As basic review, recall that the most recent variants of 40mm grenade systems are typically deemed “third generation” systems, following the design of the M79 40mm grenade launcher, the original first generation 40mm grenade launcher. Later second generation launchers are represented by the Colt M203, and the Heckler and Koch M69 launchers as systems that require mounting to the host weapon. The newest 40mm grenade launchers represent an entirely new system of weapons, representing the third generation of the 40mm grenade launcher. In general terms, third generation 40mm grenade launcher systems are defined as a multifunctional 40mm grenade launcher. That is, they are capable of functioning as a standalone unit or as part of an integrated rifle system. Third generation systems frequently feature the increased use of aluminum, composites, and polymers within the manufacturing process, and generally rely upon a side opening breech, rather than the M203’s slide forward breech mechanism. By opening to the side, the third generation systems are better capable of accepting 40mm rounds that are longer in length than the original M583 parachute flare round. This is a significant and important feature as increasing numbers of less lethal and medium velocity 40mm rounds enter the market. Finally, third generation systems all feature universal mounting solutions reliant upon Mil-Std 1913 Picatinny rails as a means of mounting the launcher to the host weapon. By presenting a universal mounting solution, third generation 40mm systems offer a unilateral cross-platform 40mm solution – that is, a single 40mm weapon system may be mounted on a host of primary weapons, without special tools in a quick and efficient manner. Mounting a third generation system to the host weapon typically requires the minimal use of common hand tools rather than relying upon specialized mounting hardware typically required to mount second generation 40mm systems to the host weapon. It should be no surprise that the Fabrique Nationale FN40GL system fits the definition of a third generation 40mm system nearly exactly.

The System

The FN40GL Enhanced Grenade Launcher is intended for integration with the Fabrique Nationale SCAR 16 and SCAR 17 rifles. Capable of firing all types of NATO standard 40x46mm low-velocity grenades, the FN40GL may be mounted under either rifle or may be configured as a stand-alone launcher.

When assembled on a Mk16/Mk17 host rifle, mounting is easily accomplished with a trigger adapter and dual locking clamp levers. The FN40GL easily mounts to the Picatinny rails at the 6 o’clock position on the host rifle. No special tools to mount or dismount the launcher from the host rifle are required as one merely flips the two mounting levers upward. The mounting system is as easily manipulated as any common Picatinny rail attachment. When mounted to the host rifle, the FN40GL is firmly mounted without any flex or movement, yet is easily removed quickly and without the use of tools.

Completely ambidextrous, the FN40GL utilizes a polymer receiver mated to an aluminum barrel for durability and light weight. Unlike other third generation 40mm systems, the 9.6-inch barrel swivels to the right or left for ease of loading and unloading from any firing position. This feature differentiates the FN40GL from other 40mm systems. While other systems allow the barrel to pivot to either the left or right, other 40mm systems force the user to choose one direction or the other. The FN40GL is currently the only 40mm system that allows the barrel to pivot in either direction at any time. While this may not seem significant, the ability to load the weapon from either the left or right allows left handed shooters to utilize a standard system without modification. More importantly, the design allows the shooter to load the weapon in any position – left or right – an important feature when loading from one side may prove difficult or impossible in the heat of battle.

The FN40GL may also be mounted to an alloy stand-alone stock assembly to allow individual use of the system. While the launcher is outfitted with Mil-Std 1913 Picatinny rails at the 12 o’clock position, the stand-alone stock assembly provides rails at the 3 o’clock, 6 o’clock, and 9 o’clock positions to allow the mounting of lights, lasers and other targeting devices. While this may not seem significant, recall than 40mm systems are being used in increasing numbers in a less lethal role. The ability to mount a forward grip, red dot sight, and laser aiming modules on the system may prove valuable on the battlefield, while the ability to mount ultra-bright LED lights and eye safe laser dazzlers may be more appropriate for use in situations involving civil disobedience.

Fabrique Nationale offers the FN40GL with a traditional folding leaf sight as standard sights. The application of optional after-market grenade launching sights or laser aiming modules is easily mounted to the system via the built in Mil-Std 1913 Picatinny rails.

At the Range

The FN40GL is a manually operated, single shot grenade launcher. Loading is easily accomplished by loading a 40mm grenade within the chamber of the weapon and closing the breech. The breech is a multiple lug rotating design. Unloading is easily accomplished by opening the breech via a lever on the left side of the weapon and removing the live round. The lever to open the breach is intuitive for right handed shooters, and is located in approximately the same location as the legacy M203 system. As the system opens to the left and right, an ambidextrous opening lever would be innovative, yet mechanically difficult to achieve with the current design.

The trigger of the system is unusually large and placed low on the weapon system. While the system was fired using the stand alone stock, it appears that the placement of the FN40GL trigger may allow the operator to keep the index (trigger) finger on the trigger of the host weapon, while using the shooter’s middle finger to fire the FN40GL. Regardless of finger placement, the FN40GL features a double action only trigger system that proved long and heavy. While firing the system was under ideal conditions, one must recall that most users will be firing the system under duress, whether a civil disturbance using less-lethal rounds, or on the battle field, firing high explosive rounds. The stress likely faced when firing the system necessarily requires a double action trigger as a means of preventing fratricide and unintended discharges of the weapon. When firing high explosive, one can never be too careful.

Accuracy of the system using the FN designed leaf sight was reasonable and targets at 250 meters were easily engaged within the kill radius of an M433 HE round. Presumably, accuracy would be better when used in conjunction with electronic or laser sighting systems. Muzzle velocity was approximately 250 feet per second.

Conclusion

The FN40GL is a highly capable third generation 40mm system. While the double action only trigger pull is not ideal, the long and heavy trigger pull is likely to prevent accidental discharges in high stress situations. It can be differentiated from others in the market in that the FN40GL is currently the only 40mm system that allows the barrel to pivot in either direction during the loading sequence. The system appears to be currently adaptable only to the FN SCAR 16 and SCAR 17, giving limited use on rifles outside of the FN family. Although tested with a standard leaf sight, accuracy of the system would presumably benefit with the addition of an aftermarket laser range finder, laser designator, or sighting system. Wide use of Mil-Std 1913 Picatinny rails allow the mounting of nearly any aftermarket sighting system. Additional information may be found online at www.fnhusa.com.

The “Program Executive Office (PEO) Soldier” is the over arching US Army organization responsible for the development, procurement, fielding and sustainment of nearly everything the soldier wears or carries. PEO Soldier at each AUSA event shows off its accomplishments in small arms, accessories and related individual and crew served weaponry within its expansive and well-staffed booth. The 2007 AUSA Annual Meeting exhibit was no exception. The PM for Soldier Weapons, Colonel Carl Lipsit, was there again and ready to discuss programs and US Army initiatives and objectives, and to provide this snapshot of ongoing efforts.

XM320 Grenade
Launcher Module (GLM)

The planned one-to-one replacement for the aging M203, the XM320 GLM, is in final testing to address numerous Army requested changes deemed advantageous before fielding. The contract for this more or less Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) item was awarded to Heckler & Koch in 2005. First fielding is planned for late fiscal year 2008 and will begin with the Army’s Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs). The US Army plans to procure upwards of 60,000 M320s over the next 5 years. Final operational testing includes evaluation of the day/night sight (DNS) mounting bracket and remote activation switch. A commercial hand-held miniature laser range finder will also be procured and issued with the GLM to allow for range determination to the target, the most common reason for grenadiers missing targets with low velocity 40x46mm ordnance at ranges beyond 150 meters. The M320 will provide the war fighter with new capabilities to include modular on or off the weapon use, night fire capability and first round on target accuracy within 5 meters.

M110 SASS

The 7.62x51mm NATO Semi-Automatic Sniper System (SASS), developed for the US Army from the COTS Knight’s Armament SR-25/MK11 sniper rifle systems, has completed all testing, is in production, and by the time this article is published will have been fielded with various US Army units to include US Army National Guard units from New York. The M110 SASS brings back to the regular Army the availability of aimed and accurate .30 caliber semi-automatic rifle fire that was lost when the bolt-action US M24 Sniper Rifle fully replaced the semi-automatic Vietnam era M21. Old lessons relearned again. When you find an auto-loading sniper rifle like the M110 SASS that can deliver accuracy on par or better than a bolt-action rifle, and with that it brings the ability for rapid multiple shot/target engagement capability, a capability always appreciated in the fast moving urban combat environment, keep a place for such a “tool’ in your infantry tool box.

XM26 MASS

As has been reported in detail in a recent SAR issue, the XM26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System (MASS) has been in development for nearly 10 years. The US Army is now close to fully fielding the final weapon and has been working on various improvements to the design. This includes a new liquid (oil) hydraulic M4-style butt stock to reduce felt recoil from the relatively light weight shotgun in the stand-alone mode. 3-round and 5-round box magazines will be available for the M26 to suit the needs of both weapon mounted and stand-alone use.

M2HB QCB

PM Soldier Weapons will have released a solicitation for a Quick Change Barrel (QCB) version of the venerable M2HB heavy machine gun before this article is in print. The requirement will be for upgrades to existing guns to be installed at Anniston Army depot and then to purchase these upgrades on new guns at a later time. This requested package, available for some years from various vendors as COTS items, includes the quick-change barrel, fixed headspace and timing, new safety and an improved blank firing adapter and flash hider.

Breaking News in US Weapons Procurement: Information that Shook Up the Small Arms Community

The last several years have been “interesting” in the small arms community, as various companies jockeyed to present replacements for our legacy system; the venerable M16/M4 rifle. At this AUSA meeting, information was available that rocked the community.

Colonel Lipsit provided some insight into the then ongoing Extreme Dust Environment testing that was being conducted at Aberdeen Proving Ground in 2007. The test included the standard issue M4 Carbine (from US Army stock), the new SCAR-L Standard Carbine (prototype – LRIP design status), the HK416 Carbine (new production) and the XM8 Baseline Carbine (Spiral 3 prototypes from US Army stores). The M4 was tested with standard USGI aluminum magazines, the HK416 and SCAR-L with the vendor provided magazines and the XM8 with the polymer XM8/G36 magazine that is unique to that system. This test was intended to ascertain the performance of the US M4 Carbine in a severe dust/sand environment with various lubrication and cleaning methods/intervals applied. This is the third such test conducted on the M4 since 2006.

During the test, the weapons and test ammunition loaded in magazines and placed in magazine pouches, were “conditioned” in the dynamic dust chamber for 30 minutes. If ejection port covers were present on the weapons (M4 and HK416 only), they were closed and the bores sealed with shoot-through dust caps, SOP for soldiers in such environments. 120 rounds were then fired through each sample. The weapons were then re-exposed in the chamber again and another 120 rounds fired. At 600 round intervals the weapons were field stripped and wiped down. Lubrication was applied as per the manufacturers established guidelines for this test. At 1,200 rounds, the weapons were thoroughly cleaned. Testing continued to 6,000 rounds on each sample, the 6,000 round figure based upon the expected barrel and bolt service life as listed in the US military M4 specification document.

This testing, started in September 2007, was conducted after pressure was applied by Congress, primarily from the office of US Senator Tom Coburn, a hard charging Republican from Oklahoma and a long-time supporter of the US ground-pounder. Senator Coburn, and his equally engaged staff, orchestrated a delay in the confirmation of the then pending and now current Secretary of the Army, the Honorable Peter Geren, during the summer months of 2007. The purpose of this delay was to force the Army to evaluate the reliability of the US M4 Carbine against select op-rod 5.56mm carbines in a harsh dust/sand environment replicating as close as possible conditions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even special fine silicon based sand of the light powdery nature found in the Arabian Gulf was obtained for this assessment. An earlier and similar test at Aberdeen in January 2007 of new M4s, M16A2s and M249s in this dust/sand environment, conducted without lubrication in hopes that reliability would increase, ended with poor results for the M4; far below what had been expected, with a stoppage occurring on average once in every six rounds fired. A second similar test conducted by the Army in May 2007 ended with an average stoppage rate of one in 88 rounds fired. This latest 2007 dust/sand test was conducted using heavy lubrication, and as a result of Congressional involvement and pressure, included three modern carbine systems each of which employs an operating rod-style gas system.

Colonel Lipsit was quick to remind this writer that there was no requirement from the User Proponent, that being the US Army Infantry Center at Fort Benning, for a replacement to the M4 at this time. Therefore this test was for data collection only for review by the US Army in its current planning for what might one day replace the current M4 Carbine when the sole source contract to Colt Defense ends in June 2009.

First Formal US Army Test of Op Rod Carbines

With the help of experts in the community, Congress mandated that in addition to testing the baseline US M4 Carbine that this assessment would also include three other systems that stand out from the ever increasing field of more than 15 commercially available op rod ARs. These three carbines were picked because they are or were recently being considered for US fielding, or are actually blooding bad guys in combat by an elite assortment of US Government organizations as is the case with the highly regarded HK416. Already fielded with select US Special Operations Forces, the HK416 Enhanced Carbine has exceeded expectations of the elite user community that have adopted it to replace M4s and MK18 CQBRs. As has been reported in the “Army Times” over the last 16 months every tier one (classified) unit within the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) has tested, fielded and continues to employ the HK416 today.

Even the US Army’s own relatively new and mostly unknown Asymmetric Warfare Group (AWG) selected and fielded the HK416 in 2005 but ironically has been recently told by US Army leadership that its use of the HK416, a “non-standard” carbine, creates too many questions and requests from conventional units as to why the rest of the US Army cannot benefit from the availability of superior commercial off-the-shelf op rod carbines. They were then directed to turn them in. The removal of the 416s from the AWG began in November 2007 and will likely have been completed by the time this article goes to print. AWG sources reported that even after more than 2 years of hard training and combat use, not a single part was replaced in any HK416. Because M4s are hard to come by at the moment, the AWG received FN M16 lowers (with the M16 engraving milled off and M4 over stamped) with M4 upper receivers fitted to them. The 416s were sent to the depot; their fate unclear. Superior carbines as proven by other units, paid for by the US taxpayer, cherished by highly experienced and decorated AWG unit members, removed from a highly regarded operational unit and replaced by the very weapon they elected not to field to begin with.

SCAR Lights Up the Field

The second entry within this dust test is the new SCAR (Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle) being developed under contract for the USSOCOM by FNH USA, a regular and proud exhibitor at the AUSA Annual Meeting. Like the HK416, the SCAR family of rifles and carbines was developed as a result of user dissatisfaction with the documented poor performance and limitations of the 40+ year old M16/M4 platform when used hard in torturous SOF environments and on SOCOM missions. Like HK416, SCAR was developed from day one with first-hand user input and has been jointly and exhaustively tested by the expected end users, to include US Army, Navy, Marine and Air Force Special Operators in environments that closely replicate those in which the system will actually be deployed. The SCAR also uses an operating rod-style gas system and thus does away with the hollow gas tube and associated carbon fouling and heat transfer issues that have plagued the M16 and M4 with their direct gas system arrangements. It also boasts barrel life expectations of 35,000 rounds or greater and 100,000 round weapon service life, according to company and USSOCOM sources.

Dust off your XM8s

The third candidate (the word candidate may be misleading as the US Army is careful to point out this extreme dust/sand test was for data collection only. The final results will be reported to the US Army Infantry Center and be included in their ongoing Capabilities Based Assessment (CBA) intended to clarify and chart the US Army’s future path or plan for future small arms, due sometime before 2010) was the now defunct, and once US Army sweetheart, polymer based XM8. Once again operating with a piston rod, or operating rod gas system, the XM8 in its final official Spiral 3 configuration set a high water mark during reliability and environmental testing by the US Army in 2005 by achieving an impressive 18,000 round MRBEFF (Mean Rounds Between Essential Function Failure) performance rating (in layman’s terms, zero stoppages or parts failures in 18,000 rounds fired). No other official developmental carbine/rifle in the reported recent history of US Army testing has fared that well, according to sources within the test agencies.

Historical Significance

Four very different weapons in the first direct comparison test by the US Army in decades. The US M4; a combat proven and highly regarded variant of the original 1960s-era ArmaLite AR-15, first officially fielded with US forces in 1964, with its aluminum two part upper and lower receiver, add-on rail system and direct gas tube-style operating system. The HK416; a highly product improved hybrid of the famous ArmaLite platform, also sporting the two-piece forged aircraft-grade aluminum receiver design and using the proven pusher rod gas system first employed by its maker in the polymer G36 rifle in 1995, and with many of the same advantages and disadvantages of the Stoner design from which the weapon was reverse engineered. Then, the shinning star of the Tampa-based US Special Operations Command; the all business SCAR-L (L for “Light” for those versions chambered for the 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge). With its one-piece extruded aluminum upper receiver with polymer lower receiver and user exchangeable barrels, the SCAR represents a unique departure for a US military rifle in that is shares up to 82% parts commonality with its big brother SCAR-H (H for “Heavy” or caliber 7.62x51mm NATO), and the many modular variants in the SCAR family, to include the short-barreled “CQC” (Close Quarters Combat), “S” (Standard Carbine) and “SV” (Sniper Variant) models. All basically the same caliber-specific platform, but with different interchangeable parts available for the user to configure the weapon he or she needs for today’s mission. Finally, the son of G36: the XM8. Arguably the most controversial rifle since the original AR-15 was introduced into the US military in the 1960s due to the unconventional way in which it was developed by the US Army and the fierce resistance from within the US Army itself, and the small arms industry, to its possible procurement from a foreign vendor without a US production plant and one that is not part of the existing US Small Arms Industrial Base. The mere thought of the US fielding a replacement to the US M4 and M16 without full and open competition, and direct comparative testing with other available systems, doomed the XM8 from the very start. An all polymer rifle save the barrel, bolt and select internal parts with a separate upper and lower receiver arrangement, using a polymer magazine and offering the user a multitude of possible variants mostly configurable in the field, the XM8 offers some notable advancements in ergonomics, user exchangeable stock options galore and a very innovative multi-function sighting device combining all of the needed “aimers” (red dot reflex sight and IR laser aimer and illuminator), and all zeroed in one single and simple operation.

Early Results

While the US Army’s Carbine Severe Dust Tests had just been completed and the final report still being written at the time of writing, early intel indicates that all three op rod carbines finished far ahead of the M4 for reliability in this environment. Sources report that the XM8 performed best amongst this pack with one stoppage every 472 rounds. The XM8 was followed by the SCAR-L with one stoppage every 265 rounds and then HK416 with one stoppage every 257 rounds. The M4’s performance was one stoppage every 68 rounds, just barely 2 magazines fired without incident, and a reliability rate almost 7 times worse than that of the XM8 under identical test conditions and protocol, almost 4 times worse than the SCAR-L and HK416. Reliable sources within the community reported that an adjustment to the lubrication schedule for the SCAR-L was required early on in the test, that one of the ten HK416 test samples performed poorly having most of the recorded stoppages and thus lowering the overall score of the weapon system (had this one sample performed like the others it would have finished at the top of the pack) and numerous barrels were replaced on the M4s to complete the 6,000 round test. When presented with these reliability numbers the Army was quick to down play the significance of the results, stating that these tests were conducted in extreme conditions that did not address “reliability in typical operational conditions” and that “everybody in the Army has high confidence in their weapon.” However, this is not what knowledgeable users are saying to this author and SAR.

Easy Answer? Not So.

From all of this modern carbine/rifle technology to choose from, developed at a cost to the US taxpayer of reportedly $70M or more ($20M SCAR, $50M XM8, zero dollars for HK416), surely the US Army could select the best available carbine for our troops and get that to the field before the shooting is over. They could but one problem remains: there is no requirement for a new carbine, or even meaningful incremental carbine enhancements. The term incremental can be defined as the 75% or “90% solution” versus the fanciful so-called “leap ahead” or “100% solution” we in this country too often pursue while all but ignoring available and affordable incremental upgrades and enhancements offered off-the-shelf by industry. This writer is not talking about accessorizing existing platforms, such as the addition of different butt stocks, rail systems, sights and the like. We have done that with some success over the years with flat top receivers and modular rail systems. While this enhances the use of the weapon for the operator, it does nothing to address the basic function or performance of the operating system, weapon integrity, function, safety and/or operator upkeep.

While the users on the ground surely would welcome a new carbine with the enhanced capabilities now and very soon to be in use in US Special Operations units, the official procurement process starts with a properly formulated and approved Requirements Document. In the US Army this begins within the lead proponent for small arms, the US Army Infantry Center at Fort Benning, Georgia. The USAIC, as mentioned earlier, is in the throngs of their CBA to determine where they want to be in 5-10 years with US Army small arms. Shall they field a new conventional carbine in 5.56mm? Should they leverage the polymer or caseless technology being explored in the current JSSAP LSAT program? Should the new suite of US Army small arms include air-bursting, or counter defilade technology, a technology that the US Army has invested deeply in over the past years to the tune of more than $377 million for the OICW/XM25 and XM307 Advanced Crew Served Weapon programs?

Strategic Pause?

Thus, without a formal requirement for anything new, the US Army continues to procure M4 Carbines and plans to do so up until at least June 2009 when the current M4 contract expires, at the tune of up to $375 million on a sole source basis without evaluating other current COTS weapons. The US Army states clearly that the M4 meets current US Army carbine specifications; and it does. There is no argument to that point. Colt is building for the US Army the carbine they have asked for and has on multiple occasions proffered to the Army various enhancements to the weapon, most of which were not accepted as they were not required in the weapon specs. However those specifications were written more than two decades ago based on the then current performance of the M16A1/A2, long before the advent of the modern op rod AR, the unibody extruded aluminum receiver of the SCAR, or the highly modular and user configurable design of a modern weapon like the XM8.

The Smoking Gun: Soldier Perspectives on Small Arms in Combat

One has to question the wisdom of not leveraging the incremental improvements that the current modern crop of assault rifles offers the end user. This point is especially driven home when one reads the US Army sponsored, Center for Naval Analysis conducted survey of 2,600 soldiers that had returned within the previous 12 months from Afghanistan and Iraq and had engaged in a firefight using the M9, M4, M16 (A2 or A4), or M249 during their last deployment. While the majority (75%) expressed overall satisfaction with their current rifle or carbine, few had ever seen and literally none have used a SCAR-L, XM8 or the HK416 or anything of a more recent design. Their frame of reference is thus limited to only what they know and have seen first hand. Given a shorter and lighter carbine with adjustable length butt stock versus the longer, heavier M16 with fixed stock; who would not welcome that, especially when fighting from vehicles and in the urban environment? Surely then the M4 would get high marks when that question is asked; which do you like better? The real test would be to offer the soldier a look at and chance to handle the more modern COTS carbines developed in the past 10 years like those described above. Surely the results of such a survey would be far different. Why not field one or more of these proven, modern carbines in a combat unit, say to a company or battalion as we have done with the Land Warrior ensemble, and then let them tell Army leadership where to spend our precious small arms procurement dollars?

What has not been widely reported from this US Army sponsored study is that, quoting from page 17 of this report, the “Percentage of soldiers who report experiencing a stoppage while engaging the enemy” was 19% for both the M16 and M4 (26% and 30% for the M9 and M249 respectively). The report goes on to state that, “A large impact means the soldier was unable to engage the target with that weapon during a significant portion of or the entire firefight after performing immediate or remedial action to clear the stoppage” (author’s emphasis added). 18% of these same soldiers stated that they were unable to clear that stoppage and get the weapon running again during the course of that engagement with the M4, 20% with the M16, 38% with the M9 and an astonishing 41% with the M249. Nearly one fifth to almost one half of the unit was “out of the fight” due to serious malfunctions in their basic weapon. These are the statistics taken right from the US Army’s own report. When questioned, US Army officials were quick to blame poor soldier maintenance for the stoppages. Sadly, we have seen this tactic used before with early AR-15s in Vietnam and more recently with the British Marines and their SA80A2’s in Operation Iraqi Freedom; blaming the war fighter for the inherent shortcomings of the weapon system.

One can then see a direct correlation between operational reports from these 494 combat soldiers surveyed who reported poor reliability to the extent of complete failure to operate during the heat of battle and the recent poor results of the same weapons in the Extreme Sand/Dust Tests described above, results that some in the Army are saying are acceptable. It is certain that those 494 brave men and women were not so satisfied with the weapon when it was useless in their hands with the enemy all around.

One then must ask why our most elite units are not using the same standard issue rifles or carbines as used by our conventional forces and instead have sought out, tested, and have fielded with great success weapons like HK416, and soon SCAR, the USSOCOM MK46 and MK48 machine guns, the MK43, and every type of handgun imaginable except the US M9?

Not the Last Word

As reported last year by this writer, this subject is far from over. Congress is involved and is drafting new legislation to persuade the US Army to consider incremental and commercially available small arms, and ammunition enhancements, both of which can and would make a big difference on the battlefield for the solider, every solider, not just our most elite warriors. In fact, on page 29 of the CNA survey referenced above, and I quote, “Twenty-six percent of M9 users requested higher caliber ammunition and increased stopping power. M4 and M16 users echoed this recommendation. When speaking to experts and soldiers on site, many commented on the limited ability to effectively stop targets, saying that those personnel targets who were shot multiple times were still able to continue pursuit” (author’s emphasis added). Soldiers are asking for more reliable weapons and more capable, more lethal bullets and ammunition yet we continue to buy thousands more of the same small arms and millions more of the same cartridges to feed them. Is it a matter of money? Is it simply too expensive to field enhanced small arms and ammunition?

The Flawed Cost Argument

The current unit costs on the current contract for carbines, and the wealth of defense spending on programs like the Joint Strike Fighter ($4.2 billion) for R&D alone, or the Army Future Combat System (FCS) which in the current defense budget received $3.2 billion for R&D, places the modern and advantageous weapons like HK416 and SCAR, and enhanced ammunition types like improved “blind to barrier” bullets and medium caliber rifle cartridges, well within reach for all US military personnel. For the $430 million dollars spent since 1980 on so-called “leap ahead” small arms programs, from which no single weapon or new round of ammunition has been fielded, we could have fielded more than a quarter million new 5.56mm or 7.62mm SCAR rifles at $1,800 each, or 358,000 new XM8s or HK416s in the more lethal 6.8x43mm SPC caliber at around $1,200 a pop. (For comparison, the 2005 contract price for an M4 was $980, $836 in 2007). However the internal bureaucracy and strong institutional resistance to field something new in the way of a modern carbine and/or rifle, anything new that is available today not in 2010 or beyond, and has been proven by other users (and in the Army’s own tests) to be incrementally better and easily integrated into the forward deployed units, is both hugely perplexing and mind numbing to this writer and many others in the community.

The Bottom Line

There should not be a single day that any US serviceman or servicewoman steps off a truck, aircraft or ship without the very best small arms technology America can provide. That technology exists today. The funds for its purchase, fielding and sustainment are obviously available and are being spent, but on decades old technology. This issue is critically important as we lose personnel in combat every single day and any advantage, even one that is ever so minor, may improve the odds of both user survival and ultimately mission success. Our weapons should be the most reliable, hard hitting and user friendly weapons on the face of this round globe yet they are not, and we should be ashamed as a result. Our fleet of small arms is old and showing their age.

Aging Fleet of Old Warriors

The average age of our eight top “work horse” weapons from the M9 to the MK19 is 33 years, 25 years if you remove the oldest- the M2HB- 23 years without the M2HB and M203 and still 21 years old with the oldest three removed from the average. If our computers, vehicles, night fighting capability, body armor, rations or medical equipment were from the same era as that of our most recently adopted small arms (mid-1980s), our forces would be hard pressed to perform on today’s modern battlefield as they have so stunningly performed during OEF/OIF. With a few exceptions, such as the new M110 SASS or M107 sniper systems, we have not fielded any new small arms designs since the mid 1980s. Again, not just for our most elite warriors in units that we do not discuss in print, but for every Soldier, Airman, Marine, Seaman, Coastguardsman and Special Operator. Anything less is a sad compromise – a compromise that we are making today and a compromise that costs lives.

The German Success Story

Even the German military, who’s annual defense budget spending figure of EUR 29.31 billion (GDP 1.3%) is far below that of the US ($42.8 billion) and below many neighboring countries in Europe (GDP 2.0%) have since 1995 replaced nearly every one of their small arms, have added numerous new calibers and capabilities they had not possessed previously. Because of this successful incremental fielding approach, the German military has the most capable set of military small arms in the free world today. In new improved small arms they have fielded no less that six since 1995 to include handguns, rifles/carbines and sniper rifles, and are working on at least three more that this writer is aware of, a new 4.6mm handgun, lightweight 7.62mm machine gun and improved .50 caliber heavy machine gun. Nine new capabilities have been added to the German small arms arsenal also since 1995 and include the first general-issue Personal Defense Weapon within NATO, a 5.56mm LMG, .300 Win Mag and .50 BMG sniper rifles and two 40mm grenade launchers, both under barrel and 40x53mm belt-fed versions. No less than six new calibers have also been fielded within the German military in the last 10 years to include brand new high performance cartridges like the 4.6x30mm PDW round. While the Germans continue to investigate advanced technology with R&D funding, they have not forgotten their soldiers fighting on today’s battlefields and have applied the “90% solution” by fielding incrementally superior small arms and capabilities. The same can be said to a lesser degree for other NATO countries like Britain, Spain, Norway, Canada and others. Let us also not forget the substantial efforts of potential threat countries as well in their development and fielding of incrementally superior small arms.

Officially, the conventional side of the US Army has not tested a single one of these COTS German weapons for possible US adoption, not one, yet many (no less than four) are in use by select US Special Operations units over those standard US issue weapons available from US military stores and which are in fact comparable in cost or less expensive than the US equivalent.

The Consequences of Failing to Act

A highly decorated US Army Special Forces senior NCO recently stated as part of this debate, “Most of the boots on the ground in OEF/OIF will be the first to tell you that the enemy has no respect for our war fighters in a head-to-head confrontation while maneuvering with his individual weapon (M16/M4). An enemy who does not respect a Soldier’s ability to deliver pain or death will always bring the fight directly to the Soldier, at belt buckle distance.”

We would like to urge everyone to get involved in this, and help our service members to get the best weapons possible. They deserve our united support. Write your elected officials on Capitol Hill. Write the US Army and Defense Department leadership. Demand that we first test then field the best commercially available weapons and ammunition that industry offers today to all of our war fighters and that we do it now, not 5-10 years down the road.

Colt Defense’s introduction of piston operated M16/M4 type rifles over the past 3 years has been customer driven and expands the M16/M4 family of weapons. Prior to that, they had experimented with a piston driven mechanism in the late 1960s known as the Colt model 703. This piston system was looked at by the U.S. Army and they came to the conclusion that there was no benefit of the piston system over the direct gas system and the program was dropped.

In the last three years, Colt Defense has been involved in two military programs and one law enforcement program dealing with piston operated firearms. The first was the Special Operation SCAR (Special operations forces Combat Assault Rifle) and they submitted three rifles. The Type A utilized their proprietary one-piece upper receiver and a direct gas operating system. The Type B was a standard M4 upper receiver with an A.R.M., Inc. SIR (Selective Integrated Rail) system with a direct gas operating system. The Type C SCAR entry was Colt’s piston operated carbine utilizing their proprietary onepiece upper receiver. The Type C SCAR, as of this writing, is the only M16/M4 based weapon to ever compete and finish an official U.S. government test and evaluation program. The Type C would later be updated and improved, which leads to Colt’s current LE1020 weapon system. The second military program Colt’s piston system would be used in was the OICW (Offensive Individual Combat Weapon). However, the program was cancelled before Colt could complete the design of that family of weapons.

While Colt intends to offer only one piston operated weapon in its catalog, they are currently integrating the best of both designs into their final offering. The first is known as the LE1020 and the other is what Colt calls their M5. In this article we will get a first-hand look at the M5 carbine. This carbine has been shown at some industry trade shows but never before in its entirety. Small Arms Review gets the exclusive first look at Colt’s other piston carbine: the M5.

The M5 Carbine

The M5 uses a conventional short-stroke tappet piston where a two piece piston/ operating rod strikes the face of the bolt carrier group driving it rearward and the piston rod returns to its forward position by a spring. However, unlike the Colt LE1020, the M5 uses a conventional M4 flat top upper receiver cut with extended feed ramps instead of Colt’s proprietary one-piece upper receiver. The piston itself rotates and locks onto the end of the operating rod. There is a spring and a stop on the rear of the operating rod. The operating rod/piston is inserted from the front of the receiver, pushed inward and guided into the front sight base. In Colt engineering testing, the M5 has fired 18,000 rounds without cleaning (other than the bore of the rifle) and without malfunction.

There are two current front sight base designs for the M5. The first is the one we just spoke of and is primarily for use with the standard upper receiver. The second more so resembles that of the LE1020 where the piston assembly is inserted from the front of the front sight base, slid back into position and held in place by a detent pin. This is designed for use with the one-piece upper receiver.

The front base is also very different from the LE1020 with a change to the front sight itself. The LE1020 uses a front sight assembly that is identical to the standard M16/M4. The M5 front sight is more similar to an AKM. The same front sight post as the M4 is used but the wings that protect the front sight post are round in profile giving greater field of view in-between the front sight base’s sides and the front sight post. This was based on the project leader speaking with many different operators and getting their opinion on what they thought would improve the sight picture of the rifle.

The barrel itself has had some redesign work on it as well though still utilizing the standard M4 feed ramps on the barrel extension. There are modifications of the chamber area of the barrel and the changes further ventilate gas and helps with air circulation by drawing heat out of the receiver and out the handguards. The cycling of the weapon acts as an air pump. Colt engineers have made the M5 in 10.5- and 14.5- inch barrel lengths.

The current prototype M5 utilizes a standard double heat shielded M4 handguard on the bottom and a modified one on the top. However, Colt is currently working on a universal handguard that will include quad Mil-Std-1913 rails. Prototype hand guards have been manufactured using a steel handguard with aluminum heat shields. Final handguard material is still under evaluation.

The bolt carrier is very unique and is quite different from the LE1020 in the way that the carrier key is held in place to cope with being struck by the piston rod. The carrier key is locked in place in the bolt carrier by a T-slot. The male connector is on the carrier key and the female connector is the bolt carrier. Then a screw is torqued to specification and crimped into place. The head of the screw has heavy serrations and, when crimped, is held firmly in place. The inside of the top of the bolt carrier has to be machined out so the two-piece carrier key assembly can be put in place. Due to this being a piston operated system; the gas rings on the bolt are not needed. The bolt is the standard M4 bolt with the heavy extractor spring and black stiffer buffer.

The lower receiver is the standard M4 lower receiver. Part of the design of the M5 upper receiver was so that it could be placed on an existing M4 lower receiver using the standard H buffer. Colt has made a very conscious effort to keep interchangeability of the lower receiver in the event the U.S. military decides they want a piston-operated rifle. Colt would be able to offer a simple retrofit upper receiver group that will meet this potential requirement.

Side Folding Stock Assembly

Another project in development with Colt Defense is the design of a new sidefolding stock. This is accomplished by modifying the bolt carrier and the buffer extension is made significantly shorter. The bolt carrier has been heavily modified and does the job as the bolt carrier and the buffer. The rear of the bolt carrier has been modified so the recoil spring attaches to it. A bumper is placed on the rear of the bolt carrier. In order to assemble the modified lower receiver, the lower receiver is slid into position from the front and the takedown and pivot pins are engaged. To disassemble, both pins must be disengaged and the upper receiver slid out the front of the lower receiver. The stock pivots to the left side and the stock can be moved upward. When folded, the controls (i.e., selector, bolt catch) are easily accessible by the shooter. The stock is telescopic like the M4 and has four positions. The stock resembles that of the M4 as well but strengthened for the configuration it is in. The computer images provided by the Colt Defense engineering department show what they are working on. Models have been made and are currently going through testing.

Conclusions

The best features from both the LE1020 and the M5 will be combined into one. Colt has taken an incremental approach to their final release. Their piston designs have been proven in both the SOCOM trials as well as independent military testing in some foreign countries and it will be very interesting to see the final design. Nevertheless, the question remains as to whether the piston system will be the future of the M16/M4 weapon system, or will it be a passing fad. The debate continues and only time will tell.

By Christopher R. Bartocci

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

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

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

Colt SCAR Type C

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

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

The SCAR Type C Upper Receiver

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

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

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

The Colt Piston Operating System

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

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

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

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

The Bolt Carrier

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

The Barrel

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

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

The Lower Receiver

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

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

Conclusions

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

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

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

“The Lightweight Small Arms Technologies program has made tremendous progress, which includes a fully functioning dynamic model of the weapons system, a working weapon prototype, and hundreds of cased telescopic rounds fired to date.” Kori Spiegel, US Army ARDEC, Joint Service Small Arms Program

Ms. Spiegel’s presentation during the symposium part of NDIA’s annual gathering of infantry weaponry innovators should be of particular interest to SAW gunners and others who stand to benefit from scientific advances that are cutting the weight of weapons and ammunition. Sharing the rostrum with AAI’s Paul Shipley, her briefing detailed ongoing developments in JSSAP’s multi-million dollar Light Weight Machine Gun and Ammunition program.

AAI is particularly well suited to head up the effort, bringing decades of experience with innovative concepts such as the Vietnam era SPIW, ACR ca. 1990, and the run-up to today’s OICW. They have assembled a similarly distinguished team of companies for the program including ARES, Alliant Techsystems, Battelle Institute, St. Marks Powder, and Omega Training Group.

Recognizing that an alternative to traditional brass cased and steel linked ammunition represents the most productive avenue to meaningful reduction in overall system weight, two alternatives are being simultaneously explored, both featuring projectiles that are “telescoped” in a cavity in the propellant.

The CTA (Cased Telescoped Ammunition) employs conventional powder, primer and projectile, but packaged in polymer casings with synthetic links. This approach is said to be a “low risk” option, yielding significant weight reduction at acceptable levels of cost, complexity and weapon performance.

Fully caseless configuration is the second alternative, using advanced propellant technology where each round is fully consumed on firing so no case extraction and ejection action is necessary. This remarkable cartridge concept was developed to a high degree by Dynamit Nobel back in 1990 for HK’s G11 rifle and is said to promise a greater degree of weight reduction.

AAI has been successfully burst firing CTA in a prototype weapon that is evolving based on engineering refinement and application of advances in materials technology. Concept drawings show the gun as having a rotating chamber with in-line push-through feed and ejection. A fluted, quick change barrel gives high stiffness and heat exchange. Right now the configuration and construction are very conventional with extensive use of alloys and polymers.

Program goals call for successful demonstration firing next year, then transition to Program Manager Soldier Weapons by 2010.

While a standout for this correspondent, the JSSAP/AAI briefing was only one of more than three dozen compelling presentations given during the period 16 to 18 May in Albuquerque’s impressive Convention Center. Other topics of interest included updates on weapons and equipment for Special Operations Forces, NATO research and development, a status report from Program Manager Soldier Weapons, and representatives of each of the US Armed Services charting near term plans for small arms upgrades and replacements. A few morsels from this banquet:

• Marine Corps Systems Command is looking for something beyond the SAW, but needs it sooner than 2010. “The Infantry Automatic Rifle… a light weight, magazine fed, 5.56mm, individual weapon,” sounds something like the CIS ULTIMAX.
• Suppressors are big with all the services seeking noise and flash reduction for everything from Barrett fifties to pistol poppers. Opportunities abound for designers and manufacturers.
• While USSOCOM is moving at flank speed to field the SCAR family, it is not neglecting those current operators still carrying M4 type carbines. NSWC Crane is closing in fast with the Miniature Day/Night Sight program to upgrade capabilities beyond the current hodgepodge of clamp-ons.
• The Coast Guard – and probably Navy Mobile Security – will be getting a reduced range 7.62mm round, developed by ARDEC, with standard velocity and penetration at moderate distance, but quick fall off after that to minimize collateral damage in crowded ports and narrow waterways.
• Remotely aimed weapon systems for a variety of platforms continue to gain favor. The robo turret on STRYKER vehicles will probably be the first to get General Dynamics’ XM307.
• USSOCOM’s MK47 Advanced Lightweight Grenade Launcher is on a parallel track with “Big Army’s” XM312/XM307.
• Knight’s is a big winner with the Army’s recent selection of their modified SR-25/MK 11 as the M110 SASS (Semiautomatic Sniper System).
• Countersniper technologies are getting lots of attention, but existing solutions tend to be complex and expensive. M2 Technologies and the Univ. of Kentucky have partnered to develop an infrared system using COTS components.
• ARDEC has a Rapid Design branch for urgent projects like the Afghan National Army’s need to mount their Russian-type DShK machine guns on American-supplied M113 APCs.
• Along with continued development of Barrett’s 25mm XM109, FN has a shoulder-fired high velocity 40mm launcher in JSSAP’s efforts to enhance anti-materiel capabilities.
• Everybody but the Coast Guard (they have the new SIG P229 in .40 caliber) wants a .45 ACP pistol. SOCOM and Big Army are, once again, conducting separate programs to this common goal.

Go online to get briefings for all of these topics and much more at www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006smallarms/2006smallarms.html

It’s a Small World

Once again this year the Awards Luncheon was enhanced immeasurably by a thoughtful presentation from JSSAP’s Dr. Stephen Small, who can always be counted upon to put current trials and tribulations into historical perspective. This time reaching back to 1326 A.D. and the dawn of gunpowder warfare, his “First Three Hundred Years of Small Arms” had an appreciative audience alternately chuckling and shaking their heads in recognition. Was some distant ancestor of Ronnie Barrett responsible for the 41 pound, carriage mounted, 27mm wheel lock “anti-materiel rifle” developed in Germany so long ago?

Small was honored immediately afterward with an NDIA Professional Service Award, as were Simunition’s Brian Berger, Aberdeen Test Center’s Marvin Maule, Broden Resources’ Dave Broden, and USMC Lieutenant Colonel Richard Adams.

This year’s George M. Chinn award was presented to Richard Swan of A.R.M.S. and the Carlos Hathcock award went to USMC Major Allen Bootby.

Hardware Show

Numerous breaks from scholarly proceedings in the auditorium gave attendees welcome opportunity to visit the large exhibit hall where more than sixty commercial firms and government entities showed their wares. There, many of the concepts and much of the hardware from dry technical papers could be found, along with knowledgeable reps to answer questions and discuss advantages that come with items on display.

ARDEC, JSSAP and Program Manager Small Arms held the biggest section of exhibit booths, a necessary and fitting situation for this giant of the military small arms community. We spoke at some length with engineers and others directly responsible for weapons and ammunition under development as well as those seeking and fielding COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) items to meet immediate needs of troops in harm’s way. From high tech “smart” weapons to Otis cleaning kits, this is the team that gets the good stuff for the good guys.

Several of JSSAP’s industry partners also had a large presence. General Dynamics was on hand with their convertible XM307 to XM312 Advanced Crew Served Weapon. AAI showed its concept mockup of the future light machine gun and its innovative cartridges. ATK had the amazing programmable airbursting ammo for the XM307 and the shoulder-fired XM25.

Long Mountain Outfitters and Defense Munitions combined their considerable assets to provide a billboard-sized display of old and new weapons from around the world, providing an engineering, reference and sales resource for the widest range of attendees. Suppressed pistols, submachine guns, assault rifles, belt guns, grenade chunkers, and antitank rockets snared enthusiasts of all types, sparking innumerable technical discussions and historical anecdotes with this walk-up-and-touch product catalog.

Other real gun guys were also much in evidence including ArmaLite, Barrett, Beretta, Colt, FN, Glock, HK, Knight’s, Remington, S&W, and Taurus.

Barrett is working with JSSAP to lighten the .50 cal M107 and to get the 25mm XM109 ready for fielding. Then there’s the exciting new bullpup XM500 in .416 caliber.

Colt Defense was showing a push-rod M16 called the Advanced Law Enforcement Carbine and a side-opening grenade launcher. Both were apparently developed as entries in recent Army and SOCOM trials. A prototype light machine gun also attracted interest, featuring quick change barrel, open and closed bolt operation, and a push-rod.

FNH USA proudly displayed several new variants of USSOCOM’s tough SCAR (Special Operations Combat Assault Rifle) including a 5.56mm version for sharpshooting, a SCAR Heavy in 7.62mm, and the clever left or right side opening Enhanced Grenade Launcher Module.

HK Defense, after fielding the push-rod HK416 in 5.56mm, has just added the 7.62mm HK417. Also on the table was the handy and hardy MG4, a 5.56mm SAW/LMG.

Knight’s has plenty of reason to crow with the Army’s recent selection of its candidate as the new M110 Semiautomatic Sniper Rifle System, but something much smaller took center stage at their booth. Weighing just 4.5 pounds and measuring only 19.5 inches with stock folded, the brand new 6x35mm PDW (Personal Defense Weapon) was a show stopper for those in the know. The unique high-performance ammo and its diminutive launch platform were developed with requirements and funding from Technical Support Working Group, a little known US Government counter-terrorism organization with direct links to the CIA, FBI and more than seventy other agencies.

Optimizing existing guns and ammo is the job of those who specialize in accessories and add-ons. Specific needs are met mostly by entrepreneurs with companies outside “the system” but well known in the tightly knit world of combat soldiers.

Some precision shooters from CENTCOM’s area of operations asked LaRue Tactical for a special mounting system and soon got the “S.T.O.M.P.” The Sniper’s Total Optic Mounting Package for Remington 700 actions consists of a suitable length of Picatinny Rail, quick-detach rings and inserts, and a quick-detach overarm for positioning night vision optics like the PVS-22 in front and in line with whatever day optic is preferred.

In the same vein, urban warrior shotgunners punished by the heavy recoil of slugs and breaching rounds asked for and got a special buffer from Enidine. The unit we saw was the “ShotShock,” neatly housed in the telescoping tubular stock with grip that Mesa Tactical makes for the Remington 870.

De-ranged

For whatever reason, L3’s Sal Fanelli keeps volunteering to coordinate and conduct the Small Arms Symposium’s traditional government and industry live fire demonstrations. Never an easy task under the best conditions, but heartened that this time wasn’t in the Peoples Republic of New Jersey; Fanelli got everything set up with the Department of Energy’s Central Training Academy to use their superb range facilities on nearby Kirtland Air Force Base.

This became a no-go a few days before the event when those in charge of base entry security clearances realized that busloads of civilians including plenty of foreign attendees would be rolling up. An official case of the vapors ensued, leaving Sal scrambling to find another venue.

Fortunately the good-guy network kicked in and the Albuquerque Police Department cleared its scheduled training to make way for the day’s demos, apparently recognizing that real “national security” should take priority over bureaucratic BS. A big thanks to APD and Range Master Dave Bartram!

Crossed SWORDS

We got out there early on range day to have plenty of time to examine and photograph the weapons and ammo that would be in action later on. This paid off handsomely when the Army’s SWORDS team arrived with two of their mean little battle ‘bots. As ARDEC’s Mike Zecca, along with his team from Foster-Miller, went about their preparations, we watched closely, took pictures and asked a few questions.

Zecca’s planned demonstration, he said, would show how the armed mini-crawler was radio remote controlled by an operator using video link to navigate, acquire targets and then take them out with bursts of machine gun fire.

The first order of business was to swap out the demilled display gun for a real M240, a process that takes only a few minutes when the right tools are on hand. Then, with Deguire at the hardened laptop style computerized OCU (operator control unit), the battery powered rock ‘n roll robot cruised around a few obstacles and pulled up on the firing line. It was time for some test firing so the range went “hot” and a belt of 7.62mm ball got loaded in the 240.

Peering intently at crosshatches on the display screen, Deguire did some fine tuning with the aiming joystick then flipped up the red firing safety cover. The M240 roared to life with the first burst hitting high. Additional fine finger pressure sent a movement signal by radio link and the muzzle lowered almost imperceptibly. The next burst was right on target and a series of quick traverse signals moved the muzzle leftward to quickly engage each silhouette in turn. Satisfied with its practice run, the team powered down SWORDS in place and manually cleared its machine gun.

Most everyone is aware of the cruel truth of “Murphy’s Law” which states, “Anything that can go wrong will, and at the worst possible time.” Keep this in mind as we jump ahead a couple of hours and pick up the story when it was SWORDS’ turn for a live fire demo in front of a crowd including some of the most influential persons in the world of infantry weaponry.

In an unfortunate incident that may have taken its place ahead of all such others in the lore of NDIA Small Arms Demonstrations, the armed robot violated the most basic range safety rule. Our narrative continues with a statement from the Army’s official after action review, presented verbatim:

“SWORDS #5 was equipped with a M240B Machine Gun and flawlessly test fired on the range prior to the opening of the event. At the time that SWORDS was to start its demo, the vehicle started backing up in a counterclockwise arc without any input from the operator. At this time the weapon had loaded ammo but the safety was on, none of the redundant arming steps had been initiated, and because the robot was moving, no firing signals could be accepted (SWORDS cannot fire on the move) by the fire control. The robot was powered down and cleared. No one was injured. An immediate formal investigation of SWORDS #5 revealed that one wire in the operator control unit had broken and was causing a rearward command string to be sent to the tracks. The wiring has now been redesigned to reduce the chance of broken wires and to add wiring redundancy so that these wires have a backup signal.”

(Editor’s Note: Robert Bruce’s in-depth report on SWORDS may be found in SAR’s Vol. 8, No. 5, September 2005 issue.)

Blastin’ With the Big Boys

The ill-fated SWORDS demo took place on the APD range’s rifle lane, a facility that allows even .50 caliber BMGs to be fired safely when reasonable care is taken. Defense Munitions kicked off the firepower show with John Browning’s masterpiece, in this case a new Ohio Ordnance M2HB on the light and versatile Vinghog 12.7 soft mount with the Vingfoot high-low tripod. This was followed by some serious double tapping from LMO’s twin M240 right/left mount that gives over 1500 rpm of 7.62x51mm firepower with superb accuracy.

Then, US Ordnance showed some sustained Sixty shooting with long bursts from their M60E4/MK43, an improved version of a long time favorite of the Navy SEALs.

Others took a turn in demonstrating their wares which included several suppressors. SRT Arms has the Typhoon can for the M4 that quick couples to standard GI birdcages, and Surefire has a nice new addition to its Fast Attach High Endurance line with one for the M249 SAW. Knight’s Dave Lutz showed the dramatic reduction in signature that comes when the M110’s suppressor is in place.

Lewis Machine has a unique recoil compensator and flash suppressor that looks akin to a SKOL can welded under the barrel but is said to significantly reduce muzzle rise and signature. Karl Lewis also showed the easy one minute conversion on his special upper from 5.56mm to 6.8 by swapping out the bolt, barrel and magazine.

The last demo on the big range was a seriously long belt of Simunition’s new 7.62mm “ShortStop” reduced range training ammo, spectacularly sprayed from an M134 Minigun positioned atop an armored car. This rig was thoughtfully provided by the Department of Energy from those now in use by Nuclear Facility Security teams.

PDWs, Pistols, Pumps, Pistons, and Pumice

Live fire action moved a couple ranges over to the pistol lanes where some other interesting weapons awaited.

Earlier that morning we had gotten our hands on Knight’s 6mm PDW, including the chance to handle and strip it. Confidence must be kept but it is permissible to say that lead engineer Doug Olsen’s mechanical action is strongly influenced by a certain designer named Kalashnikov. We also got to fire a mag in semi and full, confirming the controllability and quick handling of this clever weapon/cartridge combo. SAR looks forward to the chance to do an in-depth feature in the near future.

Taurus fired its prototype .45 ACP that is intended for the upcoming military trials, and then Glock went one by one through a table full of their variants including the ever-popular Glock 18 full auto model.

Ammo guru Whit Engel wowed the crowd with a spectacular watermelon-busting shot. Designed for breaching with minimal overpenetration, his 12 gauge hollow point “Entry Frangible Safety Slug” pulverized the hapless melon without even denting the cardboard witness plate two feet behind it.

Colt’s team put the piston-powered Advanced Law Enforcement Carbine through its paces, shooting mag after mag in quick order without incident. This was a tough act to follow for the next presenter, intending to demonstrate the effectiveness of his proprietary metal finish formula and process. Common courtesy dictates that he will not be identified here. “It eliminates the need for lubrication,” he said, pouring handfuls of APD range sand down the barrel and into the receiver of an M16 type rifle just before firing. Painfully, one pop was all he got and no amount of pulling on the charging handle would help. Damn that Murphy…

Once the last round had been fired in formal demonstrations the line opened up for event attendees to come forward and put a few rounds downrange. Sadly, the Minigun had left the range.

National Defense Industrial Association’s Small Arms Systems Division

Small Arms Review strongly supports the work of NDIA. Make plans now to be at the 2007 Small Arms event in Virginia Beach, Virginia, 7 to 10 May. For membership categories and other information contact:

National Defense Industrial Association
“Strength Through Industry and
Technology”
2111 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 400
Arlington, VA 22201
www.ndia.org

Small Arms Review gets an exclusive first look at Colt Defense’s three entries into the United States Special Operations Commands SCAR (Special operation forces Combat Assault Rifle) Program.

In Small Arms Review Vol. 8 No. 10, July 2005, SAR readers got the first in-depth look at the United States Special Operations Command new SCAR (Special operation forces Combat Assault Rifle) that is manufactured by FN Herstal, Belgium and soon to be produced in their Columbia, South Carolina facility. This weapon was but one of many that was tested in the competition. Some never made it through the minimum requirements and were eliminated prior to the first cartridge being fired.

The M4 has been, and remains to this day, the standard issue weapon for SOCOM. Complaints about the M4 surfaced within SOCOM and SOCOM conceded that they were using their M4s beyond the intent of the mil-standard, especially through extensive firing and lack of maintenance. Clearly these carbines were not meant to serve as a light machine gun or to have countless thousands of rounds fired through them without replacement of bolts and barrels. To complicate things further, the configuration of the M4A1 is controlled by the Army and not by SOCOM. This compromised the ability of Colt to make modifications to deal with SOCOM concerns due to the fact that the Army would have to authorize the changes. The Army was happy with the weapons and saw no need for changes. SOCOM clearly needed their own weapon where they were the customer and could modify and improve it at will at their own accord.

Solutions to the issues surrounding the alleged lack of lethality of the 5.56mm round include a heavier 5.56mm round or a new caliber. Whether in the M4A1 or SCAR (both have 14-1/2 inch barrels), the performance of the 5.56mm rounds will be the same. Reports indicate that the MK262 round is a significant improvement in accuracy and lethality over the M855 round, and, if adopted, would be a relatively easy fix and will function the same in either weapon.

As stated in the earlier article, SOCOM wanted an operator-envisioned weapon that would address these concerns. In September of 2003, an Operations Requirement Document was issued and the request was open to any contractor. In November the performance specifications were released by SOCOM. These called for two weapons. The first being the SCAR L (Light), a 5.56x45mm NATO caliber weapon and a SCAR H (Heavy), a 7.62x51mm weapon. Both models would have “future enhanced calibers” which would allow them to be adaptable to calibers such as 5.45x39mm, 7.62x39mm and possibly the 6.8 SPC, to just name a few.

Three of the finalists were submissions by Colt Defense. Information indicates that these weapons came in 2nd, 3rd and 4th in the competition. The reason(s) why one was picked over the others is unknown at this point due to SOCOM not publicly discussing other contractors’ weapons. SAR had the opportunity to visit Colt Defense and get a first hand look at their entries. The weapons observed were not museum grade weapons but the actual weapons used in testing. Traces of salt were visible from the salt water testing and the barrels were clearly worn. This in-depth look will be conducted in a two-part series. This first installment is on types A and B, Colt’s traditional direct gas impingement weapons. Part 2 will introduce Colt’s first piston driven weapon, the Type C.

Type A

The Type A SCAR rifle submitted by Colt utilized the traditional M16/M4 direct gas impingement operating system. Although it was pretty clear SOCOM was looking for a piston driven system, the combat proven direct gas system was a viable and reliable system for consideration.

The gas is tapped from the barrel under the front sight base and is bled off into a gas tube that runs back into the upper receiver directly into the bolt carrier. The expansion chamber is located in the rear of the bolt carrier between the rear of the bolt and the front of the inside of the carrier. This creates a hammer-like blow that drives the carrier rearward unlocking the bolt, extracting and ejecting the fired cartridge case. The spring loaded buffer is compressed on its rearward movement and then drives the bolt carrier group forward stripping a cartridge off the top of the magazine, feeding, chambering and finally locking the bolt into the barrel extension. This system lightens the weapon due to no heavy gas piston as well as increases the accuracy of the weapon by not impeding on the natural vibrations/harmonics of the barrel during firing. With the addition of a free-floating hand guard, the M16/M4 weapon systems are capable of match grade accuracy.

The Upper Receiver

The Type A rifle utilizes a Colt designed one-piece upper receiver. The Mil-Std 1913 rail runs from the rear of the receiver up to the front sight assembly. Additionally, rails run at 3, 6 and 9 o’clock on the hand guard. The barrel is left free floating to increase accuracy but, more importantly, to aid in cooling of the weapon. Accuracy is greatly improved due to nothing impeding on the barrel’s natural vibrations. During extensive fully automatic firing, the barrel is kept cooler longer and the use of vertical pistol grips and SOPMOD accessories such as optics will not put stress on the barrel causing it to droop or bend under extreme firing conditions. This one piece upper decreases the weight as well from using tradition rail systems such as the ARMS SIR system or the Knight Armament Company RAS systems and is also less bulky. The Colt upper receiver has a removable 6 o’clock rail for the installation of a grenade launcher and cleaning under the front of the upper receiver.

Both upper and lower receivers utilized a Kal-Guard finish in a “flat earth” or coyote brown finish as required in the specifications. The upper receiver utilizes the standard fired cartridge case deflector of the M16A2 and M4 family of weapons as well as the forward assist assembly. Also, the traditional ejection port dust cover is used to prevent unwanted dust and debris from entering the weapon.

The Backup Iron Sight

A universal component for Types A and C is the backup iron sight. This originally came from the M4 detachable carrying handle. The carrying handle is removed leaving only the rear sight. This sight looks similar to the Lewis Machine and Tool backup sight but is leaner and has less bulk. The backup iron sight has both windage and elevation adjustments. The elevation is adjustable from 3 to 600 meters. The flip-up “L” shaped aperture has two sights. One is for 0-200 meters and the other is for longer ranges.

The Folding Front Sight

The folding front sight assembly is mounted to the front sight base. This front sight assembly is universal on the Type A and B. Type C will utilize the same sight but a much different front sight base. The front sight is locked in place with a button on the left hand side. The front sight post is the standard square front sight that is adjustable for elevation only.

The Barrel

As per specification, two barrel lengths were required by SOCOM. The first is the standard 14-1/2 inch barrel and then a 10-1/2 inch CQC (Close Quarter Combat) barrel. Types A, B and C all came in two different barrel lengths. Due to the simplicity and cost, the Colt system changed barrels by simply popping open the rear and front takedown pins, pulling the complete upper receiver off and the replacing it with the other. This change is completed in seconds.

The barrels are both the mil-spec 1 turn in 7 inch twist button-rifled barrels. As per SCAR specs, the barrels all must be proof tested and then magnetic particle inspected for stress fractures and then marked accordingly on the barrel (C MP 5.56 NATO 1/7). Both barrels are heavy barrels all the way through. This was necessary to achieve the sustained fire rates requested by SOCOM and are very similar to the Rock Island designed M4A1 heavy barrel. The flash suppressor, as required by specification, is the Knight’s Armament Company Quick Detach compensator for the silencer. The barrels all have chrome lined bore and chambers. During the development stages, many barrel configurations were considered including stainless steel and hammer forged barrels. The barrels are finished in the same color as the receivers.

Modifications were made to the chamber to deal with the Over-The-Beach requirement. These were modifications that were proposed to the XM4 in the developing stages but not wanted by Rock Island Arsenal.

The Lower Receiver

The lower receiver assembly is the one component that is universal on Types A, B and C. There is no difference. The lower receiver, stock and buffer extension are painted in the required Flat Earth finish.

The chosen stock is manufactured by VLTOR and has two compartments, one on each side of the top of the stock that can hold batteries for optical sights. The standard buffer extension is used which allows four positions for the stock to extend. A sling mount plate is inserted between the buffer extension locking ring and the lower receiver, which allows a sling to be mounted to either the left or right side. The buffer utilized is Colt’s H2 buffer. This buffer contains one steel weight along with two tungsten weights. This was necessary due to the use of heavy barrels. This was a lesson learned when Rock Island Arsenal developed the heavy barrel for SOCOM and implemented the change without trial. The M4A1 carbines began malfunctioning in the field with light strikes caused by bolt carrier bounce. The change in the barrel affected the carbine’s dynamics and the solution was the replacement of one steel weight with one tungsten weight.

One of the most interesting changes to the lower receiver is the newly designed selector lever. Unlike the standard lever in which Safe is at 9 o’clock, Semi at 12 o’clock and Auto at 3 o’clock, the lever has been changed to where the Safe is at 5 o’clock, Semi at 3 o’clock and Auto at 1 o’clock. This was a change based on SOCOM’s requirement for the selector to operate over 90 degrees of travel (as opposed to the Colt standard of 180 degrees). In the end, this change was not liked. The selector lever is ambidextrous as per SOCOM specifications

The fire control selector is not the only ambidextrous part. The magazine release is the patented Norgon ambidextrous magazine release. Ambidextrous controls were required in the specifications. The charging handle in its original design is ambidextrous. The bolt catch remains on the left side only. Additional enhancement was that the hammer/trigger pins are made from stainless steel to increase service life.

The Bolt Carrier Group

The bolt carrier group on Type A and B are the same as the standard M4A1. As per SOCOM specification, the bolts were test fired with a 70,000 psi proof load and then magnetic particle inspected for stress fractures. The carriers are manganese phosphate finished and utilize the heavy extractor spring and buffer.

Type B

The Type B differs from Type A in two major ways. First, it uses a standard M4 upper receiver rather than the newly developed one-piece upper receiver. Second, is the addition of the ARMS, Inc. SIR (Selected Integrated Rail) system. The SIR system used was their #58-MOD.

The SIR system is a free-floating hand guard that attaches both to the barrel nut as well as the rail on top of the upper receiver. In essence, there is a protective sleeve that goes nearly all the way across the rail on the upper receiver. With nothing mounting to the barrel, the barrel is left to free float having the same effect in accuracy and heat control as the one-piece upper of Type A. This system provides a constant full-length rail from the rear of the receiver to the rear of the front sight assembly. Accessory rails may be mounted in various lengths to the left, right and bottom of the SIR system. The bottom grip of the SIR system may be removed for installation of a grenade launcher.

At the rear of the receiver is the ARMS, Inc. #40L back up sight which folds and has both long and short-range apertures. The sight is spring loaded and held closed by a lever. To engage the rear sight, one only need to pull rearward on the lever and the sight pops up and engages and immediately you are looking through the long-range sight. By flipping down the rear aperture, the larger short range aperture is engaged.

Due to the additional weight of the SIR system, the weight is slightly heavier on the Type B weighing in at 7.66 pounds in the carbine variation and 6.48 pounds in the CQC configuration.

Mechanical specifications are the same for Type A and B. The only departure was the use of the SIR system rather than a one-piece upper receiver. The only advantage to Type B is the ability to change out rail systems at will and parts commonality with the M4A1. The same front sight system is used as well as lower receiver and bolt group.

Conclusions

After careful inspection of both models in Colt’s model shop, Colt Product Development Engineer Art Daigle took me down to the engineering test range at Colt. Then he brought out a very large bin of loaded 30-round magazines. More than 500 rounds were fired between both models with no malfunctions of any sort encountered. The guns that were examined were guns that were actually tested by SOCOM during the trials. They were somewhat beat up and the remnants from the salt water testing was present. The rifling was quite worn and the guns were not clean nor was there any lubrication on them, due to Colt’s use of UCT Defense Ultra Chem. The ammunition used was Black Hills commercial 77-grain open tip match bullet; the commercial equivalent to the Mk262 MOD1 ammunition.

Coming up next month in Part 2 of the Colt SCAR program is Type C version. This is Colt’s submission of their own designed piston operated carbine. We will look closely at what might possibly become the next generation M4 carbine.