Art Pizza dedicated more than 38 years serving the U.S. Army in its Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) (which is now known as the Combat Capabilities Development Command, Armaments Center) at Picatinny Arsenal. In that time, he spent 17 years as a project engineer on the Mk19 grenade machine gun. He spent five years on the Green Ammo project (5.56mm and 9mm). Then he became the center’s Technical Expert on 40mm ammunition. He later went back into design and became the ARDEC Project Officer on hybrid ammunition (including mortars) and the extended range guided 40mm projectile. Pizza spent the last five years before his retirement as the Project Integrator for Medium and Small Caliber Weapons, Ammunition, and Fire Control systems.

We sat down with Pizza to discuss his long and distinguished career.

Small Arms Defense Journal: Art, thank you for your service to the U.S. Army and the 40mm weapon platforms. We greatly appreciate you taking the time to connect with Small Arms Defense Journal. You have the unique perspective of spending significant time in both 40mm weapons and 40mm ammunition. To solve the age-old question – when there is a system failure, who’s usually to blame, the ammo guy or the weapon guy?

Art Pizza: Around the late-1970s or early ‘80s, when the U.S. Army transitioned the Mark19 40x53mm weapon from the Navy, they were hand fitting/gunsmithing each weapon making 3-7 guns a month at Navy Ordnance Station in Louisville, Kentucky. They were beautiful, hand-built weapons; however, the production numbers were nowhere near the rate the Army needed. The Army was looking to make over 250 weapons a month. They end up contracting to Saco Defense (now General Dynamics Saco, ME). The complete Technical Data Package needed to be reworked. They worked closely with Saco Defense in manufacturing the weapon and improving the mass production and tolerances to make it at a high production rate weapon.

At the same time, we needed to increase the production rate of 40mm High-Velocity ammunition. The Mark19 is an advanced primer, blowback-operated weapon in which the bolt never locks into the receiver and depends on the firing pin tripping as the heavy bolt is moving forward. The velocity of the bolt moving forward is critical to the functioning of the weapon. The contracted 40mm ammunition at that time was purchased as individual components and sent to Milan AAP for final load, assembly and packing into cartridges. Most of the issues pertained to the consistent crimping of the cartridge case (a new 360-degree roll crimp vs. the old, staggered stake crimp.) Unfortunately, the failure to obturate because of the crimp issues caused stuck projectiles in the Mark19. If a second round was fired into the first projectile, on rare occasions it could cause a low-order explosion. This was called an in-bore detonation.

Other ammunition issues early on were related to improper charge weight. They old systems were using a volumetric charge measurement system. These cartridges also often had missing or double copper closure cups, and material flaws in the aluminum cartridge cases. We were looking to increase the production of ammunition from 40,000 units a year to close to 1 million. The solution was to have completely automated loading with net-weight, check weight systems and liner voltage distance transducers (LVDTs) to have a machine check for presence and location of these items.

Mark 19 issues mainly pertained to the timing of the feed system on the weapon resulting in dropped rounds and what we called at the time banana cartridges (because they would get bent by the weapon). Both caused feeding issues and could cause a lodged projectile or even a dropped round. The Mark19 represented new challenges to the infantry in the form of a high explosive machine gun in a small package of 65 pounds. Another issue was using the right lubrication in the field. The Mark19 called for LSAT lubricant, which was in short supply. A lot of feeding issues were based on a lack of adequate lubrication or lubrication not in the right location on the receiver rails or feed tray. Every gun coming out of the Saco factory was function fired for firing rates. If I remember right, we fired three guns 50,000 rounds each for endurance testing each year.

The bottom line was that most of the early stoppages were attributed to ammunition. Improvements to modern manufacturing methods and inspection reduced these to almost non-existent in the early stages. The weapon went through changes, as well. The cocking lever was modified to a two-piece design that reduced the possibility of an out-of-battery firing. Lubrication became more prevalent, and attention was spent on the timing of the feed system. If you had a problem with the Mark 19, it could usually be attributed to either the feed shuttle timing, a dirty weapon, or a broken part. One time I was called in to look at some weapons having issues. It turned out they did not have LSAT lube and were instead using WD40 and Break Free. They would run through maybe a box or two of ammo (32 to 64 rounds) before the gun stopped. We brought one tube with us, and we painted it on using a paintbrush to get through the training until a supply was sent in.

Over time, I was involved in several malfunctioning investigations and would try to get on-site within 48 hours. As an infantry weapon, we were not doing round counts (of how many rounds had been fired through the weapon) so we would never know what to expect, especially at training locations. I would say 80% were attributed to ammunition. If you are making over 1 million rounds a year, it is possible to get one or two bad rounds. The fuses were made back then at KDI and were difficult to manufacture but had double safeties (spin and setback). Most in-bores were attributed to a low order detonation from a round striking a stuck projectile lodged in the barrel.

Therefore, to answer your original question in the 40x53mm platform, at that time, it would have typically been the ammunition guy causing the problem.

SADJ: As an ammo guy, I will humbly accept the criticism. As far as the rest of the story, all I can say is wow! That is an amazing summary of decades of work. Over the course of your nearly 40 years in 40mm, what do you feel was your greatest accomplishment?

AP: The transitioning of the Mark19 to the Army and the rework of the technical data package. Getting it into full-rate production and fielding to the U.S. Army was a terrific feeling. Seeing what you worked on and talking to soldiers about the use of it in combat and how it saved their lives meant a lot to me. I met with some soldiers that were involved with the rescue mission of the “Black Hawk Down” incident in Somalia. The largest weapon they had available on the ground was two or three Mark19s mounted on HMMWVs. They were using it as an anti-sniper weapon and fire was directed by a captain using a laser pointer. The captain talked about the leveling of a hotel in Somalia that was stopping their rescue attempt and which they were receiving heavy fire from. The Mark19 took down the entire building. Knowing what we did at ARDEC saved a lot of U.S. lives, and knowing it was instrumental to the rescue operations, made it all come together for me. I still remember talking to this captain about what the Mark19 enabled him to do. It was hard not getting teary-eyed for him and me while listening to his story.

SADJ: Looking back over your career, was there a particularly fun project that you remember?

AP: The Extended Range Guided 40x46mm cartridge (EGR40) was the most fun. This projectile was for the handheld M79, M203, and the M320 low-velocity 40mm weapon. I was the technical expert for some time in 40mm ammunition engineering and I was asked if I wanted to lead a design team in the development of the early R&D effort. It was an easy choice going from riding a desk to getting back into a real hands-on engineering development project.

My senior design engineer, Ronny Alzamora, and I designed a new finned projectile and cartridge case with an improved combustion chamber. We had a team of engineers working on guidance navigation and control, camera, transmitters, laser receptor, and also working on wings and canards. Every week we were cutting metal and going to the range firing projectiles. It was all hands-on design work which you just didn’t usually see in the government. We had between 20 and 40 people working on various parts of it, along with a contractor and universities. We even did some early work with some students from West Point as a capstone project. We also looked at a rocket assist system. It was a lot of work. We pushed the envelope… a lot. We worked the engineers very hard. I was very lucky to have had that opportunity and it was a lot of hard work getting the separate teams focused on the end game. I learned a lot about human relationships and forming a team.

SADJ: What project was the most challenging?

AP: It was, by and large, the EGR40 because of the hands-on work we did.

SADJ: Are there any projects that you wish you could’ve had a second chance at it?

AP: What we learned about the LV 40x46mm, we never got a chance to put into practice. We found that course correction could not be accomplished in the time of flight and was not enough to make a difference at impact. We did successfully put a camera in the projectile, survive launch, and transmit and receive video and course correction signals. What we did learn was that the current 40mm round is spin-stabilized and lost spin and wobbled, making it difficult to hit a target at 400 meters. When we made our fin-stabilized projectile, we were more accurate out to 600 meters and had some variations that we were able to fly to 1,000 meters. Toward the end of the R&D project, we were pushing to drop the guidance (wings and canards) and convert to just a tail-fined projectile that had the ability to double the range of the standard HEDP projectile. We were able to increase HE and fragmentation by designing a new larger warhead. We could not get the funding to pursue this option and the team was dispersed. They tried to make improvements to the existing spinning projectile but could not demonstrate any major improvements with a spinning projectile. A finned projectile is more accurate and will fly further than a spin-stabilized one.

SADJ: Are there any other areas of your work that you would like to share with our readers?

AP:What we (Army Engineering) do has an impact on soldiers’ lives even if we don’t know about it. Don’t believe that it can’t be done. So many times in my career I was told that this or that wouldn’t work. I was told we would never get a camera to survive a gun launch. We were told we would not be able to transmit a clear image. You have to look at new innovative ideas and methods. Modeling, simulation, and design of experiments are the keys to success. You have to get away from the build-and-break mentality and think about the design of experiments. You need to test statistically with multiple variants to reduce iterative designs. Design decisions are made on statistical-based results.  

SADJ: Can you paint of picture of what the 40mm systems families will look like 40 years into the future?

AP: What I envision for a 40mm low-velocity grenadier M203/M320 weapon:

• 1-2 camera rounds with a GPS location that will transmit enemy positions back. Detect behind berms, buildings, or in defilade.
• Several extended-range projectiles with a higher velocity and flatter trajectory with increased range out to 1,000+ meters. Finned projectile with improved warhead and increased lethal radius.
• Several HE dual purpose projectiles with improved armor penetration.
• Possible netted projectile or an airburst anti-UAV projectile
• Specialty blast overpressure round for room clearing or tunnels.
• Specialty non-lethal projectiles.
• Specialty flechet round for room clearing. HEDP is useless in urban areas, room clearing, etc.
• Specialty door breaching projectile (may be able to do this with a blast overpressure).
• An improved fire control system that would allow the rounds to take on a semi-mortar-like role.

And, for the Mark19 High-Velocity system:

• A camera round that can be used for GPS and intelligence. These rounds will be able to provide intelligence out to 2000 + meters.
• An anti-UAV projectile; blast overpressure, net, etc.
• Flechet round for urban areas.
• Flare rounds, including IR flares, with higher altitudes and longer burn time. These are not currently in the HV systems. This would give night vision extended range.
• Improved cartridge case hemispherical powder chamber.
• Extended range, fin-stabilized rounds for ranges over 2,000+ meters.
• Improved fire control system to allow indirect fire applications.

By Dan Shea

I’m writing this in the first person for a reason; I want to speak to our readers as directly as possible about a great influence in my life that I hope they can share in. After my Army time I went back to college in the mid-1970s—a much more serious young man than I had been in the 1960s. Courses in business and mechanical engineering were started. Unfortunately, I never finished—necessity was that I had to go to work, then wanted to start a family and finally start into business. The work I did included electrical and electronic. I integrated the first PCs into a robotic production line for one company and designed controls for DuPont’s robotic plywood manufacturing. This was all pioneering tech. My company did alternative energy homes and business construction, and it became a good-sized electrical contractor in New Hampshire. All the while, I was studying and working on weapons—military weapons. I designed my first suppressor in 1981. This is not a brag sheet; the readers have a general idea of the work I’ve done for military, governments, industry and the historical record.

What it is about is that I’m a guy who never completed my college degree. I’ve been offered honorary PhDs a number of times and didn’t take them because, well, I didn’t do the doctoral thesis to earn a PhD and didn’t believe I was really qualified anyway. I felt like I would be insulting people who spent 10 years excelling in academia while I was essentially in the dirt and working manual labor.

So, here’s a guy who was an Army grunt and then a cook, didn’t finish college, and yet over 45 years, I was able to work inside several complex technical industries and work at top levels. No subterfuge; I’ve always been upfront about not having a degree. Aside from all the other reasons for this success, such as having a loving wife/partner and great family, there has always been an organization I could turn to.

That is ASM International. It started in 1905 sharing the lore of steel making and blacksmithing, and by WWI it had become a shaker and mover; a Colonel from U.S. Army Ordnance joined to help sort the group a bit and gain direction. In 1933, the organization became the American Society for Metals (ASM).

In 1952, ASM formed the ASM Materials Education Network, then the ASM Metals Engineering Institute, and in 1957 seminars were started. Heat treating conferences were started in 1974. By 1989 the Ninth Edition of the Metals Handbook had grown to a 17-volume set comprised of 15,000 pages, 25,000 illustrations and 7,500 tables. In 1999, the now 20-volume set went onto 4 CDs.

I was introduced to ASM in the late 1970s. It has been a guiding light to me, even though I have not attended their countless professional seminars. They have amazing courses for beginners as well as for advanced professionals. What they have that I’ve been able access all this time is an unending pool of specific technical information and guidance. (Usually purchased second-hand, because, well, I’m frugal at times.)

Need to study up on failure in metal structures like firearms? ASM has fracture analysis and failure analysis handbooks, databases and courses. Trouble with heat-treating a new product? They have a whole society devoted to Heat Treatment. Crystallography—do you want to understand alloys and surface issues and what happens as you create a new product? You’re covered.

Need to really know what 7075 T6 means, on a gut level, not just reading words in some gun magazine written by an author who is parroting what a manufacturer said? How about the ASM Handbook Volume 2A: Aluminum Science and Technology (latest edition 2018)? It’s only $297, member price is $225. Sometimes members sell collections of the handbooks when they retire or whatever. At night you can sit and read the technical issues that will continue your life-long education. Many people think I have my PE, ME or EE, and I quickly explain I didn’t finish college and then tell them about ASM International.

This article in Small Arms Defense Journal is simply me trying to pass on to you, the reader, a place where you can get the real information on materials, metals, working with them and identifying issues. I hope you at least look up their website and explore a bit (asminternational.org). You might find a new home for your future growth. And not only that, when you join, as you should, you get a subscription to one of their magazines. I’ve always been partial to Advanced Materials & Processes.

The real subject of this article is passing on knowledge. I’ve spent a lifetime passing on that research and lore from the military/machine gun world. When we started “The Archive Project” on smallarmsreview.com it was to digitize and preserve the hundreds of thousands of manuals, test reports, photos, articles, etc., that had been preserved in my library as well as those of the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds, England and Defence Academy of the United Kingdom, Shrivenham. The goal? To ensure future generations could do research quickly and surely and that this information would not be lost.

Likewise and on a much larger scale, ASM International has met that calling and is very actively promoting STEM subjects to high school students. That’s Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. The United States is falling far behind other countries in the STEM areas, and it’s critical that we keep our youth interested and charging forward into innovation and new designs. My grandparents were born with a horse and buggy, then early automobiles and lived to see cars everywhere. I started with little tiny black and white TV screens and testing tubes at the hardware store on Saturday mornings with my father (an Electrical Engineer on nuclear power production in the 1950s-60s), and now I have a computer-integrated flat screen that covers a wall. The United States was a shaker and mover (not to disparage the brilliant people around the world; I’m an American and well, as world-traveled as I am, it still affects my perspective a bit). To get back in the saddle, the U.S. needs to teach the new generations that they can take part in exciting worlds to come—new innovations, new solutions, a better world, if they’re strong enough.

The ASM Foundation is a key to this. I encourage all of you to go to the ASM Foundation website and see what you can do on a local level to help students meet the STEM subjects—how to grow stronger, how to learn, how to participate in the future on a real level, not a superficial, snowflake level of selfies and symbolic gestures. Real, solid research and innovation that they can sink their teeth into, regardless of race, creed, color or sex. STEM doesn’t discriminate; it rewards commitment and hard-core study as much as natural talent. There is the high level of satisfaction that comes from personal initiative and success.

See how you can help the new generations … asmfoundation.org.

Small Arms Defense Journal was granted a unique interview with Textron Systems about the company’s most recent developments with the Lightweight Small Arms Technologies (LSAT) program that the U.S. Army Program Executive Office is currently running. Speaking with Wayne Prender, the current Vice President of Applied Technology and Advanced Programs from Textron Systems, we were able to shed some light on one of the more advanced small arms development programs of today.
Small Arms Defense Journal: How are things going with the LSAT Program?

Wayne Prender

Textron Systems: Along with some other competitors that are competing in the program, we were recently awarded a 12-month prototype contract. That award came on June 25 (2018), and we’ve been very excited about it. We will be producing one prototype and delivering that to the Army a year from now (Fall 2019). This product is a continuation of LSAT. Since 2004 we’ve been working on maturing and improving upon our cased telescoped (CT) ammunition that is a component of this program. One of the Army’s modernization priorities has been soldier lethality, and this is one of the first contracts to have been put in line with this. We’re very excited to be providing the Army with a system that is capable of not only meeting the objectives they have but also the growth that is necessary to enable a generational weapon to grow with the Army. We do believe that we have a very good technical approach, and a very good team assembled to complete this work.

SADJ: Right now the focus is on replacing the M249 SAW, but ultimately one of the goals of this is to produce a family of weapon systems, such as a rifle, carbine and designated marksman’s rifle, all at the squad level?

TS: That is correct, not just ourselves; the Army has laid out the plans for a family of weapon systems. We will continually optimize our prototype not only for the automatic rifle but also for a potential carbine version. Last year at AUSA we did release a carbine version of our CT Weapon, and we’ll continue to evaluate how to best improve upon that system for the future. Of course we also are looking at the family of belt-fed machine guns, whether they are light, medium or heavy machine guns. Something that we have incorporated into our design is that it is scalable depending on the operational requirement.

SADJ: Seeing that the Marine Corps has had a controversial switch to the magazine-fed M27 IAR, is there an interest in a magazine-fed SAW for the Army, essentially a magazine-fed LSAT?

TS: Right now there is nothing about the CT Weapon that makes it belt-fed only. In fact our carbine version is of course a magazine-fed system. We can go with either should the requirements change. But we are also not unveiling our particular design for the prototype; we are evaluating and going through the trace studies to determine what the best approach is to meet the Army’s stated requirements as well as their goals and objectives. Both configurations (belt-fed and magazine-fed) will be a part of our evaluation.

SADJ: Is there any possibility of an interchangeable feed system being implemented, such as was used with the Stoner 63 designs?

TS: No, I do not believe that is a solution set that we are exploring at this point in time. It would be overly complicated for a 12-month program. Again, we are primarily focused on showcasing the capabilities of the weapon and fire control system.

SADJ: Could you expand on the ammunition that you are using for the program right now?

TS: Cased telescoped is the technique of embedding the round into the overall cartridge of the ammunition. We do continue to use a polymer material to form that case. That provides a lot of technical advantages, but it also decreases the overall weight of the ammunition, in addition to the actual weapon system. We’ve also developed new techniques for firing this cased telescoped ammunition. As a result we’ve been able to reduce the overall weight of the system and improve its maneuverability, accuracy and, ultimately, the lethality. Really the prototype competition is about that lethality requirement. Currently we are focused on meeting or even beating the Army’s objectives with respect to performance as well as overall size and weight.

SADJ: Previously Textron Systems had been experimenting with caseless ammunition, but that appears to have stopped?

TS: Caseless development has actually not been dropped; we continue to explore caseless ammunition through a variety of contracts, but that is not at a state of maturity where the cased telescoped polymer ammunition is today. The Prototype Opportunity Notice (PON) does require a certain level of maturity and technology-readiness level. Our polymer cased telescoped ammunition and weapon systems do have that maturity. But in the meantime we continue to do research and development not only on caseless but other advanced small arms technologies.

SADJ: With the polymer cased telescoped ammunition, could you talk about some of the challenges in development?

TS: Anything new of course comes with some of its own unique challenges. But in the case of polymer cases, polymer actually provides a number of advantages. We cannot comment on some of the issues we’ve had, but we can discuss the advantages that we’ve come across. Not only is there a weight saving but quite honestly it is also strength of the case in addition to ease of manufacturability. Now, that may sound odd that the strength of the plastic is in fact better than current brass, but in conjunction with the weapon and how the weapon operates and handles that ammunition, the polymer cased telescopic ammunition is in fact a better solution than a conventional brass setup. It really isn’t about just the ammunition or just the weapon system; it is a system of systems that has to interact together. With that we’ve been able to make it successful. Obviously challenges occur on any development program, but obviously we’ve had 14 years of lessons learned on this type of weapon system. We’ve spent a large amount of time learning to develop weapon systems like this.

SADJ: Should LSAT and cased telescoped ammunition be successful, is there any avenue to converting current U.S. Army small arms into the system?

TS: Because of the way the ammunition and the weapon interact there really isn’t any feasible way to convert a standard brass-cased 5.56 or 7.62 chambered weapon system into a cased telescoped platform. While they look similar from the outside, function exactly the same from a user’s perspective to include firing and clearing, the internals of the weapons and how it handles [sic] is just too drastic to convert from the older platform to the newer.

SADJ: What is the next hurdle/step for Textron Systems down the line?

TS: We continue to execute the programs that we have on contract today. They are very critical and important contracts. This PON is the next step for the Army’s Next Generation Squad Automatic Rifle Program, and we are laser-focused on that.

Cased Telescoped Weapons and Ammunition
(Being developed in Hunt Valley, MD)

Game-Changing Weight Reduction

Textron Systems has a long, proven history as a designer and manufacturer of armament and ammunition technologies, having been involved in many Army small arms development programs over the past 50 years. The LSAT has undergone Military Utility Assessment (MUA) with the U.S. Army Maneuver Battle Lab, evaluation with U.S. Special Operations Command, and completed the Dismounted Non-Network Enabled Limited Objective Experiment with the U.S. Army Capabilities Integration Center (ARCIC).

Textron Systems oversees an experienced team of companies for the program including: ARES, Inc. of Port Clinton, OH; Orbital ATK of Independence, MO; General Dynamics company St. Marks Powder of St. Marks, FL; MSC Software of Santa Ana, CA; and Battelle Memorial Institute of Columbus, OH.

The next generation of CT weapons and ammunition systems delivers improved maneuverability and performance at 40-percent less weight than current systems. CT weapons and ammo are offered in a 5.56mm CT Light Machine Gun (LMG), a 7.62mm CT Medium (MMG) Machine Gun and a 6.5mm CT Carbine. Numerous military assessments and technical evaluations of our 5.56mm CT LMG have validated system maturity, performance and weight reduction benefits. These proven benefits are also present in the 6.5mm and 7.62mm CT systems. When it comes to equipping the warfighter, less is definitely more.

• Cased Telescoped Weapons & Ammunition
• Carry more ammo while reducing the load
• 5.56mm LMG proven to Technology Readiness Level 7
• Improves short-range engagement times
• Provides more first-round hits at long range
• Increases accuracy and maneuverability

Over the summer of 2014, Small Arms Defense Journal received the unique opportunity to tour Accuracy International’s production facility in southern England. SADJ also got a chance to sit down and talk with Dave Walls and Tom Irwin about the company’s history and future.

Small Arms Defense Journal: Explain the beginnings of Accuracy International from your perspective.

Dave Walls: I was a qualified toolmaker making various press tools and fixtures along with my work colleague Dave Caig. I was a competitive target shooter and represented my local rifle club, my county, and eventually I qualified to join the national squad and shot for Great Britain in international competitions. Dave Caig was also a club and county shooter and represented Scotland. We both repaired our own guns; our engineering backgrounds enabled us to design better components to replace existing weaknesses in our rifles. It didn’t take long before other club members noticed that we had done modifications to make our guns shoot well. And when they needed work done they would ask if we could do what was necessary to get them up and running again. We worked through lunch breaks and after work to make the parts needed to repair other club member’s rifles. Our payment for this was for them to buy us a beer at the local pub. Before long we were repairing guns for shooters all over Sussex, Hampshire, Essex and other neighboring counties in the UK. We received so many repairs it became impossible to do them all for drinks so we had to start charging. The work demand grew so much that we could no longer continue to operate during our lunch breaks, as the demand was too great, this progressed into us buying our own machinery to install in my garden shed. The demand for repairs continued to grow more and more, taking up most of our time outside of our full time jobs, we had reached a breaking point where we were in it full time or pack it all in and have our lives back. We decided to see how much money we were earning part time to determine whether this would be enough to support one of us at least in a full time job. So over a three-month period we kept a record of our earning, and were surprised to discover that we were making more money part time than in our full time jobs.

SADJ: You made a decision to venture into a new career?

Dave: I wasn’t happy with my full time job because due to staff shortages the company decided to move me from my tool making position to work on form grinding on a surface grinder, which I knew long term, would be bad for my health. My boss at that time told me that he couldn’t find anyone skilled enough at form grinding but he could replace a toolmaker more easily. This gave me the hard shove I needed to persuade me to give in my notice. It was a big decision to make quitting a good job, going into the unknown. I had a mortgage, a wife and two kids, but I have never ever had a reason to look back. On the day I left, my boss said to me, “You’ll never make any money by just selling a few guns.” A statement that has proved to be far from the truth. Dave Caig and I started a business partnership and traded under the name of C&W products, which stands for Caig & Walls. A few years later at a three positional rifle shoot we met up with Malcolm Cooper, at the time he was one of the best shots in the UK, and later became a twice Olympic Gold medalist and world champion. After the match we all went to a barbecue where he was told about the replica Colt pistols that we had made, he was very interested and asked if he could see them. I lived less than a mile from the barbecue so we left and drove to my house. After seeing the pistols he said to me, “You’ve got the potential to design your own rifle.” To which we replied that we already had been designing our own action for a target rifle. Malcolm wanted to see the action and after looking at it he asked us if we would make him one, which we agreed to do. He later shot a new 300 meter world record. Malcolm at that time was the owner of a gun shop in Portsmouth. Dave Caig and I formed a mutual agreement to do repairs and re-barreling for him, as we did for several other gun shops. Trade was building up along with our reputation. Soon we were taking in repairs and tuning of rifles from top international competitors from all over the world. Malcolm was approached by a contact in the British Army about a tender (contract) for a new sniper rifle and he came along to discuss with us the possibility of putting a magazine in one of our target rifles. We had never made a magazine fed rifle before as all my interest was in target shooting which was single shot. Malcolm said, “I’ll get you any gun you want, if you want to have a look and see if you can get any ideas from them.” He produced about 8 rifles and I discarded about 5 of them.

SADJ: What ended up as the design of the magazine?

Dave: Initially I settled for a Springfield magazine, basically because it was easier to fit in my gun than any of the others. I designed the magazine port in the underside of the action body around this magazine and it seemed to work quite well. Then Malcolm submitted this weapon to both the SBS and the SAS who were also interested. After the trails on these weapons were made an order was placed for 42 rifles with aluminum chassis’ with a wood covering this was the predecessor to the later developed L96A1. Then we found a company that would make honeycomb-like stocks with a hard surface on the outside.

SADJ: Where are those 42 original rifles today?

Dave: Well some went to Hereford and some went to Dorset; I don’t know where they went from there. They might even still be there. Following on from this after the Falklands War the British infantry got interested in tendering for a new sniper rifle. This contract was for 1,212 rifles plus spares. We decided to enter the tender, but we didn’t think we’d ever win, but we could use the trail to obtain feedback on our product. At this time we were still working from a garden shed and we didn’t think the British Army would be interested in our rifle. We literally went ahead, submitted our tender for this trial along with 17 other companies, most of them American and European with Remington, Winchester, Walther, Browning, Mauser, Beretta, BSA and Parker Hale among them.

SADJ: Some of these companies had been in existence for a hundred years already.

Dave: Of course, and they make hundreds of guns a week, whereas between us if we were lucky we’d probably get only one rifle every 4 or 5 weeks. We were a very small business in comparison. We submitted our trial rifle and surprisingly enough the army actually quite liked it. From 17 rifle entries it went down to about 8, and we were still in it. Then it went from 8 to 5 and we were still there again. Then we began to have some worries that we might win this. The worry was what would we do if we were to win. The next elimination process took it down to 3 and we were still a contender. BSA was eliminated from the group, leaving Parker Hale and ourselves to take part in a shootout to win the contract which we won with the provision that it would be manufactured by a company with the approved quality standards.

SADJ: They must have found out that all you had was a garden shed operation?

Dave: Yes, they realized that and told us that it would have to be made by a reputable company and overseen by us. So we were sent to a company in Dartford, which was chosen by the Ministry of Defense (MOD) to manufacture the rifles. We would oversee the production for the first batch of rifles helping their production manager with our knowledge. Before Accuracy International Ltd. was formed Malcolm suggested to us that we would stand a better chance of success if we promoted the rifle in his name as he had world recognition for being a world champion. Malcolm then asked if we wanted Fame or Fortune: “If you want fame, we do it in your name. If you want fortune, we do it in mine.” I didn’t have any money at that time and neither did Dave Caig so we settled for fortune. Malcolm promoted the weapon in his name and that’s the way it began. We then started assembling the rifles ourselves in a company in Portsmouth, which was the start of Accuracy International Ltd. The company expanded and we started purchasing machines. I managed the production, programming and running the machines along with my son who had recently done a CNC programming course at college. More machines were purchased along with the increase of employees to six people working on the machine shop floor. After we had completed the MOD contract, we tendered for the Swedish contract and won the trial, which would become the Arctic Warfare System (AW Rifle). This was soon followed by Holland, Belgium, Denmark and Germany and was followed by several other nations that could not afford extensive trials and were happy to follow on the judgment of other countries. In 1999, Accuracy International was sold to a group of investors and Malcolm Cooper retained 10%. Accuracy International now had new people running the business and maintained the normal running of the company until 2001/2002 when they decided to outsource everything made in the machine shop and shut down the manufacturing side of the company. They only kept two machines and these were to make stock sides and sold all the other machinery. Tom Irwin was appointed as sales and marketing manager. In 2005 the company went into receiverships and within the first minute it was announced, I stood up and said, “I want to buy it back.” Tom immediately walked over to me and said I’d like to join you, so we got together and did it. Since we took the company back it’s gone in leaps and bounds. My focus has always been on making the guns shoot well and my target background married up with the military side extremely well. I needed somebody that had a better head for business than me and Tom fulfilled that role. I rely on Tom’s judgment on that side of things.

SADJ: So how does this affect the management of the company?

Tom Irwin: We’re both in charge; we don’t have a present managing director or CEO that runs the company. We share the responsibilities.

Dave: We have a mutual understanding that if we don’t agree on an idea we will not do it, but we will find a solution to the problems that we can both agree on.

SADJ: This has been working since 2005?

Dave: Yes, that’s when we bought the company back.

Tom: Yes, I was mostly in the States but then I got involved over here, always on the selling/sales side. After 2005 then there were four of us originally, Dave Walls, Dave Caig, the original designers and founders of the company, and then there was a finance guy and myself. There were four of us that literally split responsibilities and then Dave Caig retired so we bought back his shares. The other person remains as a shareholder but is no longer involved in the management of the company. It is now Dave and I and we did a further split of responsibilities. It works well.

SADJ: Now that the company has a phenomenal military contract success rate, has there ever been given any thought to a target rifle?

Dave: This whole time I’ve enjoyed hitting small targets at long range. I would think we could go back to our beginnings but this is more of a passion more than a business. We stayed away from assault rifles as we know our expertise is making accurate bolt action rifles. There’s no point of us trying to get into a market that is already saturated with loads and loads of companies making that sort of thing, trying to compete with people who have been making this stuff for years and years. We’ll stick to what we’re best at.

SADJ: Where did you get the idea for the thumbhole?

Dave: Target rifles. I used to shoot with thumbhole stocks and the angle of the hand was better than a traditional cranked wrist sort of thing. It puts the trigger in line so you can pull the trigger back in a direct line. Lots of target technology went into the development of that stock. A competent engineer with a reasonable amount of firearms knowledge could design a rifle but to design one to force someone into a good shooting position by the design of the stock is not that easy. Between Malcolm Cooper, Dave Caig and myself we had a vast experience of shooting and stock design. We’d come up with stocks for all different builds. I was the tallest, so we would modify it to suit me, then Malcolm was the shortest. So we could actually model the stock for the three different builds of shooting.

SADJ: Much has been written about the L96’s “flat bottomed receiver.” Can you shed some light on this?

Dave: There are a lot of articles that have been written about this, explaining the stress factors of the steel are stronger and all the tremendous mechanical advantage. I looked at these articles and thought to myself, “What a brainy guy they think I am!” The actual fact is that when designing the L96, I went to the steel rack and I didn’t have a round bit of metal, I only had a rectangular piece and everybody started copying it. The design turned out to have a lot of advantages, but they were tripped over by accident. One of the advantages is that it lends itself quite nicely to a double row magazine whereas if it was a round action, a double row magazine wouldn’t work as well. Another advantage of a square action body is bonding it on to the chassis. When it comes to machining, it makes life a lot easier because you have a nice flat base to hold on to, and easy to check because of square sides. There are lots of advantages to what we did, but it was tripped over by accident and not as scientific as people think.

SADJ: What do does AI think of the Precision Sniper Rifle (PSR) Contract?

Tom Irwin: The probability of winning it was low; we certainly tried as hard as we could to win and we came up with a product that was good enough to win. But to be realistic about it, I knew when you’re up against Remington in the USA it was always going to be difficult. When we won the British MOD contract, which became the L115A3, we said, “We are going to win this and we are not going to let anyone take this contract.” We’re not going to let some overseas company come into the UK with this. It would look really bad for us. Remington took the same position with the PSR contract in the United States. If Remington had lost that job, it would have been bad for them, with all of their facilities and home grown political support they get. We’ve got 10 people, including myself, and 4,000 square feet in the U.S. When you compare that to Remington’s facilities, we’re small fry. We didn’t expect to win it but what I expected to get out of it was a new product, and that’s what we’ve got. Even before the results came out, we went into production with that and sold over a hundred of them on a special limited edition run of the PSR contract rifle kit. It gave us an opportunity to get the rifle into full production and today we have a complete range of AX rifles directly as a result of the PSR solicitation. There are many features in all of our rifles, including the AX50, which came about because of the PSR contract so it helped us change our product range.

SADJ: With the PSR contract, some of the companies were incorporating powered rails. What does AI think of that?

Dave: This is the trouble with modern weapons; everyone wants to look like Rambo. It makes them feel good when they are carrying this stuff but it doesn’t help the shooter and it doesn’t make the rifle shoot any better. Designs are being changed really considerably by individuals that think for instance a powered rail would be a legitimate thing to have but when you come down to it from a shooting point of view, in some cases it’s not practical at all. For example, I’ve been designing a new bipod and I’ve been told that customers would like the bipod to lock solid, but I would say it’s better to have a certain amount of movement. This would be more favorable on lose ground when you fire a shot, one side of the bipod sinks in the ground. If you have it locked you would have to reach forward and unlock the bipod and lock it again, but with a certain amount of tension. But not locked you can just twisted the gun back to position, unfortunately people are saying it has to be locked.

SADJ: How has the marketing approach changed in the company?

Tom: Back in the late 90s and early 2000s, the marketing approach was completely different than today; they would not have been sitting here, talking to gun writers. There was involvement with movies and TV dramas but not anywhere near the level we are doing today. It was the same with articles, magazines and advertising. The approach was that we make the best: people know that and they’ll just come to us. They didn’t promote themselves as the best sniper rifle in the world. Around the world, with military government contracts, there are contractual requirements, which include penalty clauses, and bonds, which the prior management would not enter into. Upfront payments were a part of doing business back then. The main competitor products were customized hunting rifles. Now, fast forward to today. If you didn’t put bond money up front, if you didn’t sign up for penalty clauses, and if you tried to get upfront money, you would not get any contracts. Those days have gone! If you look at the competition, there are a number of companies using the same concept of an aluminum platform and several of them have flat bottomed receivers. Most of the competitive rifles are designed for tactical use and none of them are customized hunting rifles. There is a lot more competition around today. Our approach is to be the leader, stay ahead of the competition and we make the best sniper rifle in the world. We are not going to be catching up; others will catch up with us. If we were still making only the AW and AE today we would be going downhill rapidly. We invested in facilities, people and products and that is why we are at the point we are today, where we have no qualms at all in saying we make the best sniper rifle in the world because we believe that.

SADJ: How has legal legislation changed the picture of civilian shooting in the UK since you began the company, in both the political and social aspects?

Dave: Politically it’s almost impossible for a company to get into firearms manufacturing today, in the UK, because of all the government red tape. Socially the sport is going away. One of my friends from my competition days recently stepped down from coaching the national team and when I asked him why, he said, “There’s no new people coming into shooting, all the old guys like us are dying out.” and he’s absolutely correct. When I was young and in my teens, I would go down to my rifle club and those old guys on the range would teach me the finer points of rifle shooting. Now that generation is dead and there are no rifle clubs that kids these days can go to because they’ve all been shut down after the government has made it almost impossible to continue operation due to the restrictions.

SADJ: What does the future hold for Accuracy International?

Dave: Old age. (Laughter ensues…)

Tom: Well due to the fact that we literally just changed our product line to the AX and AT, then the immediate future is making sure we can get the product as good as it can be. So for the near term future, which you can say is the next 5 years, that is our focus and right now we’re not planning on anything beyond that. We spent so much getting to this point and we’ve done enough to keep us growing for the short term. That’s where our focus is.

SADJ: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today – a truly amazing story.

Acronyms:

AW- Began out of the Swedish trials and stands for Arctic Warfare, 3 lug action. Later made in .338 Lapua.

AE- Entry-level rifle for law enforcement agencies in 2001 as well as being an economically priced rifle.

AS- AS50, semi auto .50 caliber rifle.

AT- Improved AW. 6 lug action and quick release barrel with an AW action.

AX- PSR contract rifle. AX multi caliber, .308 NATO, .300 Win. Mag., .338 Lapua. AX 308 separate.

AICS- Accuracy International Chassis System, AT AICS, AX AICS, AW AICS. Aimed at the civilian market and upgrading existing law enforcement rifles either for the Remington 700 action or the Accuracy International actions.

L96- Original company production rifle designated L96 in British Army and nick named “The Green Meanie.” Later replaced by the .338 Lapua L115A3.

Today, unlike in the 1990s, the company is not in any sort of debt, and all the machinery in the factory is paid off in full. From a meager 2 CNC machines in the late 90s, one of which wasn’t even working, the company now boosts over 30 of them in addition to various other modern machine stations.

This machine is using electricity going through a wire and cutting the receiver to the correct specification shape. It is computer controlled and automatically cuts as many as 6 receivers in a single setting. The liquid inside the container is sterilized water.

Tom Irwin demonstrates features of the magazine well on an AX .308 chassis; particularly how a shooter or spotter can insert a magazine from the left without moving the rifle and maintaining the rifle on target.

Notice the modularity of all the external parts on the chassis. If any of these parts become worn down or broken, shooters can swap them out with new ones. Borrowing a concept from polymer handgun designs, the pistol grips can be swapped out for different size swells to accommodate different shooters.

Putting a .338 Lapua AX through its paces in the factory 100 meter range. The scope is a Schmidt & Bender, a world renowned scope for an equally remarkable rifle. Notice the amount of KeyMod slots on the frame.

Various bolt housing groups in line for further finishing and assembly. Another feature of the design was the short 60 degree bolt throw open, allowing more rapid bolt manipulation. This was especially evident during the test fire of the weapon system in the 100 meter range, the bolt being especially smooth during operation.

Top left, Caig and Walls’ third prototype rifle from 1981. Bottom left, a target rifle design from 1984. Top right, standard and original L96 sniper rifle. Notice the military iron sights and the transition from the gentle curves of the target rifles to the rigid lines of the military rifles. Middle right, Arctic Warfare cutaway. Notice on all three of these contract rifles, the different muzzle compensator design changes. Bottom right, German G22 .300 Win. Mag. Even in 1997, the need for Picatinny rails has already become apparent as is evidenced by this rifle’s scope mounting systems. Also notice the night vision optic in front of the scope. Because making optical mounts such as these was so difficult and cumbersome to pair up with the various other mounts on the market, Picatinny rails and KeyMod slots on the AX rifles did away with the headaches of the different configurations.

In the world of high quality military ammunition, the name Black Hills Ammunition is on top of the list. Not for building standard issue ammunition but for the specialized ammunition used by Special Forces and SEAL units. Jeff Hoffman is the one on the speed dial for the U.S. Special Operations Command when they need a custom load for a specific purpose.

Small Arms Defense Journal was granted an interview with Jeff Hoffman, the man behind the highest quality ammunition in the U.S. arsenal. His story is of an industry practitioner who worked his way up by his bootstraps from working a Dillon press as an employee to him and his wife Kristie owning one of the most successful munitions manufacturing companies in the U.S.

SADJ: What was your first experience with firearms?

Hoffman: The first one that I remember, specifically firearms as in burning gun powder and not with things like BB guns was my grandfather and father taking me to the range and teaching me to shoot a .22 rifle that was a Winchester Model 74. And I remember it being just magic to be able to be in one spot and create an effect in another spot with that rifle. I was hooked right there.

SADJ: You have a background in law enforcement, can you tell us a little bit about that?

Hoffman: I made friends with the local cops when I was in high school and it was interesting. I was more interested in walking uptown and hopping in a patrol car and going on patrol then I was on going out to drink beer. I spent a lot of time in a patrol car and thought that this was fun. I didn’t know what to do for a profession so for lack of something better I thought I really enjoyed what I had seen of law enforcement, so when it came time to go to college by default I took up criminal justice. I graduated with a degree in criminal justice and got hired by the Rapid City Police Department in 1979. Actually, prior to that, I had interned in my home town when I was 19 years old.

I believe I was the youngest cop in the history of South Dakota. I had to get a special dispensation from the Standards Commission to be a cop at 19. I wasn’t even old enough to be in a bar except by wearing the uniform. It was kind of funny when I went in front of the Standards Commission the Chief of Police from my hometown went with me and vouched for me so that I could get hired with him. His recommendation said “Jeff’s good in a bar fight.” That was a long time ago and I don’t think that same recommendation would get you hired as a cop now, but at the time my primary recommendation was that I was good in a bar fight.

As a Deputy Sheriff sniper, Hoffman trains with various weapons depending on the conditions. Here he uses a telescopic stock version of the Mk12, Mod1 he designed his Mk262, Mod1 ammunition around.

But after interning and getting my degree I came to Rapid City. I was hired by Rapid City Police Department and worked for them from ’79 to ’82 and then had an opportunity to get into business – the predecessor to this business. And so then I switched to the Rapid City Police Department Reserves, because once you’re a cop it’s hard to quit being a cop, so I stayed on as a reserve. And then a year later I switched to the Sheriffs Reserves. I served in that capacity until earlier this year when they made me a regular deputy. So basically I’ve been doing law enforcement for something like 35 years.

SADJ: Did you have any particular specialty in law enforcement?

Hoffman: Yup, I’m a sniper. I’ve been on the Special Response Team since 1989 as a sniper. For the past eight years or so I’ve been the sniper element leader for the Special Response Team. In 1989 my sergeant on the Sheriff’s Department stopped down to work and said – when I say “work” I mean Black Hills Shooter Supply, which was the company that was a predecessor to this. It started as Black Hills Shooter Supply. He stopped down to the work and said, “Hey Jeff, we’re starting up the warrant service team, do you want to be a part of it?” And I said, “Certainly, that sounds like fun. I’ll do anything. I’ll carry gear or whatever you need me to do. I spent my life on the phone negotiating things, I could be a negotiator.”

At the time I was a competitive pistol shooter and I said “I could be an entry guy. I’m pretty good with a handgun.” And my sergeant looked me in the eye and said, “You’re not listening to me. I want you to be a sniper and you’re gonna be my sniper.” And I said “okay.” And at that point I dedicated myself to studying sniping, becoming a real student of sniping in the martial arts sense, you never master it you’re always a student. So that’s what I’ve done for the past 25 years.

SADJ: When did you enter the gun business?

Hoffman: Black Hills Shooter Supply started in September of 1981. Kristi and I bought in to that company in March of 1982.

When I had joined the police department they found out in pretty good order that I could shoot pretty well – my grandfather taught me to shoot – and I could shoot a pistol pretty well and never had any problems qualifying. They asked if I wanted to join the pistol team and I said “sure”. I hate losing, so since I was then on the pistol team I had to win, and to win you had to practice, and to practice you had to buy ammo.

And so, I was buying ammo from our local range master who was making it on a progressive machine in his basement. And this range master one day in 1981 said, “I’m tired of police work. Do you think I could make a living making ammo full time?” I said “No.” He didn’t listen to me, fortunately, and he started the company that became Black Hills Shooter Supply. And I started working for him immediately cranking a Dillon. That was my third job. I was a police officer, also I was working security at the Hilton Hotel, and my third job was making ammunition. And as much as I cranked that Dillon along with all the other part-time officers that were doing it, we could never catch up.

I would make ammunition during the day and at night I would ship ammunition, and I realized that I was wrong and there is a big market for this. And I remember clearly thinking that I wished I had a piece of this and then later on like most businesses, that business needed some additional cash flow, so Tom, the principal owner of Black Hills shooters Supply, offered to let Kristi and I to buy into the business. To make a long story short, in March of ’82 we bought into Black Hills Shooter Supply, and we ran along in that business until October of 1988. At that point the business had two primary product lines: we sold components, brass, bullets and powder and we also sold loaded ammo. At that point a business decision was made to split the sheets. Kristi and I took the manufacture of ammunition and our former partner took the sales of components and we split the companies, and now we became Black Hills Ammunition.

SADJ: When did Black Hills Ammunition open their door?

Hoffman: Black Hills Ammunition was formed in October of `88. And since then we’re still sole owners and we’ve grown and done pretty well.

SADJ: What was your first major contract?

Hoffman: That would be the Army Marksmanship Unit in 1996. We had a gentleman by the name of Mike Harris call up and suggest that we bid on this bid. I said “I don’t know anything about military business.” And he said “I do. I’m a retired Lieutenant Colonel. I know all about this and I can help you win the bid.” And I said, “Well what do you want out of it?” He said, “I want 3%.” And I thought that was a pretty good deal, 3% of some business that we didn’t already have. And so we bid on it and surprised ourselves by winning the bid. By winning the bid it wasn’t just saying that you could do it, but you also had to provide samples. They tested our stuff. They had impossible specifications.

Jeff Hoffman is not your typical business executive. He is a master of his craft and can be seen any day on his 1,400 yard range in South Dakota honing his long range shooting skills.

The specifications, ballistically, were impossible to meet, and I told them that. We provided the samples and I explained to them that you can’t get that kind of velocity with that bullet in this cartridge without exceeding pressures. This ammunition meets your specifications for performance but it’s over the specified pressure. And they said “Yeah, we know but we wanted to see what we could get.” And we were able to save them 10,000 pounds of pressure plus provide a very accurate round that was designed for 600 round target shooting.

We provided the round that gave them the desired accuracy at an acceptable price to them and that was our first contract with the U.S. Government, the Army Marksmanship Unit in 1996. From that we didn’t realize how significant that was but we later learned that the rest of the world, all of the military units, watch the AMU to see what they do because they’re the best funded and they have very good shooters. So about three years after that all of the other Marksmanship Units have come to us and said “You do the Army stuff, would you also do stuff for us?” So by ’99 we had the Navy, Army and Marine Corps were all buying from us, and I believe also the Air Force was also buying from us.

SADJ: At the time that you did this how many people did you have working for your company?

Hoffman: Probably 25 or 28.

SADJ: Can you tell our readers about the development of the Mark 262?

Hoffman: We can. In about 1999 the Navy came to us and said “We’re designing a new 5.56mm precision rifle. It’s basically an M16A1, accurized, scope sighted, suppressed, and we need ammunition that’s accurate and effective at 600 yards.” And I said “We could do that. I know that we can meet your accuracy requirements because we’re already doing that for AMU. I don’t know anything about the performance levels – the combat effectiveness of 5.56mm at 600 yards, but I know that we meet the accuracy requirement. So we started working with them.

We submitted the ammunition that we’d been making for the AMU and then we set about making it a combat hardened cartridge, instead of .223 Rem brass we went to 5.56mm brass. We increased the charge. We modified the propellant. We’ve also modified the projectile. The brass has been modified to make it better. And ultimately, the result of that is what we have now the Mark 262 Mod 1. I’ve greatly condensed a decade of development and refinement in the cartridge in that short recital. But we went from AMU ammunition to Mark 262 Mod 1.

SADJ: Can you explain the differences between the Mark 262 mod 0 and the Mark 262 mod 1?

Hoffman: The primary difference is the addition of the cannelure, that’s what distinguished mod 0 from mod 1. We also, along the way, have gone through several generations of propellant, and mod 0 has a different propellant than mod 1 does.

SADJ: With the amazing popularity and success that the Mark 262 has had, can you tell our readers about how you were able to bridge the gap between combat reliability and match accuracy in a combat rifle round?

Hoffman: When the military came to us to produce this the primary requirement was an accuracy round, and we knew how to make accuracy. Primarily you get accuracy by careful selection of components well suited to the task. In this case the bullet that we ultimately ended up with was a Sierra 77 Matchking, a very accurate bullet. And then you assemble those carefully selected components with extreme care. For example, in Mark 262 mod 1 it has one lot of brass – for every ammo lot it’s composed of component lots that are single lot of product. One lot of primers, in one lot of brass, with one lot of propellant and one lot of bullets assembled on a single line machine in one continuous run. What we’re doing there is eliminating variables, and by eliminating variables you end up with very uniform ammunition, and carefully tested at every stage of production. So if you’re using good components, good accurate bullets, assembling them with extreme care, that’s what will give you the accuracy and the
uniformity required.

And then along the way we’ve had to do things to combat harden it like we had the brass specially produced, we had to modify the brass to do what it does from the original Winchester brass to the brass that we later went to. We had to have the brass modified. We had to have a cannelure added to the bullet, which Sierra was reluctant to do. We went through several generations of powder, ultimately ending up with a propellant that was designed specifically for this application. Those things combat hardened a
marksmanship round.

SADJ: Can you tell our readers the difference between a boat tail match hollow point and an open tip match?

Hoffman: Primarily it’s terminology, but it’s terminology that means something. Most people, when they look at a boat tail hollow point they say that you can’t use that, it violates the Geneva Convention. First it’s not the Geneva Convention that they mean to be talking about, it’s the Hague Convention. Secondly, the U.S. is not a signatory to the Hague Convention; however, we abide by its terms in accordance with the U.S. Government’s interpretations of it.

The Hague Convention basically says that you cannot use a bullet which unnecessarily deforms or is intended to cause unnecessary harm or suffering. The U.S. Judge Advocate General (JAG) has addressed these concerns specifically with this bullet and with some prior open tip match bullets to answer those concerns. Basically open tip match is the U.S. Military terminology for a boat tail hollow point that’s designed for accuracy purposes. The hollow point is not there in any way to cause the bullet to deform, fragment or do anything.

The bullet is designed specifically for accuracy, and the design of it is there only because that’s the most accurate way to produce an accurate bullet. In the case of the Mark 262, that hollow point does nothing to enhance terminal effect. When you recover any bullet fragments from a gelatin test you can find that little nose, which some people would call a hollow point, still perfectly closed shut in the recovered gelatin, which demonstrates the JAG ruling in this regard is absolutely correct. The “hollow point” does nothing towards terminal performance. Rather than argue about types of “hollow points,” JAG uses the term OTM, Open Tip Match to denote a bullet that has the core inserted from the front and the tip then formed to create a superior bullet from the
accuracy standpoint.

SADJ: Do you manufacture a civilian version of the Mark 262? And, if so, what are the differences between the commercial Mark 262 and the military version?

Hoffman: After word got out about us making the Mark 262 there was an extreme civilian demand for it. It was incredible. But the only way that it was available to the civilian market was the ammunition that we would pull from our military runs. We have a very detailed inspection process; every round of ammunition is hand inspected. And we would pull off ammunition that had the slightest cosmetic defect, and it would not go to the military. That ammunition was functionally perfect, would perform exactly the same in every performance category but it just wasn’t quite as pretty because it might have a very slight scratch or a very slight dent on it. We would sell those as cosmetic seconds.

Black Hills Ammunition produces ammunition of the highest quality for the nation’s most elite warriors. Shown is 5.56mm Mk262, Mod1 ammunition being manufactured and then off to the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Crane, Indiana where it will get deployed to Special Forces anywhere in the world.

There was always an incredible demand for those. People would call up and say, “When are you going to run more seconds?” Well, we don’t run seconds; it’s a byproduct of production and inspection. But there was such a demand for it that we cleared it with the military, talked to them and they said “Jeff, this is your product that you designed and you can sell it if you want.” And I said, “We won’t use the Mark 262 name but we’ll sell it.” That’s the reason why our commercial ammunition doesn’t say Mark 262. Legally, we would be entitled to because we produced the ammunition but I didn’t think it was right. I considered it a military term. So we sold it as 556-77 and we started offering the exact same product. The only difference is it’s not subjected to all of the military acceptance testing, because it’s not going to the military, but all the same care in production is there.

Just recently we’ve had to make one other slight change because there’s an international powder shortage going on right now – a propellant shortage. Part of it is due to the extreme demand in the industry, and part of it’s because one of the overseas plants had a minor explosion. Nobody was hurt but that plant happened to be our Mark 262 propellant. We had to give priority at that point to the military so we had to use a substitute propellant recently for the commercial 5.56mm. It gives the same performance but we believe in being absolute transparent. The current production commercial ammunition does not use the standard military Mark 262 propellant, but it gives the same performance levels.

SADJ: Can you tell the readers about your involvement with the M118 LR PIP program?

Hoffman: Some years ago a military unit came to us and said, “Jeff, we want you to improve the M118LR.” And I said, “What do you mean improve?” And they said, “You know, make it better.” At that time I didn’t have a specific task on how to improve it, so I started looking at it and seeing how you could improve it. Could you give it a longer range, higher velocity, better BC bullet, push it faster? And in our testing with the weapons supplied with that unit, I really honestly couldn’t find a way to make it better at that time. It was shooting minute of angle out of a semiautomatic weapon. It was performing very well. I couldn’t find a way to make it better.

Every time that we tried to improve the performance by shooting it faster or using heavier bullets we would run into some sort of a problem. And one thing I learned is there are some semiautomatic weapons out there that will drop primers even with ammunition perfectly within proper pressures, so there was a limitation there. You couldn’t simply increase the pressure and have it work. And so, I told them at the time that I don’t see a way to improve it. This is good ammunition.

And then a civilian trainer working with one of the top military units came to me and said, “Jeff, you need to know where to look. You need to improve temperature insensitivity, because at difference ambient temperatures the current M118LR provides too much variation and velocity, and at long distance that’s a problem for the snipers.” And he said also that lot to lot uniformity needs to be improved. So I did some testing and confirmed what he said. I learned that the propellant really could be better, and I submitted a letter to that effect to Naval Service Warfare, Crane, Indiana, and they started on a program to improve it.

And that program ultimately resulted in AB39, which is produced by Federal and it’s a much better product than the original M118LR. We competed on that contract. We didn’t win that one and that’s okay. We feel a certain amount of satisfaction in being a part of a program that improved the performance of the ammunition for our warfighters. We don’t have to win all of them. We’re happy just to be able to contribute. And if we win them then we’ll take that too.

SADJ: As of 2014, who would you say is your biggest customer?

Hoffman: The U.S. government.

SADJ: What sets Black Hills Ammunition apart from the rest of the manufacturers? What makes you guys shine above the rest?

Hoffman: We are responsive, agile in responding, very precision oriented, willing to take on R&D projects for things that, frankly, other people look at and think it’s a real pain in the ass. We’ll take those programs. At last count we have something over ten different national stock number items where we’ve developed them for the U.S. Military, because the DOD came to us and said we need something that will do this. So we set about trying to do that particular task. I think that and the absolute dedication to quality.

One thing we like about military businesses is the military has high standards and they don’t care whether you make a profit on something as long as it’s the best value for the government, as long as you’re providing them something that is better than anybody else would give them and it’s a fair price. They don’t begrudge you making a profit on it. You contrast that with law enforcement – you know I come from a law enforcement background and I love cops, but frankly most law enforcement agencies don’t have good specifications but they buy on low bid. What that means is they constantly get the cheapest thing that’s offered to them, and that’s why we’re not real strong in law enforcement. But that’s why we are real strong in the military. The military has very high standards and we don’t have to compete against the cheapest thing that anybody can make.

SADJ: How does Black Hills diversify its product line?

Hoffman: We sell direct to gun shops. We have avoided the distributor dealer marketing simply because ammunition is a competitive market. We find it works best for us to sell direct to the dealer so we sell direct to the various gun shops. We also sell direct to law enforcement agencies. We sell a lot of ammunition to the U.S. gun manufacturers and some of the foreign gun manufacturers for their function test ammunition and for their proof test ammunition, which some readers may not know what proof is. Proof is ammunition that is intentionally overloaded by a certain amount, and the gun manufacturers will fire one of these rounds through every weapon with the thought that if there’s a flaw in the weapon then it will be discovered early before that weapon is shipped from the plant.

It’s very high specification and it falls in the category of one of the niches that I enjoy, stuff that other people think is too much of a pain in the ass. It’s very high specification. It has to be done right. We’ve adopted that market and we make a large amount of the proof ammunition that the gun manufacturers in this country use. So we have those three categories: the dealers, the law enforcement agencies, the gun manufacturers, and then finally the U.S. Military.

SADJ: For your commercial line you have hunting ammunition and you have cowboy action ammunition. So you have other types of ammunition as well rather than just standard, military and law enforcement type ammunition?

Hoffman: Right. We try to provide something that in any of the categories there is significant demand for. We have training ammunition, self-defense ammunition, long range precision ammunition, premium ammunition for the big game hunter, marksmanship unit ammunition for the military and combat ammunition.

SADJ: Do you do much international business?

Hoffman: Some. Our exports are handled by APEX – Austin Sheraton and he does handle some export business for us. It’s not huge but that’s okay, because we’re extremely busy doing the U.S. business. Frankly, a lot of our export business goes to friendly foreign nations where our special forces will go train with those units and those units look and say, “What do you have there? I need some of that. How do I get that?” And then those units will come to us. A lot of advertising for export sales is actually through U.S. Special Forces contacts.

SADJ: Does Black Hills manufacture any of their own components?

Hoffman: No, we’re an assembly plant. We don’t manufacture any of the components. We don’t make brass, primers, powders or bullets; but we have very good relationships. We’ve got relationships that go back two and three decades with companies. It’s interesting in this business because so many people look at it and say, “How can you be good friends and industry partners with other people that should be your competitors?” This is a very close-knit industry. We’ve got relationships going back with Hornady all the way to 1981, personal relationships. We’ve got relationships with Sierra that almost go back that far, with Hodgdon, with Ramshot Powder Company. We have relationships that are decades old and there’s a lot of trust there. And those companies will work with us.

We have no engineers on staff. We know how to make ammunition. But when we need something special, a change in projectile, for example the Mark 262, when we needed a different brass, we went to Winchester and told them we needed a brass that will put up with this, and they went to work on it, and gave us that brass. When we needed a special propellant we went to Ramshot Powders and they went to their manufacturer and had that manufacturer specifically manufacture a powder that would do exactly what we needed done.

When we needed a cannelured Sierra MatchKing bullet, they didn’t cannelure MatchKing bullets. MatchKings were thought of as a perfect accuracy bullet, and by adding a cannelure the fear was they would damage the accuracy of it. We convinced them to put a cannelure on it. We didn’t lose any accuracy. The actual specs are not releasable to the public, but I can tell you that we shoot 300 yard groups of ten shots that are always sub-minute angle. You can’t damage accuracy very much and maintain that kind of an accuracy standard. We’re not talking three shot groups, we’re talking ten shot groups; and I’m not talking a hundred yards, this is at 300 yards. I think we’ve eliminated that concern that you’re going to damage the accuracy by adding a cannelure to the bullet.

SADJ: You’ve spoken previously about your quality control process. Can you explain what your quality control process is and how it exceeds what you would find in the industry?

Hoffman: Our quality control is a process. It’s not one step. At every point in production, as you saw earlier in your tour, we have an inspection process at every step. When we order product it’s from someone that we trust in the industry. We don’t shop around and jump around to what’s cheapest in the market. We’ve got long term suppliers who have standards, and we receive certifications from them with our shipments showing that the product meet those standards. And then when it shows up at the door, we pull samples. We have inspectors that start sampling it. As soon as the pallet shows up they start tearing stuff apart, sit down with their calipers and gauges checking stuff, because even the best vendor can make a mistake, so we check it there. And as you saw when the operators are running the machine they’re constantly inspecting the product that’s going in, as well as inspecting the ammunition that’s going out. And then everything that we shoot and produce is shot every day for pressure and velocity. And then in addition to that it goes to a hand inspection process where every round is hand inspected. We have a lot number system. Here’s one more example, the lot numbering system will allow us to track what machine produced it, what operator was running the machine, who the inspector was, and the date. And from that we can go back and see who set the machine up, who double checked it, how often was it checked during the run, what were the components used, what was the pressure and velocity of that ammunition and were there any changes made during the run.

So at any time if someone calls up and says, “Jeff, I have a round that didn’t perform the way I expected it to,” I can go back and access all of our records right down to the day that it was produced and tell you everything about that ammunition. That degree of quality control and responsibility leads to quality. Everybody that touches that along the way knows that their signature is on that box of ammo because of that lot number. It allows us to go back to who inspected it, who produced it, who set the machine up. Everybody shoulders the responsibility for making sure that the ammunition is as good as it can be.

SADJ: How many people do you have working for you today?

Hoffman: 76 I believe.

SADJ: Where do you see Black Hills Ammunition in the next decade? What are your future goals?

Hoffman: We will continue producing ammunition that is good as we can make it, and selling as much as the market wants to the extent that we can. Ever since 9/11 of 2001 we’ve been in a backorder situation except for one year. So it’s hard to meet the market demand but we’re doing the job as best we can.

SADJ: Thank you very much.

In 1982 I had just accepted a job to run the engineering department at FN Manufacturing, Inc. where the M240 machine gun would be produced for the first time in the U.S. My first job was to hire some engineers to assist me, and my very first interview was with Sal Fanelli, a young engineer out of Remington. It didn’t take me long to figure out Sal really understood firearms and that I wanted him on my team. I hired him on the spot. Through the years we enjoyed many successes together, getting new machine guns, systems, and accessories type classified in the military. In 2000, Sal was awarded the George M. Chinn Award for his contributions to the small arms industry. Presently, Sal is a supervisory engineer for Infantry Weapons Systems at the Marine Corps Systems Command. I recently learned the Marines had awarded Sal the Donald Roebling Award for acquisition. Sal led the charge in acquiring a new 5.56mm combat round for the USMC. I caught up with Sal recently to find out more about the new round and his role in the acquisition.

Why did the USMC decide they needed a new round of 5.56mm ammunition?

USMC determined that the performance of the M855 was inconsistent. Firing into a block of ballistic gelatin, we determined the M855 had yaw dependency. What we mean by that is from high speed videos of one round from an M4 we observed the path of the projectile doing exactly what we expected. It provided adequate terminal effects, but this didn’t happen every time. Other rounds went straight into the block and straight out of the block – no yaw, no enhanced terminal effects. We considered this inconsistent performance and confirmed that the M855 was impact yaw dependent.

We needed a round that gave consistent terminal effects from round to round, ammo lot to ammo lot and gave the exact terminal effects every time. We needed this performance at ranges from 0 to 400m.

You mentioned that the bullet went straight through. Was there a cause you could determine or was it just pure inconsistency?

From one round to the next, the terminal effects were not consistent. We determined it wasn’t due to being the first shot out of the gun, a cold barrel or a hot barrel, or anything else. It was so random it had to be the ammo.

It was through extensive testing that we saw these inconsistent effects and we couldn’t live with them. We wanted a term to describe this inconsistent phenomenon. That’s when the Marine Corps accepted the term “blind to barriers” suggested by Supervisory Special Agent Buford Boone, Supervisor of the FBI’s Ballistics Research facility and Hays Parks, a senior lawyer in the Office of General Counsel, DOD. Our new round would be blind to impact yaw and blind to barriers. That means it would not matter at what angle the projectile entered the gelatin block. It would give the same performance every time. At the same time we needed a round that went through intermediate barriers, like car glass, or a door, or clothing and did not ricochet or deviate from the shot line. The new round was to defeat the barriers and continue to do what it was supposed to do as far as terminal effects.

Gelatin Block Tests compare lethality of M855A1 to Mk318Mod 0.

While you were looking for a new round, was the Army’s M855A1 improved 5.56mm ammunition in consideration?

No, it wasn’t around – at least as far as we knew. Later we found out the Army was quietly developing a new 5.56mm round but was so quiet about it the other services were not aware. So, we put a “sources sought” announcement out to industry to let ammunition manufacturers know we were in the market for a new 5.56mm round. The new round had to be designed so it would give us consistent results.

We did have an ulterior motive. There was a pending requirement for a new intermediate caliber. If we could improve the consistency of the terminal effects of our current 5.56mm round and use it as a temporary solution, it would bridge the gap until we could get the requirement going for an intermediate caliber. The intermediate caliber requirement remains in the discussion phase. Instead, our development resulted in a round that equaled the performance of the current 6.8mm round. Remember the Belgian SS-109 ammunition? It was selected as the NATO standard in the U.S., and was designated the M855? Well, that ammunition outperformed the Vietnam era M193. In a similar way, our improvements have now given us a 5.56mm round that gives us the performance of the current 6.8mm round. Of course, with the same technology approach, we know today that we can get a better performing 6.8mm round and 7.62mm round than the NATO standard 7.62x51mm M80 Ball.

When we put our solicitation out on the street, we didn’t know about the Army activity to improve the M855 round nor did we know that SOCOM was developing an improved round through the Navy’s ammunition development group at Crane, Indiana. The Navy liked the wording in our solicitation and asked if the USMC wanted to join forces with them in developing a new round. We formed a joint Navy/SOCOM/USMC team and used the USMC wording to establish the requirements for the new round.

U.S. Army-designed M855A1.

Tell us what makes this round different from what is being used now.

It basically comes down to the design of the projectile. Look on line and you can see the cross section. It’s an open tip match determined by DOD and military services lawyers to be consistent with U.S. law of war obligations. By using this type projectile, we gained the flexibility to select the design of the overall projectile configuration. The design work was done by Federal Cartridge Company. They came up with a combination of a reverse draw projectile with a lead core that is crimped down into an open tip match.

With Federal building the round, now you have to check compatibility with both the M4 and the M16A4.

USMC requirement was that it had to work in the M16A4 because, at that time, that is the rifle that all USMC infantry was using. M4’s were only for special applications, officers, etc. The new round was initially designed to work in a short barreled rifle so we had to confirm that it would work in the longer-barreled M16A4. We’ve gone through three iterations of testing that have used a total of 30 guns firing anywhere from 9,000 to 15,000 rounds per weapon. We tested for function, reliability, corrosion, accuracy, you name it.

What about environmental testing, like hot, cold, sand and dust?

Yes, it was full up testing in all environments.

Sectioned projectile from Open Tip Match Mk318 Mod0.

How did you evaluate terminal effectiveness?

You know, you can’t do it well because it’s so hard to get volunteers (just kidding!) so we shoot into ordnance gelatin as adopted by government agencies. A few years back there was a joint wound ballistics Integrated Product Team (IPT). It had Army, Navy, USAF, Coast Guard and virtually every DoD organization – it was really joint, and that meant everybody. What they determined was that each agency used a different methodology for testing terminal effects, so they decided to write a charter, a test plan and gelatin block procedures. Those procedures even included how the gelatin was made, verified, and validated. With a standard gelatin block that everybody could use, terminal effects could be studied and data could be shared. Next, the IPT established criteria for how the projectile should perform in gelatin. We compared our results to the specification and also compared it to M855. Again, you can’t confirm this is what it will do in the human body, but it’s the best we can come up with. Buford can give you all the details, but essentially his eight points are:

Is Blind to Impact Yaw
Limits penetration – 12-18”
Resists yaw in tissue – no earlier than 12” is desired
Continues on shot line after penetrating tissue
Is barrier blind
Limits fragmentation
Performs consistently from 0 – 300 meters
Is accurate enough to engage human targets to 600 meters

Sal, this all sounds too easy. Surely you came up against some problems along the way.

Oh, sure there were problems. Field trials showed that the Mk318 Mod 0 did not exactly match the ballistics with the reticle pattern of the sight being used. The original ammunition’s exterior ballistics differed from the sight’s reticle pattern because it was originally designed for a 14.5-inch barrel. Since the Marine Corps’ primary service rifle is the M16A4 with a 20-inch barrel, we went back to Federal to adjust the ballistic coefficient. About this time the issue about environmentally friendly green ammo came up and we had to take a look to see if it was possible to replace the lead and still meet the specification. We found that we could replace the lead with copper, stretching the jacket around ever so slightly so it allowed us to crimp the nose even more. With that, the ballistic coefficient went up allowing the round to fly more efficiently through air with a better trajectory. Now it’s a ballistic match to the stock off-the-shelf reticle patterns that the Marine Corps uses, like the Trijicon ACOG sights. We named the improved round the Mk318 Mod1.

So, how do you avoid confusion with the new round to others that are already fielded?

There are two different configurations. The original round was adopted as Mk318 Mod 0. This is a copper jacketed, open tip match, 62 grain projectile. If you don’t know ammunition well enough you might confuse it with the Mk262 which is a 77 grain projectile. The Mk262 is an open tipped match round used by the Special Ops community. Since we were worried about confusion with the Mk262, we had to take another look at the color of the tip. Every color was taken except for solid silver so we decided to nickel plate the entire projectile. As we now jokingly say, “All Marines will have silver bullets.” That round hasn’t been fielded yet, and a potential production contract is in the future. I can just see the Marines out there polishing bullets.

Who will produce the new ammunition?

The government owns the drawings in the Technical Data Package (TDP) so Crane will procure it through open competition. There are a lot of top-notch ammo manufacturers out there.

Mk318 Mod1 with the Silver Bullet.

What about the legal wickets that had to be passed? Years ago, we used to pass any new ammunition by the legal department at the Pentagon. Hays Parks was in charge in those days, but I’ve learned he’s retired.

When I first was given this project, I spent many hours talking about the legal aspects of a new round with Supervisory Special Agent Buford Boone (ret.) at the FBI, BRF and others, including Hays Parks. Hays retired about a year ago and is currently working under a support contractor for another Government agency. Fortunately, we still have access to him. I needed his input for all of our written documents. Anything put into writing that becomes public information is subject to intense scrutiny. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) watches the development of every new round very carefully and is quick to point out what they perceive as any violation of the “Law of War” declarations. Even though other ammunition very similar to this has passed the legal review, we could not afford any misinterpretation. We don’t want to give any reason for the ICRC to file a complaint that would delay the fielding. Hays has a lot of experience as the U.S. negotiator on proposed law of war treaties related to military small arms ammunition. I requested his assistance in developing a round that would meet the capabilities we needed and be consistent with our law of war obligations. For the data Hays needed, the FBI served as the independent laboratory.

What about compatibility with other service rifles in NATO?

The testing we did was M16A4, M4, M4A1, M27 and we also tested it in the SCAR. We have not tested other country’s guns, but there are some that are currently evaluating it. It’s public knowledge that Canada has adopted it.

Is there a tracer version?

No, there is no tracer planned for this round.

So that means it’s strictly as a rifle cartridge.

On our last test, we took 16,000 rounds, linked it, and successfully fired it through the M249 to confirm compatibility for emergency use; but yes, the round is strictly meant for our rifles.

What about accuracy of the round?

The performance is phenomenal. The way the specification is written, we focus on dispersion, not accuracy. The reason is that we define accuracy as a combination of the gun, the optic, and the shooter. Whereas, the dispersion of the ammunition is set at 2 Minutes Of Angle (MOA) at 100 meters.

If you ever get a chance to read the spec, the Mk318 MOD 0, it shows the MOA no greater than 2 at 100 meters. If you read the spec of the M855, the average standard deviation is not to be more than 2MOA. There is a big difference. We’ve proven that you can have a very large group and still meet the specification.

When you were managing this program you faced a lot of challenges. What was the biggest?

In order to get buy-in from Marine Corps senior leadership, I had to prove to them that this was a technically superior round of ammunition. I had to present the results of extensive testing.

What is next? You just now going to field this round, is the USMC working on another round?

Well, I’m still putting this one to bed. There is some additional testing that needs to be done. The USMC has type classified, adopted, and issued the Mk318 Mod 0 as an interim solution until formal testing has been completed on the Army’s M855A1. The decision on which round (Mk 318 Mod 1 or M855A1) will be fielded will be made within a year.

We’ve been working on improved sniper grade ammunition. A joint Navy, SOCOM, USMC requirement yielded the AB 39, 7.62mm round. The projectile is the same as the AA11 but it uses a different primer, propellant, and amount of propellant. Now we have an off-the-shelf round that gives consistent performance lot-to-lot, shot-to-shot. Lower dispersion is achieved through 1,000 meters.

Now we are looking at the barrel geometry. A twist of 1:12 is not ideal for this projectile so we developed computer models and simulated firing with faster twist rates. We’ve had test barrels built for us, and just finished firing them using ballistic radar. ArrowTech, who developed PRODAS simulation software, has been tasked to determine the optimum twist for the barrel configuration based on this radar data. Eventually, the USMC may be going to a different twist rate that may include changes to land and groove configuration.

Finally, the Army is looking at improving the machine gun ammo and we’re just keeping track of what they’re doing.

Thank you, Sal for taking the time to provide this excellent information for our readers. We truly appreciate it.

You’re more than welcome. It has been my pleasure.

– – – Part Two of this article appears in SADJ Volume 4, Number 4. – – –

For the past several years SADJ has been following progress of the US Marine Corps’ program to identify and field a suitable alternative to the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon.  While the 5.56mm belt fed SAW is touted as a relatively portable weapon that can pump out a high volume of fire, many of the Leatherneck MOS 0311 grunts who have been humping this twenty-plus pound package since 1985 have been asking for something lighter, simpler and more reliable.  This sentiment has been repeated by many in their chain of command from fire team leaders to flag officers.

Like most any significant change to the status quo, the SAW-replacement process has been difficult as various factions have made their often contentious positions known.  Details of this struggle within the Corps, spanning more than two dozen years, will be provided in Part 2.

Meanwhile, the decision has been made and the Corps is well on its way to issuing more than 4,400 M27 IARs as fast as gunmaker Heckler & Koch can deliver them.  By early 2013, every Squad Automatic Rifleman in Infantry fire teams and Light Armored Recon scout teams will be carrying the new IAR.

But don’t mourn for the M249.  A half dozen SAWs will be retained in each Infantry Rifle Company, available to the commander as tactical situations arise.

21 November 2011, The Crucible training center, Stafford County, Virginia. In Reidsma’s hands, the M27’s approx. 12 rounds per second full auto cyclic rate is no impediment to effective target engagement from prone to standing. In addition to a favorable ratio of 12.7 lb. weight vs. the relatively light recoil of its 5.56mm ammunition, the rifle’s in-line stock, broomstick grip, quick adjusting sling, and forward-mounted bipod combine with the inherent accuracy of the weapon’s 16.5 inch cold hammer forged barrel for remarkable long range performance. (Robert Bruce)

Right to the source
Knowing that SADJ’s readers deserve a close look at the Marines’ new machine rifle, our contacts at U.S. based HK Defense answered the call, generously providing hands-on live fire and detailed information on this history-making addition to the Devil Dog arsenal.

Small Arms Defense Journal interviewed Robert “Robbie” Reidsma, on November 21, 2011, following the exclusive M27 briefing and live fire session he had arranged for us earlier that day at a special operations and law enforcement tactical training center called The Crucible in rural Stafford County near Fredericksburg, Virginia.  Reidsma, a retired USMC Infantry Senior NCO, was hired by HK Defense in 2007.  He was named by HKD as the IAR Program Manager in December 2009.

SADJ:  Your duty position title and responsibilities as they relate to the M27 program?

Reidsma:  I started off as one of the technical guys with Heckler & Koch Defense in our response to the Marine Corps’ Infantry Automatic Rifle solicitation in 2007.  I later became the Deputy Program Manager for HK’s IAR effort, and then Program Manager.  I still have other responsibilities at HKD related to military, government and federal law enforcement sales and programs.

SADJ:  Briefly describe the experience and qualifications you have that are particularly valuable to the M27 program.

Reidsma:  Twenty plus years enlisted in the Marine Corps, the majority on the infantry side of the house.  Sniper and sniper instructor, worked alongside with SYSCOM (Marine Corps Systems Command) with the Scout Sniper Day Scope and Scout Sniper equipment programs.  That’s where some of my acquisition experience comes from.  I retired as Gunnery Sergeant in 2006 and went to work as a contractor for the Department of Defense.  I was only there a short time before I came into HK about four years ago.

HK’s M27 IAR, while sharing many of the characteristics of the M16/M4 family of weapons, differs substantially in ditching the “Stoner system” direct gas tube that operates the bolt carrier. Instead, HK engineers chose a piston driven operating rod along with other mechanical refinements and improvements for greater reliability and durability. (HK Defense graphic)

SADJ:  We understand that you aren’t at liberty to talk to us about the Marine Corps’ information-gathering, evaluation, test, and selection process.  But tell us what HK did in response to the initial solicitation and follow-up stages.  

Reidsma:  In the first place, everything coming out of HK has to meet NATO requirements under NATO AC/225 specifications.  HK ensures that each weapon actually meets that regardless if it’s going to military, law enforcement or civilian customers.  If you buy a commercial handgun from HK it has met that process.  That’s why HK has such a good reputation for the quality because we don’t say, ‘this didn’t meet a certain requirement so now we’re going to sell it on the commercial market.’  All HK products meet the same NATO requirement and we’re ISO 9001 certified on the manufacturing side as well.

We reviewed the government’s requirements and solicitation to determine what HK products would meet the requirements, ensure we can meet the timelines, and support the evolution.  We look at if we need to further test the item or modify and test an existing item, etc.  Then we’ll do an internal testing process.  Whenever possible, depending on the size of the program, we’ll try to mimic as best we can whatever the government is going to do.

So we have our set of results to compare with the potential customer’s test findings; two sets of data that hopefully should come out similar.  They don’t have to be exact, but it should point in the same general directions.  All said and done the testing came out pretty good for HK‘s IAR.

SADJ:  Comment on any significant tradeoffs necessary to meet IAR’s specifications.  Things like piston vs. gas, open bolt vs. closed, cookoff, barrel swap, belt vs. mag, etc.

On April 11, 2010, I traveled to Harrodsburg, KY where I met with my good friend, Howard “Buddy” Howells.  Buddy is the only grandson of the famous Col. George M. Chinn, author of the five-volume series entitled The Machine Gun.  The last time I was in Harrodsburg was in 1985 when I met with Col. Chinn and Buddy at their office.  I was working for FN and went there to discuss the Mk19 and to get Chinn’s opinion on the maturity of the design and the producibility of the weapon using the drawing package developed by the Navy.

George Chinn had accumulated a wealth of firearm information through the years and was inspiration to many of us in firearm design.  The Colonel made great contributions to firearm design and usage, and his historical reference book series is a classic of the last century.  Buddy worked with his grandfather on some firearm designs and has an amazing memory of historical facts.

Buddy suggests we begin our meeting in the office used by George M. Chinn.  Upon entering I can’t believe what I’m seeing.  Chinn’s favorite pictures, letters, commendations, and other memorabilia still adorn the walls.  Pencils, Rolodex, pads of paper and reference material are out on his desk.  It was if the old master would return at any moment.  Unable to resist the urge, I sit in the Colonel’s chair.  Now was a good time to begin the interview.

George: Before we talk about George M. Chinn, could you give me a little insight into the Chinn family history.  

Buddy: The Chinn’s are an old pioneer family with roots in Mercer county Kentucky.  I know you remember my grandfather joking about being Chinese, but our ancestry is French.  George’s Grandfather Jack was into horse racing and even owned a Kentucky Derby winner.  Politics, farming, and Calcite mining were also family businesses.

George: So, as pioneers and frontiersmen, the Chinn family must have been around guns all the time. 

Buddy: Actually, they were familiar with both ends of a gun.  Back in 1900 Kentucky elected William Goebel as Governor.  Just one day before his inauguration, Goebel was standing on the capitol steps between his two bodyguards, one of them Chinn’s Grandfather Jack, when a shot rang out.  A sniper shot Goebel, fatally wounding him.  Following his passing and true to the Kentucky sense of fairness, for the first time in U.S. history, a dead man was sworn into office.

Col. Chinn shows off his favorite Browning trophy to FN’s Skip Kitchen.

George: What about George Chinn?  Did he have an interest in firearms when he was a youngster? 

Buddy: Chinn’s father was the warden of the prison in Frankfort, Kentucky.  This gave George many opportunities to disassemble guns from prison assets.  Chinn had access to explosives too, from the family’s calcite mine.  He led a charmed childhood and like most kids of that era, he enjoyed target shooting and plinking.

George: Tell me about George Chinn’s early education and his career plans.

Buddy: George went to a Millersburg Military Institute, a boarding high school where he was a member of the “Saturday Afternoon Tea Club.”  That’s what they jokingly called the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) program.  He graduated in 1920 in a class of nine.   Since he was in ROTC at the close of WWI, he received a WWI victory medal even though he was never in theater.

George: I read where Chinn graduated from Centre College where he claimed to have majored in “football and penmanship.”  What can you tell me about his football career? 

Buddy: As a freshman George played lineman on the Centre team that won what would today be recognized as the national championship in 1921 after beating Harvard 6-0.  It was a huge upset.  The Centre team was coached by two of the greats in football history, Charlie Moran and Robert Myers.  These men greatly influenced George.  Their coaching style and football experience itself made a huge impact on his life.  Also significant was the relationship he developed with Albert. B. “Happy” Chandler, a guy who was a kind of team “groupy.”  Happy rode along on the football trips and in later life became Governor of Kentucky – twice.  He also served as a U.S. Senator, giving George an important political connection during much of his adult life.

George: What did Chinn do after college? 

Buddy: He coached football; assistant coach at Bucknell and head coach at Catawba.  His coaching experience was very valuable throughout his career.  He refined his coach’s instinct and he knew how to prepare a team for an “operation” by making sure his players knew what to do, how to do it, and had the right equipment and training to get the job done right.  This mentality served him well in later years when he helped Naval aviators and Marines with the operation, repair, and maintenance of automatic weapons.

George: But he didn’t stay in coaching – what happened? 

Buddy: While he was vacationing in North Carolina he had an opportunity to visit a tourist attraction there called the Bat Cave.   The sight of all those tourists buying food, drinks, and souvenirs got him thinking.  He owned a piece of property alongside the road near the Brooklyn Bridge that crossed the Kentucky River.  So near this scenic river, George knew it would be a good place for a tourist stop except that the property was a sheer cliff: almost all rock, and nearly 150 feet high.  Chinn had the perfect spot and all he needed was a cave.  That part wasn’t any problem at all as he knew an explosives expert named “Tunnel” Smith and had him blast a hole at the base of the cliff.  The tunnel went straight in about 20 feet and then veered to the left about 100 feet.  At the front entrance he built a grill with a snack bar counter on the left and directly across from it was the bar.  Chinn designed the bar in a particular way that discouraged people from hanging around it.  George wanted customers to buy drinks, but he didn’t want to make a hangout for potential troublemakers.  Out in front were tables for people to sit after they’d gotten their food and drink.  Through the years there were several modifications, including a pair of columns that were made from the same stone as Chinn’s house.

George: This had to be during the depression.  There couldn’t have been the same level of tourist traffic that Bat Cave had in those years, did he make any money?  

Buddy: He did very well.  My grandmother made delicious sandwiches for what could be called a “giveaway” price.  These were prohibition years; the real money was made from liquor and slot machines.

George: Slot machines? 

Buddy: He had penny and nickel slots in the back part of the cave.  Chinn was doing great until the law caught up with him.  He was charged with running “a game of chance” at Chinn’s Cave House.  In typical self-assured Chinn fashion, he defended himself and was able to convince the court that “you didn’t have a chance” when you gambled at Chinn’s.

George: It sounds like George has led a charmed life.  Did this magic continue?

Buddy:  Well, no.  A life-changing event happened at The Cave House near the end of its operation.  George got into an argument with the owner of the business across the road.  Somehow it escalated to the point of violence when the neighbor entered the Cave House and shot George in the leg.  George was wearing his .38 revolver at the time but he didn’t want this thing to escalate so he didn’t go for his gun.  George’s wife, Cotton, however, tried to get Chinn’s gun away from him.  It was all George could do to keep his wife away from that revolver.  My grandmother was a crack shot and George was certain she would have killed the guy.  Accompanied by his wife and daughter, Ann, Chinn went immediately to the hospital to get his wound cared for.  My mother Ann, who was quite young at the time, recalled she had never seen so much blood in her life.  Chinn got patched up and carried that slug in his leg for the rest of his life.

Note: This article is a continuation of Guns & Gear of the U.S. Navy’s Riverine Forces, which originally appeared in Volume 2, Number 3 of SADJ.

The twelve men of a Riverine Security Team (RST) are the detachment’s landing force, Sailors who go ashore primarily for reconnaissance but also a variety of other “muddy boots missions.”  The team is often augmented by an Intelligence Specialist for information collection and a Hospital Corpsman for medical support.

New RSTs receive initial training in the same basic skill sets as boat crewmen, including Expeditionary Combat and Riverine Combat.  This is followed by several weeks of specialized Security Team instruction before assignment to a detachment.

After coming aboard, their Advanced Unit Level Training is heavy on mastery of individual weapons including fast transition from carbine to pistol.  They learn to effectively engage moving targets, provide supporting fire as a unit, fire and maneuver, and utilize signaling devices such as smoke grenades and pop flares.

Battle drills training consists of small unit maneuver tactics and patrolling formations, insertions and extractions both hot (under fire) and cold, as well as verbal and non-verbal communications with supporting watercraft.  AMOUT (Advanced Movement in Urban Terrain) is also emphasized where RSTs learn techniques for patrolling in villages and towns, how to conduct two and four man room entries, and defensive strong pointing of buildings.

RSTs are well armed with a variety of standard U.S. military small arms that allow a fast and furious response to situations both likely and unexpected.  As with Riverine boat crewmen, they carry both the 9mm Beretta M9 semiautomatic pistol and the 5.56mm Colt M4 series selective fire assault carbine.

These flattop M4s feature adjustable telescoping buttstocks and are topped with Aimpoint no-magnification red dot reflex sights or Trijicon ACOG 4 power day scopes.  The carbine’s Rail Accessory System forearm carries the AN/PEQ-15 laser aiming device with its pressure switch usually taped on a detachable vertical foregrip.  A visible beam tactical light is optional for selected missions.

There are six Riverines on each of the detachment’s two fire teams, consisting of a patrol leader, grenadier, machine gunner, and three riflemen.  Grenadiers have single shot 40mm M203 grenade launchers clamped under their M4s and the machine gunner is formidably armed with the 7.62mm belt-fed FN MK 48.  12 gauge Mossberg M500 pump shotguns are carried when needed for door breaching and room clearing.

Depending on the specific mission, a team member who has undergone additional specialized training in long range precision shooting with the powerful 7.62mm M14 rifle may perform as a Designated Marksman.  Additional duties for selected RSTs include Navigator, Communicator (radio operator) and JTAC (Joint Terminal Attack Controller) who skillfully directs the awesome firepower of attack aircraft or artillery.

10 April 2009, Fort A.P. Hill, Virginia. A modern version of the classic Gatling Gun from the 1860s, this six barrel Minigun is ready to go with linked 7.62mm ammunition seen in the flexible feed chute and sturdy electrical cables for its drive motor plugged into the boat’s 24 volt DC system. Riverines we talked with had good things to say about the GAU-17’s reliability now that they are equipped with the Dillon Aero feeder-delinker. Note the AN/PEQ-15 ATPIAL laser mounted on top. (Robert Bruce)

RSTs also receive training on all of the boat-mounted crew served weapons so they will be able to effectively man the guns in the event a designated gunner is out of action.  They become proficient in the use of Combat Rubber Raiding Craft (Zodiacs) for stealthy waterborne insertions and extractions.  They provide impressive supplementary firepower to ground convoys as well as strengthening defense and security of the detachment‘s landside base of operations.

The Art and Science of Hot Extractions
A week after our first meeting we caught up with Det 1 at the U.S. Army’s Fort A. P. Hill, about 235 miles to the north of Lejeune and a conveniently short duration vehicle convoy just 75 miles northwest of the unit’s home base at Yorktown Naval Weapons Station, Virginia.  Yorktown-based defense contractor ITA International was advancing the detachment’s training evolution at Lejeune with some intensive practical exercises for the Riverines in live fire from multiple boats maneuvering at White’s Lake Tactical Raft Training Site.

Lieutenant (JG) William Ashley, Detachment 1’s serious but personable OIC, explained that ever since coming out of Iraq in December 2008, his unit has been in the post-deployment/pre-deployment training cycle, gearing up for its next assignment.

Now, building on extensive static landside shooting of crew served weapons and small arms, as well as preparatory weapons training while underway, it was time to move up to waterborne ops with boats moving and shooting in confined space.  White’s Lake multipurpose range, Ashley said, adequately supports some typical riverine fire and maneuver missions, in this case insertions and “hot extractions” of Riverine Security Teams.

10 April 2009, Fort A.P. Hill, Virginia. Like most of these versatile carbines in the detachment, Lubrani’s flattop M4 carries a 4 power Trijicon ACOG day sight and PEQ-15 laser with pressure switch taped to a grip on the forearm rails. The ACOG gives excellent accuracy in day shooting and the infrared laser is spot-on for night use with PVS-14 NVGs. (Robert Bruce)

“They’ll be inserting an RST, about six guys, into the woods,” Ashley explained.  “They’ll be doing their maneuvers while the boats are shadowing them.  The RST will take (simulated) contact, start firing and make their way back towards the lakeside/river.  As they mark their flanks the boats will engage their contacts at the same time they’re moving in to extract the ground team.  And as they ‘exfil’ (exfiltrate) the area, they’ll be engaging the targets.  We’ll be doing that in several iterations with different crew swaps.”

Because each boat has two crews and the RST has two separate fire teams, there was plenty of time to observe preparations and conduct of this flexibly choreographed live fire training.  We also had time to interview an RST member under the watchful eye of Lieutenant (JG) Jeremy Baer, Assistant OIC of Det 1, RIVRON THREE.

Don’t Get Off The Boat?
John Paul “JP” Lubrani, Hull Technician 2 (EXW) is a native of Venice Beach, Los Angeles, CA.  He’s 31 years old with seven and a half years in the Navy, the last two in Detachment 1.  He started as a boat crewman and then began working with the RST while on deployment to Iraq.  JP said that he is one of the first to be dual qualified for both boat crew and RST, where he is the assistant JTAC (Joint Terminal Attack Controller) in training.  His awards include the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal and the Expeditionary Warfare pin.

SADJ:  You were originally a gunner on a Riverine boat and then volunteered for RST.  Didn’t you see the movie Apocalypse Now and know not to get off the boat?

Lubrani:  (laughs) ‘Chef – never get off the boat!’

SADJ:  You joined the Navy soon after the terrorist attacks of 9-11-01.  Is this why you enlisted?  

Lubrani:  I had a daughter and I wanted to join for her.  I didn’t want anyone else to fight my fight.  It was up to me.  I spent about five years in the LCAC (Landing Craft Air Cushion) community then asked for assignment to Riverine because it sounded like it was something above and beyond what I was currently doing.  I wanted to see if I could push myself to those limitations.

SADJ:  Has this assignment lived up to your expectations?

Lubrani:  Yes it has, 110 percent.  It’s physically demanding, mentally demanding, very challenging all around.  Every time you complete something they set a new standard, a new bar that you’ve got to try to achieve so we keep rising.

SADJ:  How are the living conditions in a Riverine unit?  No snack bar, you don’t get movies on the boat at night or a lot of hot chow.

Lubrani:  No we don’t.  Not big fans of MREs (Meals Ready to Eat) but we do eat ‘em quite a lot.  We keep ourselves entertained.  We have camaraderie and that goes a long way….  There’s a brotherhood in being a Riverine: we’re a very tight knit.  There’s roughly about three hundred of us in the squadron, broken down into three dets (detachments), about sixty people per det and a command element.  Within that det we’re very, very close.  Most of us know each others families, we get together quite often for barbecues, hanging out, birthday parties for our children, so it’s very tight knit.

11 July 2008, Rawah, Iraq. US Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Shawn Sass performs a biometrics scan on a fisherman the Riverine Security Team from RIVRON THREE encountered on the Watah Peninsula. The scan is unique to each individual and will be entered in a census database to improve security and deter insurgent activity. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Seth Maggard)

SADJ:  Are you personally interested in firearms and shooting?

Lubrani:  Absolutely.  But believe it or not coming from Los Angeles, I had never even held a weapon before I joined the military.  It made me nervous at first when you’ve got to do your qualifications.  But now, with the Riverines, I actually qualified as an Expert shooter with both the pistol and rifle so I think I’ve come a long way.  I’m a lot more comfortable around guns than when I first began.  They’re a necessity.  It’s a hard life out there sometime the way the world’s changing and I definitely think they’re a necessity.

SADJ:  Any personal firearms?

Lubrani:  A Springfield XD in .40 S&W caliber.  I wanted something a little more than a nine mil.  My wife’s in the Navy as well and she’s used to the Beretta (M9).  When we went to the range I taught her how to use the Beretta very well but I wanted something just a little more powerful for home protection.  The XD’s a gun she felt comfortable with.  No other weapons.  We’ve got four children so money’s kind of tight.

SADJ:  What formal schools and subsequent training have you received for your duties on the RST?

Lubrani:  Our initial training was at Blackwater USA (security company in Moyoc, NC), a few weeks there that covered small arms, rifle, a little bit of CQB (Close Quarter Battle), and combat first aid.  Then we deployed to Iraq.  When we came back we went through another course at the Chesapeake Annex with land warfare and a little bit of land navigation, taught by ITA.

SADJ:  Do you believe you’ve had adequate training time?

Lubrani:  Absolutely, we spend a good portion of the year just training, not only in an environment like this (AP Hill) but also self sustained training.  We have qualified guys within our own detachment to run ranges and things like that and we’ve got plenty of ammunition.

SADJ:  How about computer simulators?

Lubrani:  We’ve used those at Camp Lejeune.  We all went through SOI (USMC School of Infantry) when the command was first established.

SADJ:  Night training with NVGs?

Lubrani:  Absolutely, we spend a lot of time training with NVGs (PVS-14 Monocular Night Vision Goggle) not only on the boats but on land as well.  The more we practice with them it helps because your depth perception is so much different (shallow) when you’re wearing ‘em.

The “Brown Water Navy” is back in force and elements of Captain Kruger’s command have been conducting operations on Iraq’s waterways without a break since February 2007.  Proudly carrying forward the legacy of the U.S. Navy’s famed River Patrol Force of the Vietnam War, today’s hard-charging Riverines are superbly equipped, armed and trained for a wide range of specialized missions.

Their weapons are standard issue but there is little that is ordinary in their operational environment.  While extreme temperatures, dust and precipitation are familiar foes to all combatants, Riverines face special challenges in maximizing the effectiveness of their guns while underway and during landside missions.

SADJ talked at length with several experienced Riverines about these challenges.  Their observations, we believe, will prove useful for a variety of warfighters on land, sea and in the air.  This first installment in a two-part series affords a close look into specialized Riverine watercraft, the versatile array of crew-served weapons aboard and the dedicated Sailors who man the guns.

Fast Boats and Machine Guns
SADJ’s first encounter with Detachment 1 of Riverine Squadron 3 came on the morning of April 2, 2009, at Mile Hammock Bay on Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, as they were preparing for another long training day.  Heavy overcast, fog and driving rain emphasized the challenges of operating in all weather conditions but the hardy Riverines were eager to get underway for long-scheduled live fire maneuvers.

Lieutenant (Junior Grade) William F. Ashley, Det 1’s Officer in Charge, explained that Lejeune’s range safety requirements necessitated a careful visual reconnaissance to make sure no watercraft had strayed into the bay’s designated firing area.  Unfortunately, the weather was so bad that Range Control’s small fixed wing aircraft couldn’t fly.

1984, Panama Canal. Years after earning distinction with the U.S. Navy’s famed River Patrol Force of the Vietnam War, a light, fast and well armed PBR MKII escorts the battleship USS IOWA as it transits the canal. The iconic PBR (Patrol Boat River) remained in service until the Navy’s transition of Riverine capabilities to its Special Warfare components. (U.S. Navy photo by PH1 Jeff Hilton)

But waiting for a weather change that would allow range clearance afforded a good time for the requested interviews.  We climbed up into the back of one of the unit’s heavily armored trucks to meet with two Riverines who had gamely volunteered for the task; Gunners Mate 1st Class (EXW/SW) Adam John Sanchez and Gunners Mate Chief (EXW/SW) Geovarrie “Geo” M. Lopez, both well seasoned Sailors.

The 29 year old Sanchez hails from Eagle River, Alaska, where he spent some time as a fishing guide.  His ten years in the Navy included service on USS Spruance Guided Missile Destroyer before volunteering for Riverine two years ago.  He soon deployed to Iraq with Det 1 and earned the Navy-Marine Corps Achievement Medal.  He has been a Boat Captain for one year and his additional skills include Range Safety Officer and Crew Served Weapons Instructor.

Lopez, 35 years old, calls Key West, Florida, his hometown.  He’s had a number of different assignments during seventeen years in the Navy, notably aboard the USS Gettysburg Guided Missile Cruiser.  Volunteering for Riverine, he has two years with Det 1 and its Iraq deployment, earning the Navy-Marine Corps Achievement Medal.  Lopez is a Boat Captain and a qualified Small Arms Instructor.

It worked well to interview them together because each one’s observations tended to bring additional insights from the other.

SADJ:  Why did you join the Navy and then transition to Riverine?

Sanchez:  I considered a career in law enforcement and knew that Navy experience would be a good start.  I have military in the family and they recommended the Navy.  I asked for assignment to Riverine to ‘ramp up my career’ and get some combat experience.

Lopez:  It was in my blood, my father’s also in the Navy.  I’d seen my father’s experiences and wanted that part of my life as well.  I went from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division to Yeoman in Navy.  I volunteered for Riverine, a job with action and combat experience.

SADJ:  Are you personally interested in firearms and shooting?

Sanchez:  Oh yes, I’m a Gunners Mate (GM).

Lopez: I do like shooting, I love guns and it happens to be my job also as a GM.

SADJ:  What schools and training have prepared you for your current duties?

Sanchez:  I have 0814 NEC (Navy Enlisted Code) for CSWI (Crew Served Weapons Instructor) through STS (Navy contractor Special Tactical Services), been through GM ‘A’ school (initial qualification) then ‘C’ school (advanced) as a Vertical Launch System Tech; also Marine Corps 0331 Machine Gunner Course.  It’s outstanding training, intensive tests, very detailed.  More landside shooting and then in RSO (Range Safety Officer) school we did more of the waterside shooting.  

5 July 2008, Lake Quadisyah, Iraq. U.S. Navy Gunners Mate Jose Caro of RIVRON THREE scans the horizon beyond his M240 machine gun station aboard a Riverine Patrol Boat (RPB) conducting a security patrol near Haditha. Caro’s headphones and mic are plugged into the boat’s intercom system and hitting the switch box on his chest allows him to communicate clearly with all members of the crew despite high noise level while underway. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Seth Maggard)

Lopez:  GM ‘A’ school, 5 inch cannon, Small Arms Instructor school at Little Creek, landside shooting at Marine Corps 0331 Machine Gunner Course, and waterside starting here during this training cycle preparing for deployment.

SADJ:  Do you have the opportunity to train using computer simulators?

Lopez:  No, we do actual training on the boats.  Parked dry runs to get familiar with your stations so when you actually get on the water the only thing you have to get is your ‘sea legs’ to get your balance.  No simulation, always reality with blanks then live ammo.  We shoot underway against static targets.  

Sanchez:  Same training cycle.  We all went through the 0331 Machine Gunner Course for the Marine Corps, helped a lot.  They definitely pound in the information and that helps a lot.  I had simulators in the 0814 CSWI school but as far as the rest of the unit, no.  A couple others have had the CSWI course as well.  STS did a good job in teaching, outstanding training, probably one of the better schools I’ve been to ever. 

SADJ:  Is there enough time allocated for training?

Sanchez:  Yes, time has been OK but very condensed.  The gunners are learning what they need to learn.  Maybe expand the time a bit for a little more proficiency but overall it’s outstanding training.  

Lopez:  Definitely more training is always better.  As of right now its doing the job and I know it’s getting people’s proficiency up on the weapons.  New gunners on their first deployment are jumpin’ right in.  I know I can rely on those guys on the guns to do their job.

SADJ:  Night shooting?

Sanchez:  Absolutely, night operations are a major mission.  NVGs (night vision goggles) PVS-14 monocular we’re using right now.  PEQ-15 lasers mounted to each of the crew served weapons.  Good gear even in fog and rain.  The weather hasn’t been fantastic lately for training and we’ve been doing pretty good.  

Lopez:  Definitely what we need to be doing, most of our work is at nighttime.  That’s really when you find out if the gunners are comfortable with what they’re doing.  Anybody can do it in the daytime.  The comfort zone for those gunners at nighttime changes when they have that night vision on and one of their eyes can’t see.  They start shooting that gun and the flash wipes everything out.  You find out their comfort levels and proficiency at nighttime.  

SADJ:  What do you teach to compensate for that — close one eye?

Sanchez:  Yeah, that’s one technique.  Another is to move the NVG away from your face and look under it. It works because of the tracers once you’re on target.  You use your laser to initiate the contact through NVGs and once you’re on target you can look underneath them (using tracers) and that works as well.

5 June 2008, Anbar Province, Iraq. Petty Officer Jason Jialenes of RIVRON THREE mans the aft-mounted .50 caliber M2HB machine gun on an RPB patrolling north of the Haditha Dam. Note the gun’s heavy armor shielding and the ammo can loaded with incendiary cartridges identified by their distinctive silver painted tips. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Tyler Hill)

SADJ:  Do you use parachute flares for illumination?

Sanchez:  We have the capability but tactically that’s not done.  We’re lighting ourselves up enough with the muzzle flashes.  We’re kind of in a unique situation because we have one way in and one way out on the river.  There’s no sense in illuminating us any more than we need to. 

SADJ:  What recommendations to the chain to improve operator skill with weapons?

Sanchez:  It’s already being done.  Riverine Group is constantly improving through critiques of training and operations.  Our situation as RIVRON 3, we’re able to get the better training product because RIVRON 1 and 2 go through before us.  

Lopez:  Definitely, we have the best product that has been generated through the training cycle.  And because we’re the first detachment in our squadron, we’re able to help the other two dets for their training cycle.  Whatever we critique in our after action reports group can make some more improvements and it keeps on evolving and they get better training.

SADJ:  How about the Riverine Security Teams (RSTs)?

Sanchez:  They’re in a different training pipeline; then we meet to do an interoperability where we all work together.

Lopez:  Each Detachment has RSTs and their training is specific to the landside.  They can’t do their mission without us and we can’t do our mission without them.  They’re boat riders but they’re also trained as crew served weapon gunners.  If one of our guys takes a hit they know what to do and can take over as well.

(Editor’s Note:  Part Two provides a detailed look at Detachment 1’s Riverine Security Team)