The new Gemtech Quicksand sound suppressor, now available for purchase, is used on 7.62 NATO rifles and utilizes a patented quick mount system. It can be fastened securely in only two seconds and at only 17.5 ounces in weight it is the lightest quick-detach .308 suppressor available.

Modeled after the popular Gemtech Sandstorm, the Quicksand is manufactured to be as effective as it is light. It also adds the feature of a Quick Mount. Using an entirely new baffle design, just like the Sandstorm, the Quicksand sound suppressor is manufactured from corrosion resistant Titanium, providing a light package that is stronger than steel and tuned to maximum efficiency. The lightweight construction is not only attractive when working in environments where extra ounces translate into a much heavier burden, but Titanium also cools much faster than many other materials and has far less impact on point-of-impact shift from changing barrel harmonics.

While one attractive feature of the Quick Mount is the speed and accuracy of the attachment method, it is equally interesting that it is “backwards compatible” with the older HVT and TPRS mounts and allows a duel-use with the G5 mount for use with the Gemtech 5.56mm series of silencers. This gives the user a great amount of usefulness and continues to increase the versatility of the suppressor.

Live Fire

The base rifle chosen to test the Gemtech Quicksand was a DPMS LR-308. This rifle is an accurate platform and has performed very well under numerous testing conditions. The free-floating barrel of the test rifle is 16 inches in length, with an M4 profile. The rifling rate is 1 turn in 10 inches. The flattop upper receiver provides a suitable base for almost any mounting option. The magazine design of the DPMS LR-308 rifle is based on the early, original ArmaLite magazine design, and this has been adopted by several other manufacturers including POF-USA. There is a great selection of available magazines ranging in size from 5-rounds to 25-rounds and MAGPUL is even making a .308 version of their wildly popular PMAG in this design.

Ammunition being utilized in this testing included Lake City Special Ball and Wolf Performance Ammunition Gold. Optics for this test would be an IOR Valdata fixed 4x scope.

After an initial sighting-in period, the first order of business was to collect muzzle velocity measurements. This was repeated with each load – suppressed as well as unsuppressed – using the Vortex-style flash hider that is built into the Gemtech Quick Mount. It is important to note that due to the design of the Quick Mount, the suppressor can only mount on a single way. This is a great design step above earlier 3-lug mounts and some other commercial mounts that allow mounting in numerous positions. Since the Quick Mount only allows mounting one way, the repeatability of critical shot placement when taking the suppressor off and remounting it is held to the highest standard possible. As anyone who shoots an accurate rifle combined with a suppressor knows well, any variable, such as mounting the suppressor in a different position, has the potential to affect the point of impact greatly. The design of the Gemtech Quick Mount takes this potential for error out of the equation with their design.

The suppressor had a surprisingly low impact on the muzzle velocity (MV). We conducted the majority of our tests with 150-grain SP Wolf Gold and 173-grain Lake City M118 Special Ball. The complete information is included in the accompanying chart but in summary the average muzzle velocity from the 16-inch DPMS AP4 barrel with the Lake City was 2,496 feet per second (fps) unsuppressed and 2,500 fps suppressed. The Wolf Gold averaged 2,680 fps with no suppressor and 2,668 through the Quicksand. An interesting note may be the continuity of all ammo fired through the Quicksand Suppressor. While the overall change was not significant, the extreme spread of all ammo was decreased greatly while the suppressor was in use.

The repeatability of the suppressor was tested with great results. Testing was performed in the following manor; a string of 10 rounds was fired and the suppressor was removed. This was followed by another string of 10 rounds and the suppressor reattached. This was carried out 2 times per test so we would eventually end up with 4 groups of 10 rounds each. The return to zero was absolute each time so it actually ended up being 2 groups of 20 rounds each, one suppressed and the other unsuppressed. The deviation was a slight point of impact (POI) shift of approximately 2 inches at 100 yards, and repeatable. The Lake City Special Ball ammo performed the best in the accuracy phase although the Wolf Gold was much more consistent in muzzle velocity.

An interesting side note on ammo selection is that the Wolf Gold ran well in the stock 16-inch unsuppressed configuration, but we experienced some trouble while using the suppressor. A few rounds had trouble extracting and actually blew out primers. No other ammunition in any configuration exhibited this activity.

Summary

The Gemtech Quicksand is a very desirable suppressor. The extremely light weight of the 17.5-ounce system caused everyone who handled it to verify that it was actually a .308 can. All shooters testing this combination had fired numerous 7.62 suppressors in the past and all were impressed with the feel and sound signature of the Quicksand as well. The firearm no longer exhibits that “nose heavy” feeling common with many other sound suppressors, making initial and follow-up shots very fast, especially when engaging multiple targets. Although Gemtech claims an average decibel reduction of 32Db, the “tone” of the Titanium suppressor seems “softer” to the ear. This seems to be a standard observation as this writer recently tested the Gemtech 5.56x45mm TREK and TREK-T series sound suppressors and the same result was noted with the Titanium model in that caliber as well. All ammo fired was traveling well over 2,400 feet per second at 8 feet from the muzzle and none was the least bit uncomfortable without hearing protection of any kind as it was well below the threshold of discomfort.

The Quick Mount mounting system is a big advantage for a number of reasons – the most obvious is in the performance. Since it is a Bi-Lock system with 2 different size lugs there is only one way it can mount. This is beneficial for repeated accuracy when mounting since it will always end up with the same orientation. When the suppressor is attached it is pushed onto the mount, rotated and released. It is under spring tension which applies pressure to the front when released giving it a positive position lock the operator can actually feel. When locked in place it is not possible to shift or rotate; thus maintaining position for accuracy and retention. In the rare occurrence when the suppressor is not desired for use, the mount doubles as an effective Vortex-style flash hider/muzzle brake. Also, the threads are protected and never exposed at any time once the mount is secured.

The ability to use the Quicksand with a Gemtech G5 mount allows the owner to utilize it on a 5.56x45mm (.223) platform when desired is a positive aspect as well. While it has always been “possible” to use a 7.62mm suppressor on a 5.56mm platform, either the necessity of a thread adapter to fit, or the excessive size and weight of the 7.62mm designs didn’t make it “practical.” The Quicksand provides a solution to both situations with the mounting system and light weight of the system. The MSRP on the Quicksand is $1,400.

Gemtech Quicksand

“My favorite is the .50 cal. The brainchild of John Browning is a beast of a weapon but it’s so simple and it’s been around for nearly a hundred years. That’s amazing to me. The M240 has quickly climbed that list. It seems like they took the M60 and said how can we simplify this and make it easier for the average guy to get behind this weapon and do well with it. And I think that’s what the 240’s turned into.” Petty Officer First Class Tim Caldwell, CSWI Course Student

Range 14, MCB Quantico, VA – 15 March 2007

PO1 Caldwell, a straight talking 41 year old Master-at-Arms Navy Reservist, was responding to a question we like to ask gun guys everywhere we go. He answered without hesitation and few would dispute his observation about Browning’s .50 caliber masterpiece, prototyped in 1918 and still going strong today.

Further discussion followed, of course, and the seven year veteran, a police officer in civilian life, was intrigued to learn that the M240 of his growing esteem was a direct descendent of other Browning designs.

Rarely hesitant to conduct a short course in firearms history, we explained that it was born in Belgium in the late 1950s at Fabrique Nationale, European licensee for all of John Browning’s designs. The FN MAG 58’s boxy, riveted, heavy steel receiver is common to Browning’s .50 and .30 caliber machine guns and its operating and locking system are derived from the stalwart Browning Automatic Rifle, initially fielded in 1918, the last year of WWI. Now made in the US at FN Manufacturing, Inc. as the M240, the gun is essentially unchanged in form and function after a half century of service in many armed forces worldwide.

As to Caldwell’s observations on the combat utility of the stamped sheet metal receiver M60 (based on the WWII German MG42 with the operating system of the WWI Lewis Gun), its development began at the end of WWII and was adopted by the Army in 1957, making it a contemporary of the MAG 58. The “Sixty” entered service in the Marine Corps and Navy during the Vietnam War and has served with mixed reviews since. The Navy still has thousands in the fleet and ashore, including the significantly improved MK43 versions that were developed for Naval Special Operations, but intends to remove all 60s from first line use by the end of 2008.

He explained that all the aging and hard-used M60s in his unit are scheduled for replacement as new M240s come into the Navy inventory. We certainly understand his preference for brand new Browning-inspired M240s over the worn and tired Sixties since reliability will undoubtedly be greater and the substantial weight penalty is not so big a factor in typical Navy Expeditionary Warfare operations.

Meanwhile, he and his fellow students were getting plenty of training with both machine guns, an eminently practical solution during this time of transition Navy-wide.

Contract Training Package

It was Day 4 of Center for Security Forces’ intense and demanding two-week Program of Instruction (POI) that qualifies Navy personnel in the rate (rank is “rate” in the Navy) of E5 and above to teach their fellow Sailors the science and craft of effective employment of crew served weapons on land and sea. Caldwell and eleven other Petty Officers from various commands were a few hours into the first of two days on Quantico’s vast range complex.

Although the students were under the direct control and supervision of CSF’s military staff, we found it interesting that all the front-line instructors for this block were civilians, employees of Virginia Beach-based Special Tactical Services (STS), one of several firms contracted by CSF for various programs.

Make no mistake about their qualifications for the tasking, all of these guys are former military and most with more than one Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) deployment. Under the stern eye of STS Vice President Bill Witherspoon, a burly, retired Marine Gunnery Sergeant, six red-shirted STS employees were getting the job done with professionalism and efficiency.

Equally impressive was the fact that STS’ support package even included all the weapons to be used on both days, a tall order for any operation. Today’s emphasis was on live fire with the 7.62mm M60 and M240 machine guns, weapons in widespread use throughout the Navy. The following day would be hands-on with Caldwell’s esteemed .50 caliber M2HB and the 40mm MK 19 Mod 1, heavy hitters for serious situations.

Petty Officers Make It Happen

A short break in training action on the range yielded an opportunity to speak at some length with Chief Petty Officer Alex Hebert (pronounced “A-Bear”), Weapons Department Head at Center for Security Forces’ Chesapeake Learning Site. The serious but cordial 34 year old Master-at-Arms (Air Warfare) has 15 years in the Navy including service in Mobile Security Forces and 13 months in his current position at CSF.

Our Public Affairs escort for the day, Lieutenant Brian Simpson, CSF’s Assistant Expeditionary Warfare Program Manager, had spoken earlier of Hebert with high praise, “If I could clone him I’d be a happy camper.”

SAR: What’s the biggest challenge you and the other instructors have in implementing what we’re looking at today?

Hebert: Logistics. Currently, the Navy doesn’t own any of their own machine gun ranges in the Norfolk area. The closest Marine Corps range is Quantico, a three and a half hour drive from Norfolk. The closest Army range is a two and a half hour drive. Then you have to worry about lodging and food and ammo and getting the weapons up to the range. If we could do something to get a machine gun range in the Norfolk regional area, a closer range where we could shoot heavy machine guns on – Fifty Cals, Mark 19s – logistically it would make the job a lot easier.

SAR: Ammunition is sometimes in short supply due to wartime operational requirements and other factors. Have you got all the ammunition that you need for this course?

Hebert: Yes.

SAR: Is two weeks enough time to implement the CSWI program of instruction?

Hebert: Yes. With the two weeks you’re looking at ten to twelve hour days, so the instructors get a lot of what they need on the weapons. Most of these guys should be coming to us with some machine gun background so they should already have some knowledge of the weapons. Prior to that they have to complete the two week Operation and Maintenance course where they learn how the weapon actually operates, what that weapon does, all the intricacies of the weapon. So it’s actually four weeks of instruction.

SAR: We talked about how getting students out to a suitable live fire range is a long reach, but as far as the rest of the necessary components – classrooms, access to the FATS (Firearms Training System) simulator, these kinds of things – is that working well?

Hebert: Yes sir. On our Learning Site in Chesapeake, Virginia, we have two classrooms we can use plus a FATS room where we can fire up to twenty weapons at a time if we need to. Also, we have a blank fire range in the back of our compound, so after the students do the live fire component and FATS component they come to us.

SAR: This course is “Train the Trainer.” Tell us about the process.

Hebert: We have a ‘crawl, walk, run’ method that we do with the students. When they first get to the school we start them with some PowerPoint’s on teaching fundamentals, how the weapons operate, principles of machine gun employment.

Then we bring them into the FATS simulator for the ‘crawl’ portion of it. They shoot this course of fire that they will shoot later in live fire. In the simulator we can correct any bad habits, we can look at things they’re doing, we can give them recommendations without actually having live bullets flying around. I can train all the 7.62mm weapons, the .50 caliber, the Mark 19, we can also do the Squad Automatic Weapon, 9mm pistol, shotgun, M203.

So we go from crawling on FATS, then we come up to Quantico. Currently we spend two days here but in the next two months we’re going to increase that to three days on the range. That’s where students are beginning to ‘walk,’ shooting live fire with machine guns on a full size range, seeing everything happening.

From there we go to the ‘run’ phase where instructors and students switch roles. It’s done in blank fire and we’ll run through the same exact drill sets they’re running through today. This time it’s their show, they’re running it and we’re the worst students in the world, giving them all kinds of headaches so they can know how to deal with a student who doesn’t know what he’s doing with the weapon.

SAR: Your CSWI students are Petty Officers – E5 and above – so they have an experience level they bring with them right now. Why is it important to have a more experienced Sailor who is then going to be a weapons instructor back in his unit?

Hebert: There are a few issues with that. First, it’s E5 and above in any rating (Military Occupational Specialty). Prior – probably about five years ago – the only personnel who could teach firearms in the Navy were your Aviation Ordnancemen, Gunners Mates, Torpedomen, and Master-at-Arms. Well, because the Navy has gone to more of a hybrid Sailor – on the Riverine Forces, Mobile Security Forces (MSF) – you have a wide array of different types of Sailors. You can have a Culinary Specialist (Cook) running a machine gun, so we decided to open it up. Anybody who can qualify on the weapon can become an instructor because of how we’re developing hybrid Sailors. The E5 portion, a lot of the ranges you sign out by Army or Marine Corps standards an E5 or above is the only one who can run the range – leadership ability, situational awareness, things like that.

SAR: We have seen some ‘tricks of the trade,’ things maybe not exactly by the manual. Comment on bringing real life experience into the program of instruction and making this work in a way that is acceptable to the higher headquarters.

Hebert: Every thing we do on the range is by the instruction manual. We don’t go outside the instruction. What we do is if we have a question on something we’re doing and whether or not we can do it, we’ll clear it through higher authority with the Navy. We’ll demonstrate it to them, talk about it and see what we can do. The last thing we want to do is something that’s not inside of the instruction because we’re training the trainer.

SAR: Is one example the Runaway Gun Drill?

Hebert: This is a surprise that has to be recognized and immediately fixed. Classroom instruction prepares them to deal with a runaway gun. So, the only thing different implemented here is that the instructors say, ‘We’re going to introduce you to the MK43 machine gun on a tripod mount. One volunteer get down behind it and everybody else gather around.’ Then all of a sudden the one student picked for the demonstration gets a surprise and has to deal with a runaway gun. That’s more of a dramatic presentation than what’s usual in a program of instruction.

Simpson: (Lieutenant Simpson joins the conversation) It’s required by the schoolhouse that they’re not allowed to take that technique back to the ship and do it in that kind of a (live fire) training situation. The schoolhouse does it as a demonstration to make the point that you’re never really ready when this happens to you.

SAR: But it’s perfectly OK that this is done because it’s a dramatic lesson the students will remember for a long, long time.

Simpson: That’s correct. Noted once again, specific situations have been routed and approved through our chain of command. But it’s a learning technique we don’t recommend for our CSWI graduates to take back to the ship. It’s not authorized for them to take this technique back to wherever they’re stationed.

SAR: Give us an example of a real world lesson that has been brought back and then incorporated in the program of instruction here.

Hebert: When our course was in its beginning stages a lot of our shooting was done from ground type mounts – tripods or bipods in fixed positions. One of the things we realized was we’re not just training Navy ground forces; we’re also training a lot of the Navy surface forces. And surface forces shoot from a standing position; they shoot from a shipboard mount. One of the things we did was to have a trailer developed and certified. The trailer actually simulates being on board ship with the mount at the same height, the same distance from lifelines. Sailors actually get up and shoot like they’re shooting from a ship. That was taken from the fleet and we brought it into the course. And they can also experience how their brothers on the other side of the Navy are shooting. So, your sea sailors are shooting like ground sailors and your ground sailors are shooting like sea sailors because you never know when a ship may have to do its landing party team and they may have to do a ground mount. Now, they’re being exposed to all aspects of the weapon and how it can be employed.

SAR: In shooting from the mounts on the trailer, is there anything specific that you learn as a result of that – brass splashing off the bulkhead, coming back at you and rolling around on the deck?

Hebert: No, it’s really straightforward; the brass falls down on the deck. You have some slip hazard from brass on the deck so you have to continuously police your brass. Whereas on a ship it would just be kicked overboard or fall overboard. On the trailer we just have to make sure to police the deck to keep the brass from being on the deck as a slip hazard.

SAR: If you could write the POI exactly as you wanted, would you make any changes?

Hebert: We’re doing revisions to it on a continuous basis trying to improve it. Some things we’re adding are to use M203s for target illumination during the night fire. We’ll teach the students how to instruct their shooters on different types of target illumination, how to employ the M203 effectively with the machine gun. Both using flares and using HEDP (High Explosive Dual Purpose) rounds for dead space where the machine guns can’t reach or can’t cover. You can lob that HEDP round into that hole and still have an effective machine gun position.

SAR: How about a Night Vision component?

Hebert: Yes there is. Once we implement the whole night shoot there will be a night vision component – in about two months from now. In the O&M phase, the prerequisite course, they learn about maintenance and use of the night vision goggles, how they work with your eyes, the physiology.

SAR: But as far as practical application with night vision on the guns, that’s not being done now but is planned for the future?

Hebert: Yes, that’s in the revision and probably will be done beginning two months from now. Night vision goggles and thermal imagers, night vision scopes, a multitude of NVO (Night Vision Observation) equipment. Also the flares.

That’s why we’re going to add that third range day. There will be a day of 7.62mm machine guns, then a day of M203 and 7.62, then a day of .50 cal.

Simpson: Just to clarify, we aren’t going to do any night qualification – just familiarization. It will be up to the unit to actually do the qualification at their level.

SAR: You have a dozen students. Are any in danger of not making it through?

Hebert: With an instructor course – because most of these students do have some machine gun experience – we ‘re not going to see the students who might fail until next week when they start doing their ‘teach-backs.’ When they start teaching us the weapon systems and they start teaching us the live fire portion that’s where we’re going to see our ‘problem children’ who won’t be able to make it through the course.

SAR: Based on your experience with the number of students coming through past courses, average number who don’t make it?

Hebert: One or two per class. The main reason is they can’t relay the knowledge they have to other people to learn it properly. Or just not as familiar with the weapons as they are expected to be.

SAR: So it’s not a gentleman’s course. If you can’t make the standards you aren’t going to graduate.

Hebert: We’ve dropped people on graduation day.

SAR: What remedial help do you give them?

Hebert: All of our instructors are available the entire class day, we open the doors at 0700 and we’re usually there until 1800. And during the entire day all the weapons and instructors are available for after hours work. The weapons are always at the back of the classroom. During a break if the students want to work with the weapons and do some practice, they verify everything’s safe and they can pull a weapon out – continuously work with a weapon and take the ‘bogeyman’ out of the weapon for themselves.

The other thing if a student is having problems, the first thing we’ll do is have a counseling session and explain to him where their problems and deficiencies are. That will usually be a one-on-one situation and we’ll work with it. If the student continues to have problems or if the student fails to meet a performance requirement then we’ll remediate that student on the performance requirement – on the test or on the live fire portion – explain to him where they’re failing and what they can do to make improvements. Then re-test on that portion of it. If they fail that, then we hold an Academic Review Board. We’ll take the lead instructors and student and sit down and go through the student’s performance during the entire course to find out if it’s just that segment of the course he’s having problems with and what can we do to fix that segment. Or, if he’s just been getting by with the skin of his teeth the entire course and this is the straw that broke the camel’s back, we need to send him home.

SAR: What is the ideal student?

Hebert: One who presents himself well in front of other people. Is comfortable speaking in front of a crowd and has experience with the weapon. If I can get a shooter in here who has put six to ten thousand rounds through one of these weapon systems, knows the weapons system, understands how it operates, and can present himself in front of an audience, I’m ready to hire him as one of my instructors.

A CSWI Student

Chief Hebert’s perspective set the stage for a conversation with one of the students, Petty Officer 1st Class Tim Caldwell, a 41 year old Master-at-Arms with 7 years in the Navy Reserve. A police officer in civilian life, he joined up at the unusually mature age of 35, enlisting for Master-at-Arms in Advanced Pay Grade because of his extensive formal police training.

SAR: Tell us about your Navy assignment.

Caldwell: US Navy Reserve Mobile Inshore Undersea Warfare Unit 210 out of Baltimore, Maryland. My specific duty assignment is in the Weapons Division in the Maintenance and Repair Department. I came in filling a Gunners Mate position. I can do that as a Master-at-Arms rating so I’ve been involved in weapons ever since I arrived there.

SAR: Is this a little bit of an inexact fit with your duty assignment that you’re sent here to teach Sailors the tactical employment of the weapons, not necessarily the maintenance and repair?

Caldwell: That’s correct. We have a security team within the unit and that security team will be responsible for perimeter security, any safety sweeps outside of the perimeter wire that would need to be done. So they’re going to take the people that are best qualified with the weapons and train them to be the instructors so I can take the knowledge I’m gleaning from here and transfer that back to the Security Team members back at the unit. That doesn’t mean only ST members or M&R department members are the ones that utilize the weapons. We all get trained on them. In the event that we all have to fight we all need to be able to fight.

SAR: What you’re going to be doing when you get back to your unit as a CSWI?

Caldwell: First things first, we’re getting rid of our M60 machine guns. We have received our M240 machine guns so transition has to take place and how you manipulate the weapon is different. Not completely because it’s still a machine gun with similar characteristics.

Familiarization with the M240 will be the first thing, to get my unit members familiar with how the weapon breaks down. After they get familiar with the basic function of the weapon we’ll get them out on the range and I’m going to go through the same drills that we ran here this morning; fire one round, fire two rounds, fire three. Get them used to it just as they (the course instructors) said here – ‘to get the bogeyman out of the gun.’ Get everybody figured and snapped in so they feel comfortable with the weapon.

Then after that comfort level starts to increase and their confidence starts to increase then we’ll be able to start into our qualification process and get everybody qualified up. The idea is not to bring people out to the range and expend thousands of rounds of ammunition and then not walk away with a qualification. And that’s going to be my end result is to get people qualified. If they’re screwing up on the range I’ve got to figure out why, what they’re doing wrong, see that, make the corrections, get them back on target and continue on with the course.

SAR: We talked about why you were sent to the course, how long is it and how far are you into it?

Caldwell: It’s a two week course and we’re in the first Thursday of the first week (4 days). It has been mostly classroom and mechanical up to this point. We have had some FATS (Firearms Training System) simulator training which was a precursor to this (live fire) to help us get snapped in on what we were going to be expected to do here so they didn’t come out here and we didn’t get the ‘deer in the headlights look’ when standing on the range. We had that figured out ahead of time so we had an idea of what was going to happen.

SAR: Before you came here you had experience with the M60, but how about the M240?

Caldwell: I did not. This is the very first day in my entire life I’ve ever fired an M240 machine gun. I like the machine gun.

SAR: How do you rate the course content so far and are the students getting enough time to learn each part?

Caldwell: Being my experience as a Reservist with machine guns, I have to be able to absorb and take in a lot. I feel as though it is simple enough that anybody who pays attention to those details should be able to come in and complete this course. There are other factors that come into that whether it’s learning styles, motivation, or whatever the case may be, that’s going to affect different Sailors at different points in their career. But I think its pretty much geared to the average guy being able to come and grab a hold of these concepts – some mechanical things and also some cognitive things you have to remember – and be able to put that back down on paper and remember it. It’s not full of mathematics and geometry, trying to figure out why these certain things happen with the gun or whatever on the physical side of it. It’s simplistic – it’s mechanics, it’s a machine and it’s designed to work this way and if it doesn’t work this way you figure out why.

SAR: Your course handout shows that you’re going to start here, go through this, and end up there. Does it all look logical to you?

Caldwell: Yes it does. We’re going to be instructors. The purpose of this course is not to teach us how to maintain and operate – although that’s part of it. My understanding is that the second half of this course, all next week, is going to be based on them showing us how to teach it back. Things we need to work on as instructors and how we communicate. Are we explaining it correctly, do we have habits that are going to turn people off when we talk to them? Those are the kind of things we’re going to get feedback on from the instructors to us – to help us go back and be effective in communicating this to our units.

SAR: Give us your overall impression of the instructor staff, their knowledge, professionalism and teaching style.

Caldwell: I think we have a great group of instructors who are stepping forward and doing this. We have the Navy side, obviously in control of us, and we have the contractor instructors who are teaching the course. On the Navy side, Chief Hebert has been fantastic. He’s stepped forward, been very forthright with us, there have been no hidden punches like ‘oh crap, I forgot to tell you about that.’ He’s been up front and supportive of everything we’ve needed to do for this course. The majority of the instruction has been done by the contracted instructors (Special Tactical Services), and all of them have previous military experience and some even in-depth combat experience which is even more important when you’re teaching this course. Because they know from a first hand level what happens to the body, what happens to the mind when it’s in that position where ‘oh crap somebody’s shooting at me too!’ and it’s not just a paper or plastic target.

SAR: How about their teaching styles. We noticed it started out very low key this morning and has quickly ratcheted up. Is that the way it usually happens?

Caldwell: I think so, that’s one of the ways you want to learn because if you’re going to make mistakes you want to make them now and you want to be able to help each individual Sailor. If you see a mistake as that adrenalin starts to go and somebody’s standing there yelling at you – because nobody likes to be yelled at – but as it happens and it does, the adrenalin starts to pump and you need to start thinking OK, maybe you need to take a deep breath and focus in on what’s going on and keep going. And I think they’ve done a very good job at raising our nervousness – call it that – and helping us work through that and keep going on with the drill and fight through it to completion.

SAR: What’s been the hardest part for you so far?

Caldwell: I think the hardest part has been the anticipation I placed on myself. Mental stress. The stress that was build up here was, hey, if you screw up here you’re done, we’re gonna throw you out of the course. Coming into this it was like, oh man, what happens if I get in there and I have a brain lock? It happens, people do that. But once I got through the initial phase – disassembly and reassembly of the M240 and the M2 Heavy Barrel .50 caliber machine gun – once I got through that it was like, OK, you can do this. Just relax, pay attention, do what the instructors tell you to do and you’ll be fine.

SAR: How about some of the other students. Have they had serious brain cramps, problems with the mechanical part or other?

Caldwell: I don’t think so and I think part of it is – my situation is a little bit different here. I took the Operation and Maintenance Course in September last year. A lot of the guys here took the O & M Course the two weeks before this course. So they’ve been here for two weeks doing Operation and Maintenance with the same instructors, and then fall right in to Crew Served Weapon Instructor Course so for some of them I think it’s been a little bit easier. There’s always that idea that you want to do good in front of your fellow Sailors. Nobody wants to be at the bottom, everybody’s achieving, to try to get to the top. But all in all I think everybody’s done the best they can. Each individual has different stressors, different buttons that get pushed. And as soon as the instructors find out which button it is, boom they’re on it and trying to force you to screw up and work through that and get to completion of the task.

SAR: So they’re helping individuals identify for themselves what their strengths and weaknesses are, and to work through those weaknesses as individuals. Not lock-stepping everybody through the program of instruction.

Caldwell: That’s correct. The instructors have been more than willing to step aside on an individual basis. When you say, I’m not getting this, I don’t understand it, these guys will pull us to the side, slow you down and say, OK now think about it. And take you through. You gotta crawl before you walk and walk before you run. And they’ve taken that approach to it. Step by step increments.

SAR: What challenges do you expect to face at your home unit when you bring this program of instruction there? Will you have the time you need, the range facilities, ammunition, that kind of thing?

Caldwell: I think the biggest challenge for me, being a Range Safety Officer, is getting the administrative side squared away first. Making sure I have my Letters of Instruction done, making sure I have my ammunition ordered, making sure that my ranges are set aside. Because where I’m at in Baltimore, obviously, we have no machine gun ranges so we have to make arrangements with Quantico or Fort AP Hill, places like that. So we need to be able to get range time, and plan that and have that plan fit into the overall plan for the unit on the calendar year.

The second one then is going to be OK, now I need to get in here, I need to have my line coaches done and snap my line coaches in on what exactly I’m expecting of them so when we go out and we present this to the Security Team I want them to look up to the Line Coaches and say I want to get to their level and try to get up to that. So they have something to work for too. It’s going to be a motivational thing.

SAR: Of the weapons you’re being taught here, what’s your favorite?

Caldwell: Well, we haven’t gotten to it yet (in live fire) but my favorite is the .50 cal. The effect, the devastation, you can wreak with a Fifty Cal, the things you can take out not only small vehicles but also boats. And in the event that you get good enough or in that situation, maybe even low, slow flying aircraft. It’s one of those weapons that’s been deployed and employed at various times throughout our military history. It has come up to the challenge and is still serving the country today.

SAR: What would you like to say to your fellow Sailors and to those young people considering joining the Navy about what you’re doing?

Caldwell: I don’t think there is anything I wouldn’t want to do to provide for the safety and security of my wife and my three daughters. If that means I’ve got to be 41 years old and being deployed to some foreign country somewhere to help ensure that our country’s borders stay safe then I’ll do that. I would hope that every single person takes stock in where we have been as a nation and how we started out and the sacrifices that people through hundreds of years have gone through to have the things we have. Freedom being the utmost, foremost thing. If we don’t have freedom we don’t have anything. And if we can’t stand up and defend that, put on a uniform and walk out in our communities and say, ‘This is what I stand for and this is who I am,’ then we’re in a sorry state. But I don’t think that’s the case at all. I think there’s many young men and women who are stepping to the forefront. This is a volunteer military now, not the draftees we had back in Vietnam. I’ve been watching these young Marines go through the chow lines here at Northwest. They’re kids, I could be their dad for most of them, that’s the way they look. I’m the old man and to see these young men step up and say, ‘Hey, I’ll go, I’ll do it,’ they have a servant’s attitude, a servant’s heart and you can’t top that.

SAR: OK, we’re going back and talking about your typical ‘mall rat’ teenager, what would you say to him about the Master-at-Arms rating?

Caldwell: The Master-at-Arms rating, there are a lot of particulars. You have to be a well rounded individual because it is the enforcement arm inside the Navy. In a unit we answer directly to the XO (executive officer) who tells us the things he wants to enforce. We’re responsible for security, responsible for doing roving patrols. That may mean if you’re in Iraq that you have to man up and be a gunner, it may mean you’re a driver. You see in the MA rating a lot of different facets of the Navy. You’ll go places, you’ll see things, you’ll serve on a ship, you’ll be a ground pounder as well as being a blue water sailor. A lot of things to experience. I don’t know how else you can get a paycheck and have somebody let you see the world, go across the globe. Hey, I’ve been here, I’ve been there. I was 35 years old before I left the borders of this country. Now I’ve been to England, to Spain, to Germany, to Kuwait. I can’t put a price tag on those experiences. And, I have the privilege of representing the United States.

M240 Technical Specifications (USMC and US Navy M240G Model)

Caliber: ….. 7.62mm NATO
Weight: ….. 24.2 pounds
Length: ….. 47.5 inches
Operation: ….. Gas
Cyclic Rate of Fire: ….. 650 – 950 RPM (3 gas regulator settings)
Sustained Rate: ….. 100 RPM
Max. Effective Range: ….. 1,800 meters from tripod
Manufacturer: ….. FNMI, Columbia, SC
Approximate Cost: ….. $10,700

Crew Served Weapons Instructor Course (CSWI)

“All Navy personnel armed with light and medium machine guns are required to undergo quarterly sustainment training. Sustainment training shall include but is not limited to: classroom instruction, dry fire training, weapons manipulation drills utilizing dummy rounds, simulator training, blank fire training and/or additional live fire training. The CSW Instructor (NEC 0814) shall conduct this training in accordance with items listed….” CSWI Course Trainee Guide

Given the large and growing number of Navy personnel whose duties include machine gunning on land and sea, the requirements for standardized initial training, followed by refresher training four times each year, plus annual qualification, pose formidable challenges. CSW Instructors are at the forefront of this; NCOs specially selected, thoroughly prepared and professionally capable of ensuring that Sailors under their supervision are held to strict standards.

SAR was provided a copy of Center for Security Forces’ comprehensive 190 page CSWI Course Trainee Guide that details tasks, conditions and standards for 40 major performance requirements. The course divides these into three main Units of Instruction with the first two covering not only the mechanical and live fire skills needed for weapons that will work when you need them and hit what you aim at, but also when and how to employ warning shots in appropriate situations. The third block emphasizes preparing and conducting training safely and efficiently in the Navy’s elaborate administrative structure and in conjunction with different regulations governing range utilization in sister services.

Those who successfully navigate through the full four week program will have attained the course’s nine “Terminal Objectives.” These define the wide range of specialized skills the Navy believes are needed for effective instruction in the military science of machine gunning:

• Describe range safety procedures
• Describe marksmanship fundamentals
• Demonstrate the ability to accurately employ warning shots
• Demonstrate CSW employment and gunnery
• Demonstrate coaching techniques for machine guns
• Identify publications, forms, equipment, and procedures for managing a command CSW training program
• Demonstrate the ability to prepare and plan a CSW training evolution
• Demonstrate the procedures, instructions, and equipment required to safely set-up and operate a machine gun range
• Demonstrate the procedures, instructions and equipment required to effectively use range cards

The Guide identifies much more than tactical and technical proficiency. In order to be awarded Navy Enlisted Classification Code 0814, Crew Served Weapon Instructor, each must conclusively demonstrate seven key attributes:

1. Knowledge and Ability
2. Self Control and Patience
3. Communications Skills
4. Ability to Inspire Confidence
5. Positive Attitude and Enthusiasm
6. Perception
7. Open Mind

Producing large numbers of CSW Instructors with this combination of admirable traits isn’t easy. It begins with an individual’s personality profile – not everybody has a teaching temperament – and builds over four weeks of intense training.

The two-week Crew Served Weapons Operation and Maintenance course is a prerequisite for admission into the Instructor course. This provides a strong foundation in all mechanical aspects of the 7.62mm M60 and M240 series medium machine guns, the .50 caliber M2HB heavy machine gun, and the 40mm Mk 19 Mod 3 grenade machine gun.

The CSWI Course’s Program of Instruction (POI) is also two weeks long, beginning with general weapons and range safety, then marksmanship fundamentals, employment of CSWs, and planning for training.

Crawl, Walk, Run

Every task is outlined – broken down into logical steps called “teaching points” – and supported by clearly written documentation. We found superb narrative and graphic aids in the form of Information Sheets with reference materials from technical manuals, Diagram Sheets with simplified drawings showing mechanical principles, Job Sheets with step-by-step instructions, and the make or break Performance Tests.

We were pleased to see that there is little if any “reinventing the wheel.” Marine Corps Weapons Publication 3-15.2.2 MACHINE GUNS AND GUNNERY, is the foundation for all of the CSWI POIs mechanical and practical application instruction. This superlative manual, in its umpteenth revision since the Marine bulldog was just a pup, is packed with no-nonsense information from real combat experience over the decades and can’t be improved upon

Indeed, Devil Dog machine gunners from World War One would find drawings in the new Navy manual illustrating fundamental Classes of Fire – Grazing, Plunging, Traverse, Search, Frontal, Flanking, Enfilade, and Oblique – nearly identical to those first used in instructional materials back in 1918 and carried forward in decades since.

Mastering Machine Guns

The thoroughness of instruction is immediately evident from a grouping of tasks for the veteran .50 caliber Browning M2HB machine gun. Ten detailed Job Sheets take the student through every aspect of this 90 year old favorite of GIs in all services. Affectionately known as “Ma Deuce,” this hard hitting and far-reaching combat weapon needs skilled attention for optimal performance.

So, the POI calls for mastery of stripping and assembly, cycle of operations, head space and timing, function check, load and unload both day and night, condition codes, trigger control and “rhythm,” malfunctions, and employment of the traversing and elevating mechanism.

Realistic training in several of these tasks once required going out to a live fire range, an expensive, time consuming process that is quickly degraded by inclement weather and many other factors. This enormous handicap is avoided in CSF’s CSWI training by extensive use of an elaborate FATS – Firearms Training System – installed at its compound in Chesapeake, Virginia.

This sophisticated electro-optical-pneumatic system uses a powerful computer to digitally project different training scenarios on a big screen for “live fire” target engagement and scoring of hits. It uses specially modified actual weapons that load, fire, report, and recoil. While not a substitute for the course’s two days on an actual range, FATS is the next best thing, helping trainees work through problems in a controlled environment instead of wasting time and ammo.

Role Reversal

After demonstrating all of these to strict standards in classroom, simulator and live fire range qualification, each student must then take over the role of instructor. These three days in the second week are the hardest part for many of the students as they “teach back” all topics for each one of four very different machine gun systems. An extra degree of difficulty is provided by a cadre who likely take wicked pleasure in role-playing as slow learners or worse.

Again with an eye toward efficiency and practicality, blanks are used in teach-back for the actual firing tasks with each of the four machine guns. This has a number of positive aspects, not the least of which are safety and convenience.

During the teach-back ordeal, all seven key attributes of an effective instructor must be clearly shown in informal and formal evaluation. For example, if a hesitant or flustered instructor trainee fails to “inspire confidence,” he gets extra time and plenty of sympathetic remedial attention to get better. If that isn’t sufficient to correct the problem then the student will not graduate. Standards must be upheld.

Planning, Preparation and Documentation

The administration of machine gun training doesn’t have the excitement of putting rounds downrange but it is no less important to the big picture. The trainee CSWI learns range preparation, planning, setup, and management. Then, with so many Sailors needing periodic qualification and refresher training on machine guns, certification and documentation for their personnel records is also essential.

Are Your Good Enough?

The Crew Served Weapon Instructor Course is open to Sailors of all ratings in the rate of E5 and above. Detailed information may be found in CANTRAC, the Catalog of Navy Training Courses, at Navy Knowledge Online.

Find Out More

The Center for Security Forces provides training and human performance solutions to Navy Expeditionary, Security, and Antiterrorism professionals to meet the needs of the Fleet. CSF’s primary customers are personnel serving in the Master-at-Arms (MA) Rating, Sailors assigned in an antiterrorism role, the Navy Security Officer communities, and the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC). The Center trains Navy personnel worldwide in security and antiterrorism measures and procedures. CSF reports to the Naval Personnel Development Command (NPDC) and is part of the Naval Education and Training Command (NETC).

CSF website: www.npdc.navy.mil/csf
CFS News: www.news.navy.mil/local/csf/
NECC website: www.necc.navy.mil
US Navy: www.navy.mil

“It really goes back about twelve or thirteen years when Gene Stoner – rest his soul – and Reed Knight, my boss, got together and Reed gave Mr. Stoner an engineering and production facility for him to fulfill some of his dreams. And one of his dreams was a rifle like the SR-25. Soon after building the first SR-25 some of our special forces took them to Somalia and that’s where the SR-25 started to make its combat reputation. Soon after that the barrel was shortened from 24 inches to 20 inches and other things were changed and improved and that’s where the MK 11 comes from. That became the MK 11 Mod 0 in the year 2000. Now, five or six years later you’ve got the XM110 so there’s a clear sequence.” David A. Lutz, VP for Military Operations, Knight’s Armament Company

The fast-paced urban combat environment that quickly evolved in the Global War on Terror created shooting challenges that weren’t being satisfactorily met by the Army’s standard issue bolt action M24 Sniper Weapon System or by the limited-issue accurized M16 variants and reworked M14s. So many snipers were reporting dissatisfaction and their need was so urgent that the Army’s Program Executive Office Soldier fast-tracked a solution as authorized under the Soldier Enhancement Program. A formal Presolicitation Notice for what was soon designated as the XM110 SASS was posted on 17 Nov 2004:

“The US Army ARDEC…has a requirement for a 7.62mm semi-automatic sniper system (SASS) capable of delivering precision fire primarily on anti-personnel targets out to 1000 meters…. The offeror shall submit five (5) bid samples at no cost or obligation to the government…. The first fifteen (15) of the thirty (30) SASSs will be delivered with spare parts 30 days after contract award.” Solicitation Number W15QKN-05-R-0433

The actual solicitation followed barely two weeks later, nearly a hundred pages of highly detailed requirements in which the Army invited all comers to submit a definition-stretching COTS/NDI (Commercial-off-the-Shelf/Non-Developmental Item) for a comprehensive evaluation. Five manufacturers bravely entered the arena but when the slugfest ended Knight’s was the winner announced on 28 September 2005. Their modified MK 11 Mod 0 has earned a five year contract and recent statements by program officials indicate the Army intends to buy and deploy thousands of complete systems as fast as Knight’s formidable manufacturing facility can turn them out.

A few months after the award announcement, when the runner-up’s formal protest had been dismissed after lengthy review by the General Accounting Office, the government bureaucracy’s innumerable administrative details had been worked out, and the production process was smoothly underway, Knight’s invited SAR in for an exclusive tour of its impressive new headquarters and enormous manufacturing complex on Florida’s “Space Coast” in Titusville.

While there we got the opportunity to conduct an in-depth interview with a key player in the fast and furious process that resulted in this tremendous victory for snipers in the Army, as well as significant product improvements that are already beginning to benefit those in other branches of the US Armed Forces.

David A. Lutz, a retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel with a well-deserved reputation for straight shooting in every sense of the word, is Knight’s Vice President for Military Operations. He was instrumental in development of the Stoner-Knight SR-25 into a military sniper system that has achieved tremendous success with Navy SEALs, Army Rangers and other elements of US Special Operations Command. Lutz worked closely with retired Navy Lieutenant Commander Michael Warner, who skippered Knight’s winning team in the SASS competition as Program Manager.

What follows are key excerpts from more than two hours of in-depth discussion, giving a fascinating look from the contractor’s perspective at the complex process that has led to selection of the Army’s newest sniper rifle.

SAR:The Army’s solicitation ran to nearly a hundred pages for an end-item system that was supposed to be pulled almost literally off the ready rack. Comments?

Lutz: ‘Non-Developmental Item’ is supposed to be the short cut to fielding the 90 percent solution to the guy in the field immediately. It seems to me that the generals know what NDI is, they know that’s what’s needed because it supports the troops they command. But once the program gets launched the bureaucracy below the general officer level is the same as it was twenty or thirty years ago.

There were things on nearly every page that you had to do; whether it was produce a gun or produce a piece of paper or produce a plan. If I can make a comment here, unless you’re a pretty good size company and have some pretty extensive depth of skill sets, you’re not going to be able to address these ‘NDI’ solicitations that require such boilerplate.

SAR: How did the Army’s experience with the M24 system influence the initial solicitation and subsequent modifications?

Lutz: As originally conceived – I think by the Army Sniper community – it was supposed to be a total package to include a night scope, a new spotting scope. So they put everything they wanted into it. They even made reference to a ‘sniper support kit’ that would have all these bells and whistles that you’d see – let’s say – at the S.H.O.T. show. A spirit level on the scope so you could make sure you’re not canted. A little wind direction velocity meter that you might see at Camp Perry.

Well, when the solicitation came out for this XM110 some of those extra things, so to speak, were not included in the solicitation. I think the Army wisely pared down that list.

What they were really interested in was a rifle. Part of the requirement was for that rifle to have what’s now the standard Picatinny Rail. We put such a rail system in the year 2000 on the MK11 Mod 0 so the real estate of the rail could be out front of the daytime zeroed sniper optic and could accept an attachable night sight that would not require the sniper to remove his day scope and possibly lose his zero.

SAR: You’ve shown us in side-by-side comparison that Knight’s winning XM110 is essentially the same as the SR-25 and the MK 11 Mod 0. Same upper and lower receiver, bolt mechanism, direct gas tube system, match grade Obermeyer barrel, and so forth. But significant modifications had to be made in secondary areas. Take us through those changes in the rifle from muzzle to buttstock, starting with the Army’s requirement for a separate flash suppressor and a sound suppressor.

Lutz: The MK 11 Mod 0 does not have, never did have, a flash suppressor. When the Navy SEALs need flash suppression they install the sound suppressor that comes with the system. Our sound suppressor I guess in a way is the world’s best flash suppressor as well because it masks all the flash.

A flash suppressor was not a COTS item (for the SR-25) so we had a very short period of time to adapt the MK 11 barrel which we use in the SASS but we thread it and we install a flash suppressor we designed – a very basic flash suppressor – to meet that Army requirement.

That in turn had an effect on the sound suppressor we manufacture for the MK 11. The flash suppressor makes the MK 11 barrel an inch and a half longer and it also increases the diameter at the muzzle so a new sound suppressor had to be designed and manufactured for the Army SASS. Now the working part of the suppressor – the baffle stack that’s in front of the muzzle – is identical so you get the same noise attenuation but it’s an inch and a half longer at the rear because of the impact the flash suppressor had on it.

The way the suppressor attaches to the rifle is identical. There’s two points of contact, one at the muzzle and the primary one back on the gas block where there’s a drop latch which secures it. And right behind the gas block we’ve got the rail system.

SAR: Any changes there?

Lutz: The URX – Upper Receiver Extending – rail system for the SASS is new and in fact better in some ways than the MK 11. Instead of there being some sort of slip nut between the receiver and the rail system as a means to attach and secure it, in URX form the rail system screws directly onto the upper receiver and then as the barrel nut is torqued the upper receiver and the rail become one piece. It’s much more rigid, you have the timing across the top of the rail precise with the MIL-SPEC as opposed to the MK 11. So it’s better in several respects.

Also unique to the URX is that the bottom rail is detachable by the operator. This allows the operator to take that lower rail off and clean debris, dirt, mud from around the outside of the barrel.

We developed the URX, ironically, for a completely different SR-25 requested by a certain part of the military that already had MK 11s. If possible it should be just as accurate but something that was lighter weight, easier to carry that they could use for patrolling, reconnaissance missions and perhaps even close quarters battle. So we developed the SR-25 Battle Rifle with a fourteen and a half inch barrel and a telescopic buttstock. In an effort to take as much weight out of it as we could, we developed this URX forend.

All we had to do for the SASS is make that Battle Rifle’s URX forend long enough for the twenty inch barrel SASS rifle. That was pretty easy for us to do.

We put our standard MK 11 folding rear sight on the gun. It had to have backup iron sights adjustable from two hundred to six hundred meters. But they wanted the front sight to be integral to the rail, so the SASS – as opposed to the MK 11 which has an accessory, a true clamp mounted flip front sight – so we very quickly came up with a design to make the front sight integral to the URX rail.

SAR: The Army wanted an ambidextrous selector but didn’t specify an adjustable trigger mechanism.

Lutz: The requirement asked for an ambidextrous selector and we make one of those – we’ve made it for the SR-25 for awhile so that was pretty easy to do.

Though the Army didn’t ask for an infinitely adjustable trigger, it’s common for snipers who are used to bolt action rifles to have a trigger that is adjustable in eighteen different directions. We use a very simple, reliable two-stage trigger. They’re all set here in the factory at four and a half pounds and that’s as much as they need. I know that some precision shooters like a lighter trigger pull but I think most of that experience is based on single stage trigger use.

With a two stage trigger you have an initial take up of about an eighth of an inch, in actuality uses up about a pound and a half of that four and a half pounds. So for your final squeeze your brain’s forgotten about the one and a half pounds you took up the first stage with so as you squeeze the trigger it really just feels like three pounds. It’s something you have to try and I’ve found when most marksmen actually try the trigger they think it’s fine. And when you think about the fact it’s not going to fall out of adjustment or an operator will find out subsequently it is very difficult to change those adjustments. Making it more ‘fail safe’ is the way to go.

SAR: Stock length and cheek weld are also important to precision shooting.

Lutz: The MK 11 did not have an adjustable buttstock and it was required by the Army that the buttstock be adjustable for length. In order to start off at the shortest distance possible, instead of using a standard M16A2 rifle stock that the MK 11 uses, we went back to the Vietnam-era M16A1 stock which gave us a five eighths inch shorter overall package. Our adjustable buttstock extends from that for about two and a half inches so you’ve got quite a bit of length adjustment.

Now it was desired by the Army that the stock also have an adjustable cheekpiece and it have adjustments for cant and what’s called castoff. Because those things were ‘desired’ – not required – and because we didn’t really have time to adequately address them in a sound engineering design we didn’t do any of that, we just did the required length adjustment.

Our XM110 is an M16 based design that Mr. Stoner made in what he called a ‘straight line design’ with the stock already at the proper height for a scope if you have the right height scope mount, about an inch and a half. So the contrivance of an adjustable cheek piece is really not necessary with this style rifle as long as you have the correct height ring.

And also because of the feature of the M16’s charging handle that’s right on top of the stock when retracted. There can’t be any raised portion in that four or five inches right behind it.

Our charging handle, by the way, is based on Dave Dunlap’s “Gas Buster” design that we pay a royalty to PRI (Precision Reflex Inc.) for permission to use. It has a number of important benefits, particularly operator comfort when the sound suppressor is attached.

SAR: Is the system’s day scope an “off-the-shelf” Leupold?

Lutz: One of the hardest nuts to crack was trying to meet all of their required capabilities for the scope and then to address some of their desirable features. One of the things they obviously wanted was a variable power scope that had one half of a minute of angle (MOA) adjustments in elevation, but also had the characteristics of what most people call a ballistic cam, or an elevation knob graduated in meters. In this case it had to be graduated from 100 meters to 1,000 meters.

Now there are lots of scopes graduated in meters; particularly the Leopold Tactical Series with what they call the M3 turret. But those clicks – increments on the knob – are all one MOA. To get half MOA clicks you have to accept a knob that rotates 360 degrees twice so it becomes a two turn system. Now the way Leupold engineered this, once the rifle and scope are zeroed, you can rotate the elevation knob about two and a half total turns.

The Army also required the whole rifle to be a desert tan dark earth color. Leupold didn’t make a scope that color at the time. They went right to work and now the current scopes are all hard anodized dark earth. This is defined in the Mil-Spec narrative as ‘darker than a cardboard box but not as dark as chocolate.’

The scope also had to have an illuminated reticle. Fortunately, one of the newer lines of the Leupold Tactical Series scopes are their three and a half to ten power variable with the TMR, Tactical Milling Reticle. It’s illuminated for low-light shooting, powered by the same battery that’s in the Army’s M68 Close Combat Optic – what you and I call an Aimpoint.

We had a lot of options for the scope mount when the solicitation came out but we wanted to improve our return to zero capability and make it simpler. So instead of using a pair of parallel split rings and all those parts and pieces, we came up with a new one piece scope mount that as a product improvement has potential to become a quick detachable design.

The two half inch nuts and two clamps are standard format types of scope attachment means that (snipers) use their half inch T handle 65 inch pound torque wrench that’s included in our tool kit. But the way the mount’s designed, you can take the two nuts and the two clamps off, put a single clamp on that side with two wing nuts. By virtue of the torque you can get from the wing nut and the longer one piece clamp you can get the same return to zero without resorting to the wrench technique. So we’ve got plans for that mount beyond the SASS.

SAR: The rifle we just photographed on your range is remarkably uniform in ‘Flat Dark Earth’ color from end to end despite the differences in what’s underneath – steel suppressor, aluminum receiver, synthetic stock, etc. How is this done?

Lutz: One of the challenges to make the rifle this brown color is that we’ve been working for several years trying to get the right dye mix to anodize different aluminum parts this ‘dark earth’ color. Sometimes you’d come up with a perfect color, other times you come up with a color that was too much of a gold tone. And if it wasn’t a gold tone when it was freshly done, as soon as you’d put the gun together and had some oil on it this oil made the light tan anodization look gold.

So once the rifle is all put together we mask off some areas and paint – bake on paint – a dark earth MIL-SPEC color to the whole gun. That’s how to deliver the gun in a nice uniform appearance. You also get quite a bit more corrosion resistance because you’re painting right on top of pristine anodization, or in the case of the barrel, pristine mag phosphate.

SAR: The system comes complete with two hard cases full of accessories, tools and equipment. Any particular challenges to pulling all these together?

Lutz: The Army SASS required a system case that had enough room in it for everything that was listed in the solicitation to include a drag bag. Of course it had to have the rifle and there was an assortment of ten and twenty round magazines, cleaning kit, sling, scope covers, laser anti-reflection filter, plus spare parts. Basically the whole nine yards.

We knew what that sniper community already had, particularly as far as a kit goes that supports the M24. We emulated with our XM110 candidate as much as we could what they were used to seeing, even to include the M1907 leather sling which has been in the Army for a long time.

Hardigg, in Massachusetts, put a lot of effort into both of the system’s hard side cases. Although the Army solicitation referred to the SASS as ‘Non Developmental,’ there was not a rifle on the planet that met all the criteria they required, much less desired. Likewise with the system case and the second case that fits inside that is used to protect the day scope if and when the sniper needs to take it off.

The scope case had to pass a cold weather drop test at 65 degrees below zero, a drop test from five feet onto a steel plate that was on top of a concrete slab. There was not an ‘NDI’ case that would pass that drop test and also be small enough to also fit in the system case without taking up way too much space. Hardigg really worked hard to make one at minimum size that would pass all these tests.

We submitted our five SASS samples on time in March last year and at that time Reed Knight, the owner of the company, directed that we build another forty more. That was because the solicitation required that if you won and received the award, then you had to quickly deliver fifteen rifles – I believe it was 30 days after award. To get ahead of that curve we went ahead and built forty.

SAR: Give us a quick version of where this program is right now (Feb 2006) as far as Knight’s is concerned.

Lutz: What I’ll call real First Article Testing is being done now up at ATC (Army Test Center, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland) on the fifteen rifles we were required to deliver right after the announcement that we had won. I think really what they’re doing is they’re verifying the barrel life and accuracy and reliability they obviously captured from testing the first five that they used as a selection criteria. About two weeks ago they were at the 3,500 round barrel life point.

Personally, I’m gearing up to deliver training at the end of the month, both operator and maintainer. It’s a contract deliverable that we train their new equipment trainers. So we’ll train them for a week here at Knight’s and I guess they go back to Fort Benning (GA) and practice on each other for a couple of weeks. They also take the handout material and electronic material I give them here and they translate it into the Army boilerplate. Then, they go up to Fort Drum (NY) – probably in May.

SAR: 10th Mountain Division?

Lutz: Yes, they’ll do the Operational Test. Soldiers – snipers – have already tested some of the first five. And also George Niewenhous (ATC) doesn’t have all fifteen of the rifles. Two of the fifteen went to Fort Benning, so the Sniper School has two as we speak.

We know the rifle works and I’ve seen pictures of it being drug thru the mud and through obstacles in part of the testing they did for the first five. It’s been through some hurdles already. But the Operational Test is much more than just testing the rifle. It’s going to test the training program, what they call the ‘POI’ (Program of Instruction) that Fort Benning is going to develop, obviously with some help from us.

They’re going to come up with a way to train the trainers, then take ‘em up to Fort Drum and work with soldiers and armorers who aren’t trained on this particular rifle. The Army will evaluate how effective the training is, the handout material, the amount of hours they need to train on whatever. Does the technical manual adequately show them how to change a gas tube, how to change an extractor? The amount of ammunition; how many rounds are needed for someone to qualify. Those are all parts of an operational test that go beyond whether or not your rifle shoots.

SAR: After that?

Lutz: When that’s finished we expect to get what we call ‘L-Rip’ – Limited Rate Production authorization. By sort of reading between the lines we think that’s going to be somewhere between two hundred and three hundred systems. The first ones are going to end up being delivered in December (2006) because by their schedule December is when the First Unit Equipped is going to be designated. I’ve already heard that the 10th Mountain is real excited about these rifles and they’ve asked permission to take the rifles with them when they deploy.

(Note: Subsequent Army announcements indicate the intent to buy 4,492 systems. SAR has learned that Knight’s is refurbishing the Army’s Operational Test rifles and elements of the 10th Mountain recently deployed to Afghanistan will be the first to receive them as an “urgent need requirement.”)

SAR: Any feedback from the folks who have been testing the XM110 that you can talk about?

Lutz: They apparently have a really good accuracy test stand up at Aberdeen. ATC shoots in a tunnel with no wind, no mirage, no humidity, no mosquitoes biting you like here. The five guns that we sent up for the initial tests all shot under .8 MOA (minute of angle) from the stand.

SAR: Have improvements to the MK 11 in Knight’s XM110 caught the eye of the Navy and Marine Corps?

Lutz: Very soon after the Army selected the SR-25 based XM110, the Marine Corps ordered 180 MK 11s on the current contract we have with the Navy and SOCOM. It’s a MK 11 but they want it with the SASS threaded barrel, the SASS flash suppressor, which also means they get the SASS sound suppressor, and URX type forend, as opposed to the MK 11 forend. And they want it black because they feel it will blend in with the rest of the troops that all have black guns so the snipers won’t stand out so much.

We’ve had joint service meetings where it appears as if the Navy is planning for subsequent MK 11 buys with several of the same things the Marine Corps adopted or wanted, but painted like the Army’s.

SAR: The M110 SASS is semiauto only and has a ‘legal length’ barrel. What plans does Knight’s have to offer the M110 SASS to law enforcement as well as competition shooters in the civilian world?

Lutz: We’ve got our hands full right now with deliveries to the military.

SAR: Any final thoughts on the process?

Lutz: The government would help themselves if they could release some of the specifics as early as possible so we could either develop the things we need to develop, link together those different things that are commercially available, all under one house.

I think the user would have been better served if somehow we would have been allowed to submit the MK 11 Mod 0 – we’ve produced over a thousand of them – as it is. That would have been a true NDI.

(Editor’s Note: Persistent misinformation about the Army’s SASS selection process deserves authoritative rebuttal. The General Accounting Office’s findings on the protest filed by the runner-up system’s proponent may be found at www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/297374.pdf)

Visit Knight’s Armament Company on the web at www.knightarmco.comSR-XM110 Rifle System Characteristics Military Description: Knight’s Armament Company’s SR-XM110 is a precision, medium weight, detachable magazine fed, gas operated, semi-automatic, free-floating barrel sniper rifle system, optimized to fire the M118 Long Range ammunition.

Each SR-XM110 SASS delivered contains the following components:

• 7.62x51mm NATO SR-XM110 Rifle
• MIL-STD 1913 Picatinny Rail forend with four rails parallel to the bore with the top rail surface on-line with that of the upper receiver. The design of this forend allows the rifle barrel to be free-floated for enhanced accuracy.
• Back Up Iron Sights front and rear, either integral to the rifle or installed on the MIL-STD 1913 Rail.
• Collapsible Bipod that is adjustable and Operator removable if desired.
• SR-XM110 Magazines: four 20-round magazines and four 10-round magazines.
• Leather Carrying Sling. This sling is also designed to support the rifle in various shooting positions as an aid to marksmanship.
• 3.5×10 Variable Power Day Optic Rifle Scope mounted on a one-piece return to zero MIL-STD 1913 Picatinny Rail scope mount. An Operator removable Laser Filter Unit, Anti-Reflection Device and flip-open dust covers may also be provided.
• A Sound Suppressor that provides very effective acoustic, flash and blast suppression.
• A Flash Suppressor that minimizes muzzle flash when the sound suppressor is not used.
• Protective (hard) Carrying Case for the complete weapon system, as well as a sub-component hard scope carrying case.
• Soft Weapon Carrying Case (aka: Drag Bag. Optional item dependent on individual contract requirements) and a Soft Rifle Scope Carrying Case with padded Scope Cover Insert.
• Cleaning Kit with coated bore rod and guide plus required brushes and jags. Also a pocket-sized field cleaning kit with flexible rod.
• Deployment Kit containing Operator Level tools not provided in the Cleaning Kit, Scope Cleaning Kit, Spare battery for Day Scope Illuminated Reticle, Carrying Case with Field/Operator Spare Parts.
• Operator and Armorer Maintenance Manuals.
• A modified Army M240B 7.62mm Machine Gun Blank Firing Adapter can also be provided.