge. The rifle performed satisfactorily under battlefield conditions and was an improvement over the then current Soviet issue semiautomatic rifle, the Tokarev SVT 40. The Tokarev SVT38/40 rifles fired the full power 7.62×54 rimmed Russian round, and was very prone to breakage. The SVT40 was a complicated design, difficult to manufacture. In the years following WWII, the 7.62×39 SKS carbine would eventually be adopted by twenty-one communist influenced nations, and manufactured by six countries. Over four million would be produced.

The conclusion of WWII in Europe ended the need for any new military weapons. In a few short years after the end of WWII, the cold war between the East and West began to heat up. SKS production in the Soviet Union soon resumed, with slight modifications, in 1949. The rifle was only issued as a front line infantry weapon in the Soviet Union for a few years, until it was greatly overshadowed by the adoption of the select fire AK47 assault rifle, which went into production in 1951. The SKS was soon relegated to secondary status, although production would continue for several more years. The SKS had two antiquated features, it was semiautomatic only, and worse, it had a fixed 10 round magazine.

Due to the Soviet’s usual secrecy in their weapons production, it isn’t known for sure exactly what year SKS production concluded in the Soviet Union. Some earlier production models had the year of manufacture stamped in the receiver top cover, along with an arsenal stamp identifying the factory that manufactured the rifle. The top covers were also serial numbered to the rifle. The last year marked in this manner was 1955. It is believed that carbines manufactured after 1955 were only marked on the left side of the receiver with the serial number and a smaller arsenal stamp. The Russians used their Cyrillic alphabet letters in their serial numbers reportably to designate the year of manufacture. Using this system it is believed that there were carbines produced up until 1957.

The SKS was manufactured at two Russian factories, Tula and Izhevsk. Tula arsenal’s stamp consisted of a star with an arrow inside it, This star and the year of manufacture were stamped on the receiver top cover. This was subsequently changed to just a star, stamped on the side of the receiver along with the serial number. The Izhevsk arsenal stamp was a triangle inside a circle, with an arrow inside the triangle. The Tula produced models are the most commonly encountered.

The Russian SKSs were originally finished in a polished, deep blue color. The bolt assemblies and bayonet blades are a flat silver color. Russian SKSs are equipped with a blade style bayonet. Most parts are numbered to the receiver. A hardwood or laminated stock was also serial numbered to the receiver. The stocks on mismatched rebuilds will have the original serial numbers lined out, and the current serial number added. While undergoing the rebuilding process, maintaining matching part numbers apparently wasn’t a priority.

The first Russian SKS carbines were imported into the U.S. in the early 1990s. All of these Russian imports, unlike some of the Chinese guns, were all genuine military surplus. Most of these carbines had been rebuilt and stored as reserve weapons in Russia. A few brand new unissued and unfired carbines were also discovered. Virtually all the Russian guns imported were in very good condition. Along with the Russian guns limited amounts of East German and a very few Yugoslavian models were briefly imported. These latter guns are seldom seen today. The Russian guns, like the Chinese, are equipped with folding bayonets. With the Russian guns however it is legal to retain the bayonet, partially because the Russian guns are on the BATF’s Curio and Relics list!

THE CHINESE TYPE 56 CARBINE

The most common of the SKSs available in the U.S. are the Chinese versions. Importation began in earnest in 1986. It is estimated that over a million were imported. Almost all of the SKS carbines in the United States prior to that time were limited to veteran’s war trophies. All Chinese SKSs were originally equipped with folding bayonets. The early guns had the blade type, the later guns were equipped with the spike version.

The first Chinese SKSs that were being brought into the country were actual military firearms that in most cases were arsenal rebuilt, and had been stored for many years. These carbines were bargain priced and the ammunition was inexpensive as well. For about $200 you could purchase an SKS carbine and a thousand rounds of 7.62×39 ammo. The carbines were so popular that soon the Chinese ran out of surplus guns and began manufacturing SKSs specifically for the U.S. commercial market. All the Chinese SKSs imported were manufactured in government operated weapons factories

U.S. Importers and distributors even began offering special modified Chinese SKS models that would appeal to all types of shooters; Paratrooper models featuring shorter barrel lengths, target models, scoped models, folding stock versions, saddle guns, and other non military variations were available. Accessories of all sorts were being introduced to upgrade or enhance the SKS. A few SKSs were manufactured to accept the AK47 30 round magazines. These were marketed as the “SKS 30” or the “Model D”. Some people thought it quite ironic that the Chinese, who had formerly supplied the North Vietnamese with weapons, were now making money selling them to the very people that they were used against in the Vietnam War.

The Chinese manufacture of the SKS began after the Russians considered the weapon obsolete in 1956. The Chinese nomenclature for the SKS was the Type 56 Carbine, not to be confused with their Type 56 Rifle (The Chinese version of the AK47). For the Chinese, the SKS carbine was easy to manufacture, reliable, and fulfilled their requirements for a military rifle.

Chinese SKSs are finished in a flat black color. The wood on Chinese carbines is a type of hardwood indigenous to China. Original military guns will have the receiver serial number stamped vertically on the stock. A number of maroon colored fiberglass stocks and hand guards were also manufactured for military use in tropical climates, such as Vietnam. Serial numbers are located on the left side of the receiver, along with a manufacturer’s code, usually a number inside of a triangle. A common code on recently imported guns is a number 66. This is the factory code for Norinco, a large exporter of SKS Carbines, AK rifles, and Tokarev pistols. The date of manufacture of Chinese military SKSs is a numerical code in the serial number. Military Type 56 SKSs were manufactured until sometime in the 1970’s.

Early Chinese SKS carbines were identical to their Soviet counterparts. In later production, in an attempt to expedite manufacture, a new style receiver and barrel was adopted. This new barrel was pressed and pinned into the receiver, rather than screwed in like previous versions. The sheet metal receiver AKs also feature this type of barrel installation.

The Chinese took SKS development a step further, and introduced several select-fire versions, the Type 63 and the Type 68. These models featured a 20 or 30 round magazine and adjustable gas regulator. The mode of fire selector is located in front of the trigger guard. Although they are similar in appearance to a common semiauto SKS carbine, they differ internally. One interesting difference is that they feature a rotating bolt much like that in the AK series of rifles. The Type 68 also features a sheetmetal receiver.

EAST GERMAN SKS

The East Germans produced a variation of the SKS known as the Karabiner-S. It is very similar to the Russian gun. It is recognized by its unique stock that has a slot cut in it to retain the sling, much like WWII German K98 rifles. A few other minor differences are the lack of a cleaning or knock out rod stored under the barrel,and the fact that the buttplate is solid, without provisions for storing a cleaning kit. Serial numbers are located on the left side of the receiver. Very few East German SKSs were imported, and they are quite rare today.

YUGOSLAVIAN M59/66

The Yugoslavian version of the SKS is the Type M59/66. It differs from other versions of the SKS in that it has a permanent, barrel mounted grenade launcher, and folding ladder type grenade launcher sight. There is also a gas shutoff valve. A rubber recoil pad is also fitted to the stock. Sights are similar to other SKS models, except they are luminous night sights. The M59/66’s grenade launching attributes bring the weight of this version up to 9.63 pounds. Very few of the Yugoslavian SKSs were imported and they are highly sought after today. They are one of the highest quality manufactured SKSs.

As popular and common as the SKS imports once were, they are now slowly disappearing from the surplus advertising pages and the classified ads. The SKS carbines will never again be as plentiful and inexpensive as they once were.

Are Rumors of the death of the Pattern Room Greatly Exaggerated?

The fate of the British Ministry of Defence (MOD) Pattern Room hangs in the budget balance these days. While it’s fate is still uncertain, pessimists in the United Kingdom already are ringing the death knell for the institution which will be celebrating its 367th anniversary this year.

Begun during the reign of Charles I out of the king’s frustration with the vagaries in small arms manufacturing, the Pattern Room served to standardize and improve design of infantry weapons. All sealed patterns of weapons were housed first at the Tower of London. A wax seal on a sample weapon was the royal sign of approval for that pattern. The sealed pattern represented the standard reference for that particular weapon. It was the monarch’s way of ensuring some level of consistency in firearms manufacturing well before the age of mass production.

Over the centuries the Pattern Room’s mission changed to meet the demands of it’s masters, from king to parliament. A major increase in the collection’s influence in small arms manufacturing in Britain came with the introduction of the American system of manufacturing during the middle of the 19th century. The Pattern Room already had been co-located at the Royal Small Arms Factory at Enfield, in the outskirts of London. About the time the factory introduced the concept of mass production of interchangeable parts, the Pattern Room fell under the direction of the Chief Inspector of Small Arms, responsible for weapons acceptance. Similar to their American counterparts at the Springfield Armory in Massachusetts, weapons inspectors used standard gauges based on sealed patterns from the Pattern Room to verify the quality of weapons coming off the production line. Over time that role changed as production standardization increasingly depended on design drawings in the manufacturing process. With that change came a shift in the Pattern Room’s influence over the design process. The collection of firearms specimens evolved to represent a reference library of materials and documents British arms design engineers turned to for ideas.

Today there are over 11,300 objects in the holdings at Nottingham. Of those, about 8,500 are weapons ranging from automatic pistols to recoilless rifles. They have military firearms dating from the 1800s to the present; everything from machine-guns to anti-aircraft guns. The Pattern Room’s library contains books and manuals for weapons and ammunition from around the world. They also have historical ordnance and procurement records. As a result the Pattern Room is viewed as a primary source of information for weapons designers and historians around the world.

After their resounding victory at the end of the Cold War, some representatives within western governments smelled a peace dividend in the winds of change sweeping across Europe. The resulting higher threat threshold has been accompanied by significant declines in defense budgets. Continuing along the path of its Conservative predecessors, the current Labour government wants to cut defense costs further. Part of that has included a review of the relevance of the Pattern Room in meeting peacekeeping requirements of a new age army in the new world order. As an asset of the Ministry of Defence, the Pattern Room’s collection is funded through the MOD’s Procurement Executive.

The Pattern Room costs the British tax payer approximately £200,000 (US$326,000) each year. That keeps the lights on, pays the rent to Royal Ordnance for use of the secure building within the company’s compound in Nottingham, and buys weapons, books and documents to add to the collection. It pays the salaries of the staff who escort the more than 3,000 visitors coming to the facility and respond to over 1,000 inquiries each year.

A more recent, and perhaps most dramatic, change in management took place after privatization in 1988 when the Royal Small Arms Factory became Royal Ordnance (RO), and a subsidiary of the major arms maker British Aerospace. While the manufacturing responsibilities shifted to the private sector, the Pattern Room remained within the military domain under the Master General of the Ordnance in 1989. Not long after the closing of the Royal Ordnance site in Enfield, the Pattern Room and its collection were relocated to a new building in RO’s facilities in Nottingham.

According to a Ministry of Defence spokesman, the case for the pattern room came under scrutiny at that point. Its primary function as a reference collection of weapons and weapons design documentation had been taken over by events. In November 1997, during “question time” in parliament the current government was asked what its plans were regarding the Pattern Room. The MOD’s response was that there were no plans at that time, since they were in the process of a management review.

While various reorganizations took place over the years, the Pattern Room’s primary mission to support the MOD’s weapons procurement activities saw few changes. During hot wars, designers at the Royal Small Arms factory looked to the collection to view earlier designs. Just as books in a library, the weapons in the Pattern Room represented the recorded knowledge of the past to guide designers away from their predecessors’ pitfalls. As a result of technological advancements leading up to World War I the collection expanded rapidly, a reflection of the many changes in small arms development during that period. The collection doubled in size after World War II, the result of additions from allied stocks and captured Axis weapons. In the Cold War era, the collection served not only weapons designers but military planners. The collection grew to include information and specimens from potential enemy forces in the Warsaw Pact nations. Technical experts from the military branches and intelligence communities could go to the Pattern Room’s collection to learn about weapons their forces might be facing on a future battlefield.

According to government spokesmen, what to do about the Pattern Room remains under investigation, with no specific deadline for an official decision. There is some speculation that a decision will come before the end of the fiscal year in April. Rumors of the demise of the collection were rampant after the Labour government passed the law banning private ownership of handguns. Suggestions that the government intended to smelt the collection were followed with letters of protest and inquiries to the MOD asking for a reprieve and explanations.

After input from members of the user community, the government assured those concerned that the weapons would not be destroyed. Members of the specialist small arms community from around the world familiar with the collection also have protested the idea of disbursing the holdings into the collector community. The bulk of the weapons would have to be sold in the overseas collectors’ market because of gun ownership restrictions in Britain. The resulting Diaspora would end British MOD and intelligence community access to what some have confided is an essential reference source.

For British designers, the weapons in the Pattern Room act as guides in the design process. They search the collection for ideas and solutions to specific problems. “British business will suffer” according to arms designer Mick Colson, if the MOD closes the Pattern Room. As an example Colson said he has looked to the collection for ideas on peripheral devices such as telescopic sights and scope mounts. The Pattern Room represents “a reference library of weapons – in paper and hardware form,” said Colson. “It is important for designers to have access to this worldwide collection because different weapons designs work in different climates and meet different [mission] requirements.” Colson said the Pattern Room’s extensive collection shows “what works, what has worked, and sometimes what doesn’t work. It would be a great shame for it to go away.”

According to Thomas Nelson, author and arms historian who has been visiting the Pattern Room since the 1960’s, this collection is one of the most important in the western world. While Nelson said it does not compare in volume to the collections at the Kremlin in Moscow or the Hermitage in St. Petersburg, the quality of the Pattern Room’s collection and the liberal access afforded researchers gives it its added value. “Hands-on access, being able to take the weapons apart and put them back together, the helpfulness of the staff, all combine to make it probably the most accessible collection for the serious researcher,” said Nelson.

Possibilities for the future of the weapons in the Pattern Room include transferring them to one of the other major military museums in the United Kingdom. The Royal Armories Museum at Leeds has been named as a likely candidate.

The Royal Armouries Museum began its history along side the Pattern Room at the Tower of London, as a collection of specimen weapons in the British military inventory. Over time the Armouries’ mission shifted to that of a traditional arms museum, rather than a working collection in the form of the Pattern Room. Unlike the Pattern Room which supports studies in weapons design as well as historical research, the Royal Armouries concentrates on providing public access to its collection for research in the history of the technology of firearms. Along with their counterparts at the National Army Museum and the Imperial War Museum, curators and trustees at the Royal Armouries have been making known to MOD decision-makers their feelings concerning the future of the Pattern Room’s collection.

They have been lobbying to ensure that whatever the final decision, the MOD makes every effort to keep the collection intact, and preferably in England. One of the senior directors of the Armouries said that “breaking up of the collection, of a resource of that scale, would represent a considerable loss…. It is a case of the whole being worth more than the sum of its parts.” That it holds whole series of weapons in their various stages of development is one of the strongest arguments for keeping the collection intact. He added that the value of the collection lays not only in the number of weapons but in the breadth and variety of its holdings. Disbursing them among various museums around the world would make consultation of the reference materials currently housed at Nottingham difficult if not impossible.

In part because of their close association, at least in their early histories, several have suggested that the Royal Armouries is a natural new home for the Pattern Room’s collection. When asked how it would support such an acquisition, a spokesman pointed to the Armouries’ own tradition of supporting historical research. He said the museum would “seek to have the staff levels to allow public access” in the manner researchers at the Pattern Room have come to expect.

At this point while rumors of the Pattern Room’s eminent demise run rampant, the MOD conducts its management review, and the small arms world waits.

SAR traveled to the FNMI facility in Columbia SC for the “Cook’s tour” of the facility, and the chance to root through the parts pile upstairs while testing out the M249, M240 series, P90 and FiveseveN pistol. George Kontis and Sal Fanelli from FNMI were most helpful, allowing SAR to shoot as much ammo as we wanted. Well, almost. The Mid Carolina Rifle Club graciously allowed us to use their range for the testing. The following article is the first in a series of specific articles on FNMI’s products.

The United States Military’s search for a replacement for the venerable M60 GPMG has been officially over for a short time. We went from the Browning series of .30 caliber guns, to the “Throw-away” .30 caliber M60, added the 5.56 caliber Minimi series, then got serious about the General Purpose Machine Gun role again with the M240 MAG series. Your faithful correspondent has always been a fan of the M60- but that must be kept in context- the M60 was designed as a 100,000 round gun; sheet metal receiver components, issued with a receiver stretch gauge. Door gunners burning 5,000 or 6,000 rounds a day ate that 100,000 rounds up real fast, and tossed the guns out for a new one fairly regularly. In contrast, it is not unusual to hear MAG series gunners speak of “5 million round” MAGs. “5 million round” guns! The M240 series guns in use by the US Military have a rating of 26,000 MRBF. That is “Mean Rounds Between Failures”. On average, the M240 series guns just don’t have problems.

While the weight is significantly more than that of the M60, the robust construction has added to the reliability of the gun. This article is not on the MAG or M240 series weapons- it is about the changes made for the newly adopted M240B model that the US Army has specified and purchased.

The basic changes from the M240G are as follows; the addition of a dust cover over the ejection port, heat shielding hand guards, single rate of fire (750 rpm), and an integrated optical feed cover which allows for scope mounting.

To understand the M240B, it is necessary to take a closer look at the FN MAG-58 series of weapons and how they function. Many times these guns are referred to as “Upside down BAR’s”, and there is some truth in that simile. However, for SAR’s purposes today, we are going to take you through a cycle of the weapon instead of going into the historical roots of the design.

One Cycle:

For purposes of our sanity, we are going to refer to the Piston Assembly as the “Op rod” and the Breech Block as the “Bolt”.

The weapon is properly prepared and maintained, top cover opened, and a belt is placed in the feed tray. (The 7.62 x 51 mm ammunition is linked in either M13 disintegrating links, or the DM1 belt. M13’s are standard M60 GPMG links, DM1 belts are the same as the HK21 uses). The charging handle is pulled to the rear, then returned forward. This leaves the Op rod held to the rear by the sear notch. The recoil spring is compressed.

The trigger is depressed, lowering the sear. The recoil spring drives the Op rod assembly forward, and the feed horns on the bolt contact the lower edge of the cartridge base, moving the cartridge forward out of it’s link. The nose of the bullet is guided down into the chamber on the feed ramp, and the cartridge heads into the chamber.

Before the cartridge is chambered, the concave part of the locking lever contacts the ends of the main front guides on the sides of the body, causing the locking lever to come down into the lock position. The cartridge now reaches the full chamber position, and has the bolt locked solidly behind it. (The extractor has positioned itself over the rim of the cartridge as the cartridge “Bottoms out” in the chamber). Forward motion of the bolt has stopped.

M240B Field Strip:

←

One of the changes from the 240 G to the 240B is the addition of a dust cover on the ejection port. While not found necessary by NATO, this is a good, sound design addition.

→

(Left to Right) Early MAG58 feed tray, transitional feed tray, newest version of the M240B or G feed tray

←

(Top to bottom) FNMI has added an additional sear notch, to prevent a “Runaway” gun. The M240B and G both use this new sear. Similar to the M60E3 op rod, which FNMI claims to be a copy of their idea, the difference between the 240G (Top) and 240B (Bottom) Op rods is in the next photo. (Bottom two photos) These illustrate the sear in the proper position, and in the emergency position where the op rod has not recoiled enough to engage the proper sear position and is caught by the secondary one.

↑

The new blank firing adapter (BFA) assembly for the M240 series has the ability to be used for right or left hand feed according to the host gun. The barrel restrictor attaches to the flash hider, and the feed tray restrictor shortens the tray for standard 7.62 NATO blanks. Installing the feed tray restrictor must be done properly, or the feed ramp extension will not help guide the blanks into the chamber.

The Op rod continues forward and drives the firing pin into the primer. Forward motion of the Op rod is stopped when the forward face is seated on the gas cylinder. It should be obvious by now that the firing pin can not go forward until the bolt is firmly locked against the lugs on the receiver.

Once the cartridge has been fired (We are not going into the physics of the expanding propellant gases), the bullet proceeds down the barrel. As it passes the gas vent on the forward section of the barrel, gas is bled off into the gas regulator, then into the gas cylinder. This system is pressurized for the time remaining that the bullet is in the barrel until it exits the muzzle. The pressure is relieved as it drives the Op rod backwards.

The Op rod’s backward motion relieves the pressure on the firing pin, and activates the link, pulling the locking lever up away from the locking lugs. This cams the bolt to the rear at a much slower rate than would be expected, allowing the extractor to reliably start pulling the cartridge out of the chamber. This slow rate makes for a very reliable extraction process. It is referred to as “Primary extraction” and is one of the major selling features of the MAG series of machine guns.

As the Op rod continues it’s rearward motion, the bolt is completely unlocked and the mass of the Op rod and bolt continue to recoil as one. The cartridge base, held by the extractor, strikes the ejector and the spent case exits the receiver to the bottom. The Op rod assembly continues to the rear, compressing the recoil spring, then strikes the buffer in the buttstock face.

At this point, if the trigger is still depressed, the cycle repeats itself, or if the trigger has been released, the sear catches in the sear notch on the Op rod and the weapon is ready to fire at will.

To understand the M240B, it is necessary to take a closer look at the FN MAG-58 series of weapons and how they function. Many times these guns are referred to as “Upside down BAR’s”, and there is some truth in that simile. However, for SAR’s purposes today, we are going to take you through a cycle of the weapon instead of going into the historical roots of the design.

In 1993, a mysterious new assault rifle appeared at an arms display at the elite Taman Guards Division outside Moscow. The strange new rifle was displayed alongside the common AK-74 assault rifles and RPK-74 light machine guns which made up the standard armament of the Taman Guards division and was labeled “ASN”- a Russian acronym for Avtomat Spetsialnyi Nikonov. The soldiers at the show could give no meaningful information about the rifle beyond the basic information on the placard on the table above the rifle. Shortly thereafter, data began to emerge regarding the ASN, indicating that it was an advanced combat rifle in the true sense of the word, but its status remained a mystery. The Russian Ministry of Defense recently cleared up the mystery, however, by announcing that the ASN had passed all its troop trials with flying colors and that it had been type classified as the Avtomat Nikonova-94 (AN-94). The number “94” indicates the year that the rifle was officially type classified and adopted for military service to replace the AK-47/AKM/AK-74 series rifles.

The genesis of the AN-94 actually begins with the adoption of the AK-74 by the Soviet military over twenty years ago. At the time, the 5.45x39mm cartridge of the AK-74 was a tacit acknowledgment by the Soviet military of the effectiveness of high-velocity small-caliber projectiles at normal battlefield ranges which had been proven by the American M16A1. The 5.45x39mm round was derived from the M1943 7.62x39mm cartridge. While the 5.45mm’s terminal effects were sufficiently lethal to earn it the nickname “The Poison Bullet” by Mujahideen in Afghanistan, the Soviet military was not completely satisfied by the overall performance of the AK-74. The military probably realized that the AK-74 effectively represented the end of the practical development life of the Kalashnikov assault rifle design and that a new rifle would be required by the turn of the century. The primary requirement for this new rifle was that it achieve a probability of hit (or effectiveness) of 1.5 to 2.0 times that of the AK-74. The military also apparently felt that a reduction in recoil was necessary in order to improve hit probability. The AK-74 reduced recoil in comparison to the older 7.62x39mm AK-47’s and AKM’s, but the recoil reduction was due only to the ammunition change and , to a lesser extent, the compensator/flash suppressor design, and was considered inadequate. Accordingly, a program was initiated to develop a new advanced technology assault rifle to replace all of the venerable Kalashnikov family. In addition to greater effectiveness and reduced recoil, the new rifle would also have to meet stringent reliability requirements.

The development program was nicknamed “Abakan,” for a village in Siberia where testing of candidate weapons was conducted. This led to the AN-94 being misnamed “Abakan” when prototypes were first observed in the hands of Russian troops several years ago. “Abakan” was used by the Russians to generically refer to rifles being evaluated under the development program. Subsequently, it was determined that the actual designation of the pre-production AN-94 was Automat Spetsialnyi Nikonova, or ASN. According to Gennady Nikonov, designer of the AN-94, every official Soviet firearms designer submitted a candidate rifle for consideration and no less than eight different rifles were tested during the development program before the ASN was type classified as the AN-94. Interestingly, when queried about the rifle in 1992, the usually plain-spoken Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov refused to comment on the ASN. He was quoted as saying, “I don’t feel I am entitled to give an assessment of the new product.” Kalashnikov went on to say that his son Viktor had a design in the Abakan Competition, hence his reluctance to comment. It is now clear that the Kalashnikov design was an “also ran” in the competition, especially given persistent rumors of protests by Kalashnikov regarding type classification of the AN-94.

The AN-94 assault rifle is in pre-production status at the Izhevsk Machine Factory (Izmash joint Stock Company) and it is a complete departure from earlier Soviet/Russian small arms designs. Lack of money and, probably, Kalashnikov’s protestations prevent the rifle from entering into full production as of this writing (Jan. 1998), but according to authoritative Russian sources the AN-94 will eventually replace the AK-series in Russian service. The AN-94 can be viewed essentially as the Russian counterpart of the American Advanced Combat Rifle or Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW), as it is a complete departure from any rifle ever developed by the Soviet/Russian firearms industry and represents a significant improvement in performance over the Kalashnikov designs that it will eventually replace.

The AN-94 has appeared on an irregular basis at arms shows and unit weapons displays inside Russia, but unlike virtually every other Russian infantry weapon, the AN-94 at the moment is emphatically not for sale to foreign buyers, per Russian sources. If the Russian military holds true to past practices, the AN-94 will first be issued to elite divisions such as the Taman Guards Division, where rifles undergoing troop trials were first observed. The RPK-74 will probably remain in service, at least until a light machine gun version of the AN-94 is developed.

It is possible that the Kalashnikov-derived 6×49 mm rifle and machine gun that have been shown by TsNIITochmash for potential joint production at numerous international arms shows were one of the losers in the Abakan Competition. The TsNIITochmash design loss was probably due to the fact that the claimed performance improvements over current Kalashnikov weapons was no better than the AN-94. While the Kalashnikov derivatives are based on the existing weapons, thus minimizing training, they would have made a tremendous, probably unacceptable, demand on a logistics system which already has three rifle and light/medium machine gun calibers. The advantage of the AN-94 over the Kalashnikov designs is that it achieves the same or better performance while simplifying logistics by using existing ammunition, not to mention claimed increases in AN-94 reliability over the Kalashnikov rifles. Moreover, the capabilities and overall design of the AN-94 indicate a change in Russian small arms tactical thinking. This will presently be elaborated upon.

The construction methods of the AN-94 were likely another reason for its adoption over the Kalashnikov design. Unlike the Kalashnikov weapons, the AN-94 employs modern manufacturing techniques. The rifle’s furniture is all made of polymer, as is that of the AK-100 family, but there the similarity to the Kalashnikov ends. What appears to be a gas tube beneath the barrel of the AN-94 is actually a fixed rod extending from the stock which incorporates a guide for the rifle’s firing unit (barrel/receiver assembly) at the front and a dual-purpose stud at its center. One purpose of the stud is to stabilize the rifle when on full-automatic fire. The barrel and guide rod tend to resonate on full-automatic and the stud adds weight to dampen the oscillation. The stud also prevents the rifle from sliding back and forth when it is locked into the firing port of a BMP. The AN-94 gas cylinder is located above the barrel underneath the handguard and is quite short. The reason for this will become clear as we describe the rifle’s functioning. The entire operating mechanism of the AN-94 is placed inside the stock, which is referred to in Russian documentation as a “carrier-stock.” The reason for this is the fact that the barrel and receiver are integrated into a firing unit which reciprocates on guide rails inside the stock. The bolt carrier and bolt are carried by and operate inside the rifle’s internal receiver. The AN-94 has two internal buffers, one in the forearm and another at the rear of the receiver. The forearm buffer not only absorbs shock, but accelerates return travel of the firing unit as it moves forward in counterrecoil. The rear buffer boosts forward acceleration of the bolt carrier besides preventing the receiver/firing unit from striking the rear of the stock as it recoils.

One of the key principles of the AN-94’s operation is what has been referred to as a “blow-back shifted pulse,” or BBSP. This relates to the fact that the receiver and barrel assembly reciprocate independently from the bolt and its carrier, although the latter reciprocate in the receiver. A simplified functional explanation of the two-round burst feature will clarify the BBSP principle. When the first round is fired, the entire barrel/receiver assembly begins moving to the rear, taking the bolt carrier with it and compressing the forward buffer. As the bullet passes the gas port, gas is bled off into the gas cylinder, driving the bolt carrier to the rear, thus unlocking the bolt, extracting and ejecting the spent case. The bolt carrier is moving much faster than the barrel/receiver assembly and impacts against the rear buffer, which in conjunction with the return spring propels it forward, temporarily inactivating the sear while stripping a fresh round from the magazine and chambering it. As the bolt locks, the sear is released and the second round is fired before the receiver completes its rearward motion. The bolt carrier and hammer begin their next cycle. In essence, the first two bullets have left the barrel of the rifle while the receiver is still moving to the rear and has not had a chance to impact the rear buffer. As can be seen, the AN-94 is therefore both recoil and gas-operated. While the blow back shifted pulse principle is not all that makes the AN-94 unique, it is the central principle that makes the dual cyclic rate possible.

According to Russian sources, the AN-94 is disassembled by “traditional methods,” but reliability and maintenance is greatly improved over the AK- series of weapons by the aforementioned use of modern materials and production processes. It is difficult to imagine that AK reliability could be improved upon to any degree, but the Russians claim that the AN-94’s mean rounds between failure is 40,000 rounds, a 150 per cent improvement over the AK-74! Despite improvements over earlier weapons, the Russian firearms industry lags behind the West in terms of computer numerical controlled (CNC) machinery, and it is unlikely that Izmash uses this production methodology to any great degree in manufacturing the AN-94.

The functioning of the AN-94 is unique. As previously mentioned, the AN-94 has a two-round burst fire capability, along with fully automatic fire with a dual cyclic rate, due to the blow back shifted pulse system, a new operating principle which incorporates both gas and recoil operation. The BBSP system has been described in detail elsewhere. The 1,800 rpm
burst is obtained each time the rifle’s trigger is squeezed in full-automatic mode. This rate is so fast that the first two rounds have left the barrel before the rifle begins to recoil in the shooter’s hands. The rifle automatically cycles down to 600 rpm after the first two rounds are fired. To say that the AN-94 is different is an understatement. Not only is the functioning unique, but so is the method of achieving it.

The AN-94’s functioning can best be described and understood in terms of the small arms cycle of operation. It is difficult to describe a unique firearm without having examined it. The technical description of the AN-94 which follows is based solely on data provided courtesy of Izmash Joint Stock Company, not upon actual examination of an AN-94. It is based on the judgment of the authors and is subject to change. Due to length considerations, we will focus on automatic operation of the AN-94, as this captures the essence of its uniqueness.

To fire on full auutomatic, the safety is set on “O,” or “ogon” (“Fire” in Russian.) and the selector is set to “AB,” an abbreviation for “avtomaticheskiy,” or “automatic.” This shifts the disintegrator into contact with one of the shoulders of the trigger plate. The operator pulls the charging handle to the rear. As this is happening, a “special mechanism” carries out
an operation called preliminary feeding, in which a round is apparently removed from the magazine without being chambered. (As this is written, the exact nature of the “special mechanism” and the “preliminary feeding” itself are unclear.) Upon release of the charging handle, pressure of the return spring and rear buffer drive the bolt carrier and bolt forward, ramming the cartridge into the chamber. This operation is repeated every time the operating mechanism of the rifle cycles.

FIRST ROUND

FIRING, FIRST ROUND: Pulling the trigger moves the trigger plate on its axis, releasing the sear, which in turn releases the striker. The striker moves forward under the pressure of its spring, strikes the firing pin and fires the cartridge.

UNLOCKING, FIRST ROUND: Driven by recoil, the barrel/receiver assembly (firing unit) move to the rear on guide rail(s) inside the carrier-stock and begin to compress the forward buffer spring. The bullet passes the gas port, allowing gas to enter the gas cylinder, pressing the gas piston, thereby driving the bolt carrier and bolt to the rear. The bolt is cammed by the
rearward moving carrier to turn and unlock from the barrel extension. It should be noted that the entire barrel/receiver unit is moving to the rear as this function is taking place.

EXTRACTING,FIRST ROUND: As the bolt continues to the rear, it pulls the spent cartridge case from the chamber.

EJECTING, FIRST ROUND: As the spent cartridge case clears the base of the chamber, it is thrown out the ejection port.

SECOND ROUND

FEEDING, CHAMBERING AND LOCKING: As the bolt carrier and striker reach their rearmost position, the return spring and rear buffer press them back forward to feed, chamber and lock the weapon for the second shot. The barrel/receiver unit is still moving to the rear. Since the unit is farther to the rear than when the first shot was fed and fired, the second cartridge has a shorter distance to travel from the magazine to the chamber, thereby assisting in the high rate of fire. This action is assisted by the “special mechanism” that pre-feeds
each cartridge as the bolt carrier moves to the rear. As the barrel/receiver unit moved to the rear, the sear was temporarily deactivated and the striker was thereby allowed to impinge on the firing pin, thus firing the second shot. Whether the hammer/striker follows the bolt forward or presses on the firing pin as the bolt locks is not clear as this is written. The second round fires while the barrel/receiver assembly is still moving to the rear. The bolt carrier and bolt begin to move rearward driven by gas from the second cartridge. The sear is retained by the trigger plate. The “disintegrator” and trigger plate return to their original positions. The rear buffer and return spring drive the bolt carrier back forward, ramming a pre-loaded round into the chamber. The barrel/receiver unit is driven forward by the buffers and a return spring.

The Russians claim that the probability of a first round hit by the AN-94 is 1.5 to 1.7 times better than that of an AK-74 by actual troop testing in combat units. Russian sources have also stated that the overall efficiency of the AN-94 is “twice that of the AK-74 and fifty per cent greater than the American M16.” Whether the Russian who made this statement was alluding to the M16A1 or M16A2 is not known, but presumably the reference was to the M16A1, as the M16A2 is significantly improved in terms of general performance over its predecessor. Regardless, it is clear that the AN-94 has achieved the design requirements established by the Russian military.

The AN-94 apparently is equipped with optical sights as standard. These are the familiar 1L29 4x optical sights which have been used on the AK-74, RPK-74 and PKM weapons for several years. The AN-94 also has unique “iron” sights. The rear adjustable peep sight is a “wheel” canted slightly to the right of horizontal with apertures at different elevations for adjusting aimed fire. According to Russian sources, the AN-94 is sighted out to 1,000 meters, but the increments of adjustment of the iron sights are not known as of this writing and 1,000 meter accuracy with the light 5.45mm bullet is questionable. This “canted drum” arrangement is similar to that used by Heckler & Koch, but appears to be easier to use. Each aperture is clearly marked on top with its sighted range and a quick twist by the rifleman allows him to change his range almost instantly, even with gloves or trigger-finger mittens, unlike Western rifles which must be laboriously adjusted in order to make a change in sighted range. While the AN-94 sights do not allow for precise changes like those of, e.g. the M16A2, they appear to be well-suited for the quick adjustments necessary for accurate combat firing.

In addition to using the same optical sights as earlier weapons, the AN-94 also accepts the familiar GP-25 40mm underbarrel grenade launcher. The AN-94 bayonet is similar to earlier designs, and may well fit older rifles, but the blade design is somewhat different than that of Kalashnikov rifles. AN-94 bayonets that have been observed lack the “sawback” feature of older designs and the point is apparently nearly symmetrical while retaining the wire – cutting capability of earlier bayonets.

The AN-94 probably reflects a change in Russian infantry tactical thinking. There are a number of design features on the rifle that support this notion. First, the rifle’s selector switch goes first from “safe” to “semi, “ indicating that “semi” is the preferred firing position, the best for achieving accurate aimed fire. All AK-series rifles go from “safe” first to “full auto,” because massed automatic fire was paramount in Soviet small arms tactics at the time of the rifle’s design in the late 1940’s. Accurate aimed fire was a secondary consideration. The sights of the AN-94 are another indicator that the AN-94 is a new departure in Russian small arms thinking. Unlike the rudimentary iron sights of all AK rifles, the AN-94 rifle features a fairly sophisticated system of iron “peep” sights which allow for quick changes in battlesight range. Moreover, the 1,800 round per minute two round burst feature of the AN-94 is stated by Russian sources to be specifically intended to raise the probability of hit and to increase the effective range of the rifle. These requirements are the antithesis of fully automatic massed fire which achieves hits by sheer numbers of rounds fired towards the target.

In sum, Gennady Nikonov has apparently developed a thoroughly modern replacement for the venerable Kalashnikov series of assault rifles which have dominated not only Soviet/Russian, but the world’s military small arms market for nearly 50 years. There are other significant military rifles, but none can compare with the Kalashnikov series, with some 50 million AK-47’s, AKM’s and AK-74’s manufactured since 1947. It now seems, however, that Mikhail Kalashnikov’s landmark design has finally been overcome by modern technology. The Russians have wisely chosen to begin replacing the Kalashnikov rifles in their own military while the AK’s are still serving satisfactorily. Even so, the latest versions of the Kalashnikov assault rifles, the AK-100 series, chambered not only in 7.62x39mm, 5.45x39mm, but in 5.56x45mm NATO, and produced with the latest phenolic furniture and the same optical sights as the ASN, will ensure the presence of Kalashnikov assault rifles on the world’s battlefields for many years to come.

“Simpler is better”, someone once said, and for the fall match we took that advice to heart. Seventy steel targets divided up over six strings at distances from forty to seventy feet. Only four no shoots on the whole field. The strings would be addressed from the three basic shooting positions, standing, kneeling and prone. Just one small catch, three of the strings would be shot from the left hand only, but that’s OK. The remaining three are shot right hand only.

Welcome to our version of “Lefty’s Revenge”, the fall 97 KCR open subgun match. What the shooters faced were two stages with three shooting positions placed back to back on the range. Each one started the shooter on the standing string at the ready. On the signal they would engage the targets through the doorway in front of them, ten “shoot” steel targets, with only one steel “no shoot” obstructing a dead-on pepper popper. Then forty feet to the shooter’s gun side on either stage was the next challenge, the kneeling string. Here, more targets, and a little further out, but only one “no shoot” to work around again. Although the right hand string had a target partially obstructed by a post, it was still a relatively clean field. Finally, forty more feet to the gun side to the last string, prone. Here throwing lead at the steel bad guys through a window in the bottom of a low wall, not a “no shoot” in sight, just steel. The shooter’s time for the stage would stop on the last shot. Fast, clean and simple, until you got to actually shooting it.

Jon Wollishin and Ed made sure that there would be sufficient awkward shots on both stages. The left hand prone string had one target on a post high enough to get nicknamed Jon’s birdhouse. This one really put the monopod (extended mag) users at a disadvantage. Either stage could be shot first, shooter’s choice. Most elected to shoot the right hand stage first. The difference between the stages as far as the arrangement of targets was minimal, beyond the two aforementioned uniquely placed targets. The difference in the time required was impressive. It ran up to seven additional seconds, Malcomb Davis in open class with clean runs back to back, right on out to DNF due to out of ammo. The match itself ran super smooth, which is good because with an all left hand stage in the mix “the weird” dial is really cranked.

Mother nature took pity on the shooters and delivered the nicest weather we have had for a shoot in years. Clear, with lots of sun and temps in the mid seventies and low eighties, (oh yeah). Registration and sign up were another walk in the park, thanks to John Butterfield and Dave Scofield gunning that end. Tony Gooch provided a Big tent to anchor the matches, then worked all day on registration and every other conceivable task that arose. Many thanks from all involved, Mr. Gooch. The NFA bowling pin shoot was running on that other end of the range. Dick Lengler and his team kept the waiting shooters entertained, and for those who had shot the course, somewhere to relieve frustration. Begun at the “crash and burn” that was the MGN Tenth Anniversary Shoot, the pin match has become a permanent event at the Creek. A great place to compete a little if the regular match seems like too deep water. It’s a good place to bring a friend to let them try tossing lead with a subgun just for fun, or to warm up your gun before the main event. We are certain that a lot of people are going to get their first taste of subgunning events… The bowling pin match has another positive benefit. It is a fund raising event for the National Firearms Association, and if ever an organization deserved support it’s the NFA. Aside from being the organizational and logistical foundation from which all these great subgun matches we have been putting on arise, the NFA is one of the few organizations that is promoting class three ownership.

The match got off on time, (a good sign), and stayed on course all day thanks to the dedicated team of range officers. The right-hand string ran consistently faster than the left, both on time required to shoot and to score. What may have contributed to the left side’s longer shoot time could have been some of the “left prone” contortions displayed addressing Jon’s Birdhouse. Over your shoulder to the left and up. Eesh! what a place for a target. But a lot of people picked out the trick, a roll onto the right shoulder, the right arm being still grounded. Or they did it the hard way, with exceptional skill, or just threw large amounts of hot lead at it. They all work. The first eight places in open class were clean runs. Tom Carpenter was a couple of seconds faster on each stage to take first over Malcomb Davis. The TASK M11 also made a good showing in open class. Talk about turning a sow’s ear into a what? The classic shooters weren’t quite as clean either but boy they had fun. Class Winner Fred Watkins would like to extend his thanks to Joe Carrer for not showing up and allowing him to win. Fred, you’re too humble. The big story here was the Swedish Ks. Seven out of the top ten finishers were packing them. After the 97 NFA National Championship Match the big Swedes are bumped up to open class. I’m not sure what else we are going to do yet. Right now we’re considering having the Swede gun shooters start from say, the snack bar? OK, how about the porta can? Well we have to do something, they’re having too much fun with those things. Second place classic shooter Mark Brumet had a story of his own when he shot the course for Tavis Bellow who was sidelined with a broken arm. Classic score sheets resembled open class only with more stage time, about the same amount of penalties though.

Towards early afternoon, when the after lunch malaise started to affect the target setters, some of the shooters jumped in to keep the pace going. The Patriot Sales team put one of their aspiring shooters to work setting targets. If this lad ends up being as good a shooter as a worker there may be another national champ in the making. Looking towards the rising stars, the woman’s class was a blow out. Dueling sisters, Lorcita Gilpin took first, beating out sis with a nearly clean run, getting bitten by the peek-a-boo target on the right hand kneeling string. Lorcita took up subgunning through her sister a little over a year ago. Lisa insists the rematch will be different. Lynn Obeu wisely stayed out of the family thing and ran a clean run to third. Without a doubt this was one of the most fun matches we have had, Part of the blame also lies with Larry Beazley, who builds BEAST targets, for providing us with the new subgun capable pepper poppers and swinging silhouettes. Please thank him with your patronage when you see him at Knob Creek or many of the Midwest gun shows for supporting our sport. He makes a very good product at a fair price. Speaking of sport, want to go for a walk in the woods with your favorite lead flinger? How about hunting “steel space weirdoes”?? The Spring ’98 match will be just that, plus the NFA Bowling Pin Match, we’ll see you at the creek.

Open Class

1- Tom Carpenter, 77.70 MP-5
2- Malcomb Davis, 81.95 MP-5
3- Larry Banks, 88.03 MP-5
4- Jeff Hollifield, 89.52 MP-5
5- Rick Hill, 92.07 MP-5 suppressed
6- M.G. Sawyer, 96.79 Task M-11
7- Eric Graetz, 98.71 M-11
8- Jim Greene, 107.71 MP-5
10- Fred Watkins, 122.5 MP-5

Classic Class

1- Fred Watkins, 140.30 Port Said
2- Mark Brumit, 141.39 Port Said
3- M.G. Sawyer, 158.40 Swedish K
4- Steve Murray, 185.22 Swedish K
5- Ed Varner, 197.55 MP-40
6- Dan Paulmer, 202.16 Swedish K
7- Ron Davison, 203.31 Thompson
9- Gary Loflin, 224.71 Swedish K
10- William Ehringer, 255.95 Swedish K

Top Woman

1- Loricia Gilpin, 340.10 MP-5
2- Lisa Sparks, 528.47 MP5SD
3- Lynn Oberu, 520.82 MP-5