Generation 1
The first generation Glock 17 pistols had a smooth polymer grip.  They had a 2-piece spring guide and recoil spring.  The magazine was designed so it would not drop free when the magazine release was pressed.  Although this proved to be problematic for American users, the Austrian Army required it.  Rumour had it that it was so the magazines could not be lost in the snow.  To be able to import the gun into the United States a few modifications had to be made.  In Europe the serial number had to be on the slide and barrel.  In the U.S. it is required on the frame, so Glock moulded a tab into the frame.  Also to meet the points for importation, Glock added an adjustable sight.  The first generation was in fact the Austrian Army model P-80 although it would be sold else where as the Glock 17 (Gaston Glock’s 17th patent).

The Glock 17 pistol is striker fired omitting any external hammer.  The striker has a partial load on it when the pistol is ready to fire.  Approximately 25% of the load is taken up.  When the trigger is pulled, the remaining 75% of the striker is taken up and released to fire the cartridge.  Mr. Glock called his pistol “Safe Action.”  No external safeties are used.  However, the pistol has 3 internal safeties.  To gain a realistic perspective, you must understand that military and law enforcement personnel carried revolvers with no manual safety for many years.  This was never deemed unsafe.  However, with double action semiautomatic pistols, it is common for firearms instructors to find it difficult to train inexperienced people.  Reason being the first heavy pull of the trigger is often a flyer due to the extreme amount of force required to depress the trigger.  The follow-up single action shot is often also a flyer due to anticipation of the heavier trigger pull, even though the pistol is now firing in the lighter single action mode.  The Glock pistols have one constant trigger pull from first to last shot. Removing the element of anticipation, the shooter has enhanced accuracy and more accurate first shot hits.

Gaston Glock’s first pistol and the one that started it all, the Glock 17 which became the Austrian Army’s P-80 pistol. This pistol would forever alter the materials military and police handguns would be made and take the entire market by storm.

The 3 safeties in the “Safe Action” Glock pistol are all passive and function in order.  The first safety is the trigger safety.  There is a lever in the center of the trigger that unless disengaged prevents any rearward movement of the trigger.  The trigger safety is disengaged only by the trigger finger.  The second safety is the firing pin safety.  The firing pin safety physically blocks the strikers’ movement until the trigger is pulled to the rear.  When the trigger is pulled rearward, the trigger bar pushes upward on the firing pin safety disengaging it.  The final safety is the drop safety.  This is a track which the trigger bar/cruciform moves.  When the trigger is pulled all the way to the rear the trigger bar is pushed down, releasing the striker to fire the cartridge.  When the trigger is released, all 3 safeties automatically engage.  The Glock pistol has been dropped 100 feet in the air from a helicopter with a primed cartridge in the chamber.  When examined, it did not fire.

The slide is manufactured from a bar of solid steel and is finished by a process called gas nitration.  This clear finish penetrates .05 inches into the metal.  The slide of a Glock pistol is so hard it is just under a diamond on the Rockwell scale (55 to 60).  This finish is so hard that Austrian soldiers sharpen their bayonets on the slide. This finish is corrosive resistant as well.

The barrel of the Glock 17 is cold hammer forged.  After a pilot hole is drilled through the center of the barrel a mandrel, which contains the rifling and chamber, is placed inside the barrel blank.  Multiple hammers exert tons of force on the outside of the barrel, forming the polygonal bore and chamber.  Unlike conventional barrels with cut rifling, there are no sharp lands and grooves.  The bore diameter is tighter than a conventional barrel as well.  This does two things.  First, due to no sharp lands and grooves the barrel does not wear much at all increasing long term accuracy/barrel life and making the barrel easy to clean.  Second is a tighter bullet to barrel seal increasing velocity.

The Generation 2 Glock 17 shows many changes to the frame of the pistol including the checkering on the front and backstrap of the pistol. Some changes would be made to the trigger group as well. This pistol would also be made available with the new drop free magazines.

Generation 2
The second generation Glock was made for the desires of the American consumer.  First, the grip was changed to add checkering to the front and back strap of the pistol.  Additionally slightly rougher sides were added as well.  Internally, the recoil spring and spring guide were changed to a captive assembly.  Later second generations received an upgrade on the trigger group and firing pin block for improved safety.  Glock provided this for free based on the serial number range of the pistol.  The pistol was offered with fixed sights, adjustable as well as tritium night sights.  Perhaps the most significant change was for the American consumer with the drop free magazine.  The internal metal body went around all sides of the magazine preventing the magazines from swelling whether empty or full.  With the introduction of other calibers, an additional pin was added to secure in the locking block on all non 9×19 caliber pistols.  During this generation calibres in .40, 10mm Auto, .45 Auto, .357 and .380 Auto were introduced.

The International Air and Defense Fair (FIDAE) that takes place in Chile every two years rebounded from the quake that shook the region in 2010 with the exhibition in 2012 proving to be 25% larger than the previous event.  Two years ago, FIDAE took place against all odds and only a few days after the country was hit by one of the biggest earthquakes and tsunamis in history.  The exhibition took place as a showpiece to demonstrate that Chile had fortitude and organizational skills to allow the show to go on, as relief assistance was taking place in parallel to the fair.  Jose Higuera, from FIDAE 2012 News, tells us that more than 624 companies were represented in the event, making the exhibition the biggest and most important defense and security event in Latin America and one of the most important in the world.  FIDAE CEO, Lt. Col. Jean Pierre Desgroux, declared that the fair does not fuel the prospects of an arm race in the region, and qualified the fair as a multi-spectral, encompassing defense, commercial, and military aviation, as well as general aviation, space and homeland security.

The U.S. in particular had a heavy presence, with over 70 companies being represented at the show.  Most prominent was the display from the U.S. Department of Defense, along with the presence of the U.S. Embassy in Pavilion C, one of the seven large hangars used for the exhibits.  This being mainly an air show; received the Latin American debut of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, a huge wide body carrier of which LAN airlines from Chile has opted for 32 examples.  There were a number of F-16 fighters from the Chilean Air Force (FACh) and Texas Air Guard.  It was highlighted that the FACh F-16 force is now at full strength, with three operational squadrons to include 10 Block 50 C/D variants, and 36 upgraded A/B MLU models.

An evolution of the MGL. (J. Montes)

The European industry countered with the presence of the Airbus A380, and the impressive A-400M transport, one of the four testing examples now in operations In addition, Alenia-Aermacchi presented its C-27J, which shared tarmac space with C-130s, and its rival C-295.  In the fighter category, there were two Mirage 2000s from the Brazilian Air Force in representation, plus the Chilean Mirages on the side (now retired), which were exhibited along a still operational A-37B.

There were two machines that are particularly interesting and important strategically in the region that were present in FIDAE.  The AT-29 Super Tucano, represented by an example from the FACh, had won a few months ago the Light Air Support capabilities (LAS) from the USAF for procurement to the Afghan and other allied air forces under the designation of A-20.  The AT-29 has been selected by Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, as well as their preference to replace the A-37B; in addition, the plane has proved itself in its native Brazil, as well as Ecuador, Colombia, and Chile.  However, soon after the LAS competition, Hawker Beechcraft, the company responsible for the AT-6C contender, filed a lawsuit.  As result, in February, the Air Force scrapped the $355 million contract it gave the Brazilian’s Embraer and U.S. Sierra Nevada Corporation for 20 Super Tucano light attack turboprops.

The gap left by the ill-fated A-20 could still be filled by the A/T-50 Golden Eagle, which was also represented in FIDAE.  This is a light multi-purpose jet trainer developed between the Korean Air Industry (KAI) and Lockheed Martin.  The basic T-50 has evolved into the A-50, a light fighter equipped with a multi-dimensional AN/APG-67 radar, originally developed by GE for the F-20 fighter.  The radar has also been selected to equip other light fighters such as the Argentinean IA-63 Pampa and the Taiwanese AIDC F-CK-1 Chingkuo.  A more advanced radar from Israel has been selected to equip the follow-on variant, the FA-50.  The Golden Eagle series are equipped with a Samsung-Techwin built engine, which is the GE F404-102 turbofan with FADEC (Full Authority Digital Control) built under licensed.  The engine allows a maximum speed of Mach 1.5.  The Guatemalan Air Force has already mentioned the AT-50 as potential replacement of the A-37B, and Chile is also considering it as replacement of its aging fleet of A/T-36 and A-37B.  It is noted that the series F/A/T-50 would be ideal replacements of the mentioned worn out A-37B, providing for a true high performance machine to Central and South American countries.

The MK-47 AGL. (J. Montes)

Many other industries, to include the U.S. and Israel, highlighted their technological achievements in AUV at the fair.  Many robotic drones are being used in homeland security tasks, surveillance, intelligence gathering and others.  There were several mockups of the successful Predator, to include B, and C Avenger, Gray Eagle, and Sea Avenger variants, and associated systems such as Lynx radar, Claw Payload Software and Griffin Eye surveillance systems.  On the other hand, even the U.S. has made use of several Israeli designed and built AUVs such as the Heron.  Several of these drones have been deployed in drug-surveillance flights in the continent.  U.S. and Israeli systems are operational not only along the border, but also in security tasks along oil installations in the Gulf and Colombia.

Eurocopter displayed one EC-275 from the Brazilian Air Force.  This model is a twin-engine, 11-ton evolution of the Super Puma/Cougar family.  The Brazilian and Mexican forces have ordered the EC275, and the aircraft is competing for orders from several other air forces.  Numbers of other helicopters and light aircraft adorned the tarmac.

Ground Forces
Although the show is geared to air and space, there is considerable presence of ground equipment on display; anywhere from harnesses and infantry equipment to artillery systems.

In the 1980s, the U.S. replaced many soft-skinned vehicles with the Humvee.  One of the replaced items was the M151 MUTT.  The demise of this little do-it-all 4×4 appears to have been premature, and has resulted in the introduction of a large list of light all terrain wheeled vehicles in the 500kg payload category to fill the gap.  In this field, General Dynamics provided information on the JAMMA (Joint All-Terrain Modular Mobility Asset), built as a first response high performance platform, with an innovative rollover protection and modular, threat-specific armor for multiple mission profiles.  This small silhouette vehicle can be used as reconnaissance, rescue/recovery, medevac, mobile security and rapid response vehicle.  The JAMMA can fit the bay cargo of the V-22 Osprey or larger aircraft, and comes in a Narrow Track Configuration (NTC) or in a Wide Track Configuration (WTC).  The vehicle can travel at a speed of 85 mph (136.8 kph), at a range of 450 mi (724.2 km), provided by a 3.2L V6 180hp Turbo Diesel engine and a automatic transmission.

A Mini Uzi in detail. (J. Montes)

Polaris is another company that has developed a number of ATVs that fill the gap left by the demise of the M151.  The Sportsman MV850, present in FIDAE, for instance, featured an 850cc / 77hp 4-stroke SOHC Twin cylinder gas engine; it has an 11.75 gal / 44.5 L fuel capacity, electronic power steering, black-out drive and is IR capable, has a 1,500 lbs. / 680.4 kg towing capacity, and it comes with front & rear metal racks.  The 2012 Ranger Military Diesel Crew refers to a small troop transport with room up to 6.  It comes with a 24 HP .9L/904cc Yanmar diesel engine, metal foldable dump box, keyless ignition, and a 1,000 lb (453.6 kg) rear box capacity plus a 2,000 lb (907.2 kg) towing capacity.

IAI presented the larger RAM MKIII, with an empty weight of 5.3 tons, and a payload of 1.2 tons, giving for a combat weight of 6.5 tons.  Although the RAM is a larger vehicle than those two previously mentioned, the initial concept of the RAMTA RBY MK-1 was to field a jeep size vehicle, lightly armored, and highly maneuverable, armed with machine guns, RCLs, and TOW missiles to attack heavy armored formations in southern Lebanon.  The RBY-MK1 became successful in Central and South America during the 1980s, and its lines inspired others such as the Carrancho from Chile, which used a Chevy S-10 pickup truck chassis; the Salvadorian built Cashuat light attack vehicle, based on the Dodge M-37B chassis, also follows similar lines and concept.  The RBY would eventually transform as weapons platform, with adaptation of the TCM-20 turret and the M40A1 106mm RCL.  The RAM-Mk III, at FIDAE, was presented as a tank killer equipped with NIMROD SR missile with an 8KM range.

– – – Part One of this article appears in SADJ Volume 4, Number 3. – – –

As threat forces match the firepower of the current rifle squad, the Marine Corps must maintain the innovative edge for which it is famous.  While experimentation is still required, the evaluations undertaken by Second Battalion, Seventh Marines, definitively indicate that the Marine Corps should place the M249 into a light machine gun role and add a true automatic rifle to the squad’s inventory.  (Conclusion to AUTOMATIC RIFLE CONCEPT, an unsigned monograph circa 2001, circulated in the USMC Infantry community)

Friends and foes of the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon in the U.S. Marine Corps’ infantry fire teams have been engaged in often fierce verbal firefights dating back years before this innovative light machine gun entered Leatherneck service; soon after the Army adopted FN’s MINIMI in 1984.  While the reasons for this are many and varied, astute observers often cite two main points of contention:

• Advocates of belt fed weapons like the M249 admire their relative portability and high volume of fire at critical times in offensive and defensive actions.
• Critics say the 5.56mm SAW‘s hefty 20+ pound combat weight slows movement and reliability issues too often degrade the gun’s claimed firepower advantage.

This second group has argued long and strenuously for an “Infantry Automatic Rifle” that’s both lighter and simpler than the SAW, with similar combat effectiveness from better accuracy and realistic capability in full auto and sustained fire.

Now, more than a quarter century after the Belgian belt-fed joined the Marines, and a decade after the infantry automatic rifle tests by 2nd Battalion 7th Marine Regiment, the IAR camp has won the argument.

“After a rigorous testing process, both in garrison and deployed environments, and in-depth consultation with weapons experts through the Corps, the Commandant approved the fielding of the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle.  Fielding of the IAR will significantly enhance the ability of infantrymen to gain and maintain fire superiority, reduce the fighting load and provide them with a more ergonomic and accurate weapons system that can keep up during the assault.”  (USMC press statement, June 2011)

The winning IAR is a lightly modified HK416, beating out dozens of rivals along the way to earn Heckler & Koch an initial contract for as much as $23.6 million to supply up to 6,500 M27s.

More than 400 of these are already in the fight in Afghanistan and full fielding to all of the Corps’ Infantry Battalions and Light Armored Recon units should be complete in 2013.

January 2005, Camp Habbaniyah, Iraq. Iraqi soldiers aim in their magazine-fed 7.62x39mm RPK light machine guns during the Iraqi Small Arms Weapons Instructor Course taught by the Marines of the 2nd Marine Division Training Center here. Admiration of the combat efficiency of the Soviet-designed RPK was a factor in persistent and growing requests from rank-and-file Marines for a true automatic rifle. (USMC)

Back Story
What follows here contains only brief note of the tactical pros and cons of SAW vs. IAR because these have long been and are likely to remain an ongoing debate.  This is, we believe, best left to the Corps’ combat-hardened professionals who have a ‘Devil Dog,’ so to speak, in the fight.

Instead, it is intended to be a close look at how the Marine Corps went about the process of fielding what is hoped will be a worthy successor to the iconic “B.A.R.” – John Moses Browning’s Automatic Rifle.

In addition to official program documentation, our primary sources of information for this feature include three career Marines, each with detailed knowledge and relevant perspectives.  They are CWO5 (Ret) Jeffrey Eby, recently Senior Gunner for the Corps, Major (Ret) Charles Clark III, USMC Infantry Weapons Capabilities Integration Officer at Marine Corps Headquarters, and Gunnery Sergeant (Ret) Robert Reidsma, HK’s M27 IAR Project Manager.  Reidsma’s interview served well as the backbone for the first installment of this two-part series.

Additional input has come from other knowledgeable individuals who, not surprisingly, have asked not to be identified due to sensitivities both professional and personal.

Gunner Eby, now Advanced Technology Programs Manager for the cutting-edge weapon sighting systems innovator Trijicon, moved up steadily in rank and responsibilities from CWO2 with 2nd Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, to the pinnacle of this career field in the USMC.

An outspoken, principled and tireless advocate of the IAR from the time he was involved in the first real IAR trials around 2001 and continuing through the M27’s adoption, Eby offers us his detailed perspective on the Corps’ recent decision:

“The primary focus of replacing the M249 with a true automatic rifle stemmed from the understanding that the M249 is a Light Machine Gun that was adopted by the USMC because the Army had a contract method that we could use.  The goal of the effort that led to the M27 stemmed from a desire to reduce system weight from 26.5 lbs to 10.5 lbs, increase lethality by increasing the hit ratio of all shots fired and increase the portability of a system in the hands of an offensive force that is trying to “close with the enemy” as opposed to attempting to use a weapon such as the M249, better designed for defensive engagements.

“The Commandant of the Marine Corps, along with many other Marines, was concerned about the loss in pure volume of fire when moving from a belt fed weapon to a magazine fed weapon.  Experiments by Marine Corps Operational Test and Evaluation Activity (MCOTEA) proved that the M27 significantly outperformed the M249 in suppression, used significantly less ammunition and had less downtime during reloads when total down time was measured through a full combat load of ammunition.  This was especially true at night due to the complexity of the M249 function/operation creating a greater frequency of stoppages and malfunctions.

“The Marine Corps believes, as do I, that the M27 will prove to be a key component to:

• Level the movement, portability and maneuverability across all personnel,
• Reduce the visible indication of the location of automatic weapons to the enemy,
• Utilize a common ammunition source,
• Streamline all training tasks,
• Enhance the automatic rifleman’s direct fire contribution in Counter Insurgency environments when the volume of fire is not necessarily desirable (collateral damage),
• Allow the squad to maintain the ability to provide a high-volume of fire when required.

“The squad will be more lethal from accurate fires.  The squad will be more mobile from significant weight reduction of both weapon and total ammunition requirements.  The tempo of the rifle squad can now be set by the squad leader instead of the slow moving light machine gun.

Okinawa, 1945. A Marine of the 1st Marine Division draws a bead on a Japanese sniper with his .45 caliber Thompson submachine gun while his companion, armed with a .30-06 caliber Browning Automatic Rifle, ducks for cover. Although heavy and having only a 20 round magazine, the accurate, hard hitting and long-reaching BAR is held in highest regard by many veterans of WWII and Korea. The Corps’ subsequent tries at its replacement started with a bipod-equipped M14. When this proved unsatisfactory and ‘Fourteens’ were replaced during the Vietnam War with M16s, certain riflemen in each fire team were designated as ‘automatic riflemen.’ That didn’t work very well either so the Corps fielded the M249 in 1985. (US Marine Corps photo/National Archives)

“The loss of the psychological effect of a high volume of inaccurate fire provided by the M249 will NOT be an issue, as any combat veteran who has heard gunfire can attest to, as after the first “dive to cover” occasion has been conducted, the sound of inaccurate fire passing somewhere nearby no longer impresses the veteran to the point of taking cover.

“I do not believe there are any negatives to the M27 replacing the M249 from any aspect that has been considered.”

Some of the M27’s Main Marines
Success of the IAR initiative in the form of the M27 is the result of a team effort with many players in addition to Eby, Clark and his immediate predecessor, Patrick Cantwell.  These men and others, notably Major (now Lieutenant Colonel) John “Ethan” Smith, IAW Project Officer, labored long and hard in the honored tradition of quiet and selfless service to the Corps.

While the scope of this report doesn’t permit identifying all of them, some of the key personnel brought to our attention are Lieutenant Colonel Mark Brinkman, MARCORSYSCOM’s Product Group 13 Program Manager for Infantry Weapons, along with Captain Edward Leon, succeeding Smith as IAR/M27 Project Officer.  Also, working patiently and steadily behind the scenes was PMIW Engineering Team Leader Salvatore Fanelli, well known and respected for decades of important work in the world of military small arms.

Our initial requests through USMC public affairs channels to interview any of these men proved unsuccessful until persistent efforts eventually paid off with permission to conduct only one – a telephonic interview with Clark, speaking from his office at MCB Quantico, Virginia.  This retired Marine Major is the Infantry Weapons Capabilities Integration Officer for the Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration, a three star command at Headquarters, Marine Corps.

Identifying himself as the “user representative” inside the acquisition process, Clark was well positioned in the latter stages of moving the IAR requirement through the bureaucratic maze.  The IWCIO and his five person team cover all infantry weapons, individual and crew served weapons, optics, sniper capabilities, and remote weapons stations.  They’re not only responsible for the requirements for each of those capabilities, but also for all the Marine Corps doctrine relating to those weapons systems.

However, the heavy 30-round drum proved to be unsatisfactory in service, and by 1938 the gun designer Shpagin developed an ‘add-on’ belt feed unit for the DK.  The modified DK with belt feed passed the usual trials and was subsequently adopted as DShK-38 (Degtyarov – Shpagin Krupnokalibernyj – Degtyarov and Shpagin large caliber, model of 1938).  While the DShK was a satisfactory weapon with reasonable power (at least to deal with low-flying aircraft and lightly armored vehicles), it had some peculiar properties, of which the most notable was the very heavy universal wheeled mount, which, despite its weight, could not provide the necessary gun stability and vibration dampening for accurate long range fire.  Overall, the DShK was a decent weapon, but it was built in relatively small numbers – by 1945 the USSR had only about 40,000 HMG’s in land and naval service (including U.S. made Browning M2HB supplied through the lend-lease program), mostly in Army AA units and on smaller naval crafts.  However, like the SG-43 it also was upgraded during the immediate post-war period, and also experienced a long service life, especially in so-called ‘Soviet satellite’ countries, as well as in many other Asian and African countries.

During the late 1930s, Soviet army experts developed a very powerful round for anti-tank rifles.  Known as 14.5×114, this round provided significant penetration and flat trajectory, and as soon as first anti-tank rifles entered the service, the Army requested development of a machine gun firing this potent round.  The first machine gun firing 14.5mm ammunition was developed in 1941 at the Red Army Small Arms Proving Ground near Moscow.  Designed by Simonin, it was a gas-operated weapon fed by Hotchkiss-type rigid strips with 10-round capacity.  Ten specimen of this gun were produced early in 1942, with five tested on T-60 light tanks and five more – on Kolesnikov mounts originally produced for DShK HMG.  The Simonin machine gun proved to be a formidable weapon, but was far too expensive for mass production.  It set the base for official requirements, issued by Army, and at least three design teams entered the race to produce an effective 14.5mm machine gun.

The eventual winner of the contest was designer Vladimirov, who quickly developed a belt-fed, air-cooled 14.5mm machine gun using the short-recoil action of his own experimental 20mm aircraft cannon V-20.  Development of the new HMG commenced in 1942, and the first working prototypes of the KPV were built by 1944.  They were initially tested on DShK wheeled mounts.  It must be noted that this design had some opponents in the Red Army ranks, who believed that a recoil-operated firearm would be less reliable than a gas-operated one.  Despite that, the KPV won the trials and after much refinement work it was adopted in 1949 in an infantry version (on a wheeled mount) and in three towed AA mountings (single, twin and quad).  Later on, its ‘tank’ version was used as the primary armament of some armored reconnaissance and personnel carrier vehicles such as BRDM, BTR-60D, BTR-70 and BTR-80.  In the AA role, KPV guns saw considerable action in the hands of the North Vietnamese armed forces, supplied from the USSR and China as military aid.  Later on, AA mounts with KPVT guns were used by the Soviet Army in Afghanistan, to fire up at Mujahidin hiding in the mountains and firing at Soviet bases and convoys from above.

Modified 12.7mm DShKM heavy machine gun on Soviet tank.

Quest for Squall Firepower
It is a well-known fact that Soviet designers routinely tried to produce various super-fast-firing machine guns (and later automatic cannons) since the late 1930s.  The prime use for such guns was to arm airplanes, although anti-aircraft tasks were also proposed for such weapons.  After much experimenting with single-barreled weapons and mechanically coupled ShKAS guns, another solution was tried.  Around 1936, designer Slostin developed a prototype rotary machine gun in 7.62x54R.  This weapon had a rotary cluster of 8 barrels a-la Gatling, but unlike most such systems it was self-powered, using gas pistons attached to each barrel.  Development of this “squall-firing gun” (in contemporary Russian terminology) with rates of fire reaching 6-8 thousands of rounds per minute, continued up until 1944 or 1945.  In 1944 the same designer started development of a much more formidable weapon, a 6-barreled self-powered (gas-operated) Gatling-type gun chambered for the powerful 14.5x114mm API and API-T ammunition.  This monstrous weapon was intended to serve as remotely-operated AA weapon for the super-heavy IS-7 tank then in development. At least one prototype machine gun was built, but tank designers choose the slower-firing but significantly lighter and probably more reliable KPVT instead.

In fact, the prototype IS-7 tank (as made in 1947) was one of the most heavily armed tracked vehicles of its time – in addition to its rifled 130mm main gun it carried two 14.5mm KPVT machine guns (one on a remotely-controlled AA mount and one co-axial with the main gun) and six 7.62mm SGMT machine guns.  Development of the Slostin multi-barrel machine guns was terminated shortly after WW2, but the general idea lived on.  During the 1970s, Soviet designers Yakushev and Borzov developed a 4-barreled self-powered (gas operated) rotary machine gun, known as YakB-12.7.  It was and still is widely deployed as a primary armament of the Mil Mi-24 “Hind” attack helicopter.  To ensure increased effectiveness of this weapon against massed unprotected infantry (typical for Chinese army of 1960s and 1970s), Soviet Air force adopted special duplex loading for YakB-12.7 along with more common ball, API and API-T rounds in 12.7×108.

Post-WW2 Developments
The venerable 12.7mm DShKM served well into the 1960s, but it was far too heavy for mobile warfare, and proved to be insufficiently accurate over longer ranges.  Therefore, a new requirement was drawn up for an improved 12.7mm HMG, which could be used as an infantry support weapon (on a tripod), as a tank defensive weapon (cupola-mounted) or as a short-range AA weapon (on dedicated mounts).  Development of a new weapon was initiated in 1969, and in 1972 the Soviet Army adopted the design by Nikitin, Sokolov and Volkov.  Known as the NSV-12.7, this weapon is also known as “Utjos” (Cliff; the original codename of the development program).  This weapon was significantly lighter than the DShKM especially in its infantry support configuration.  On a tripod and with 50 rounds in a belt the NSV weighed some 100 kg / 220 lbs. less than the DShKM on its wheeled mount with the same amount of ammunition.  It was also more accurate and better suited for contemporary production techniques.  The NSV quickly replaced the DShKM on Soviet tanks, as well as with infantry units as a heavy support weapon and in certain non-infantry units as a short-range AA weapon (on dedicated low-profile AA mounts).  It saw considerable action in Afghanistan, and later in Chechnya, being used at stationary posts and, sometimes, mounted on the MT-LB tracked armored vehicles and army trucks to provide convoys and small mobile units with additional firepower.

The last decade of the 20th century was rather turbulent.  The fall of the Soviet Union left some military factories located outside Russia; worse still, some of these factories were the primary makers of certain weapon types, such as the 12.7mm NSV and NSVT HMGs.  The Metallist factory that made these guns for the Soviet army remained in the now-independent Kazakhstan, and it kept all master drawings and other manufacturing documentation for this important weapon.  It was therefore decided to take the opportunity to develop an improved HMG for use both by infantry and on vehicles (mostly tanks), and this task was handed over to the designers of the Degtyarov plant (ZID, the former Degtyarov machine gun factory) in the city of Kovrov.

The new 12.7mm weapon was to retain the same mounting interfaces as the NSV, while providing better long-range accuracy.  The ZID team did not have to start from the ground up – actually, the factory’s design team had been working on an improved 12.7mm HMG since 1987 – but the fall of the USSR delayed its development.  The new Russian Army requirement allowed them to shake the dust from their older design drawings, and while development was rather slow (because of the constant lack of funding), the finalized gun was adopted by the Russian Army in 1997 and put into mass production in 2001.  Known as KORD (Konstruktsija ORuzheinikov-Degtyarovtsev – design of Degtyarov plant team), or under the official index 6P50, this weapon is now issued to infantry troops and is mounted on most modern Russian tanks, such as the T-80U and T-90, as well as on jeeps and on ground mounts.  Because it uses the same firing and mounting interface, KORD can be also retrofitted to older tanks (i.e. T-64 and T-72), to replace worn-out NSVT-12.7 weapons.  One unusual feature of the KORD is its relatively low recoil, which allows it to be used not only from the same lightweight tripod as the NSV, but also from a proprietary bipod mount, creating what could be called a lightweight heavy MG.  In this configuration the KORD weighs ‘only’ 31kg / 68 lbs. less ammunition, thus allowing it to be carried on the battlefield by a single soldier, although obviously for short distances only.  This makes the KORD useful during ‘limited warfare’ operations in urban and forest environments, as the HMG team can change positions almost as fast as the infantry it supports, and is able to fire from almost anywhere, including the high stories of urban buildings (through the windows) or even from the rooftops.

Third Party Nationals
In the past, the State Department has considered the country of birth as the qualifying characteristic in determining whether parties are permitted to perform arms exports or brokered transactions involving US-made munitions.  Individuals that may have been born in Iran, entered the United States as an infant, and owe all allegiances to the United States would have been prohibited from involvement in an arms transaction under the old State Department regulations.

The new regulations look to two major characteristics: substantive contacts, and business and personal travel to determine whether a party owes allegiance to the United States.

Under §126.18, “substantive contacts” may include (but are not limited to) the following:

• Regular travel to a foreign location;
• Recent or continuing contact with agents, brokers and  foreign nationals;
• Continued demonstrated allegiance to a foreign country;
• Maintenance of business relationships with persons within a foreign country;
• Maintenance of a residence within a foreign country;
• Receiving salary or other continuing monetary compensation within a foreign country;
• Contacts by the Foreign Nationals/Third Country Nationals with government or military officials, agents, or proxies;
• Business contacts (with a focus on the nature of the business and its legitimacy);
• Family contacts with individuals who pose a risk of diversion;
• Non-family contacts with individuals who acquire and sell defense articles for profit or monetary gain, who work for or with front companies, or who work for criminal or terrorist organizations;
• The totality of continuing connections to a third country, including carrying a passport of that country, casting ballots for elections in that country, currently or previously holding an official position within that country, and prior employment with the government of that country; or
• Actions otherwise indicating a risk of diversion

Bottom line: Parties that demonstrate a risk of diversion or other evidence of allegiance to a country other than the United States will be prohibited from engaging in arms transactions.  This policy is not perfect – it places a large burden on the employer to investigate and determine whether a party may be prohibited.  On the other hand, the policy eliminates a blanket policy of denial for parties that may otherwise be loyal to the United States.

Electronic Payment of Annual Registration Fees
In mid-2011, the State Department updated the DS2031 registration form, and started accepting electronic payment of annual fees for exporters, manufacturers, and brokers.  In the past, payment was required in U.S. funds, or paid via check issued by a U.S. bank.  This created a major issue for foreign brokers who were otherwise unable to register and pay the annual fees required for registration.

The new format of the DS2031 form is much easier to follow, and prompts the user when required fields are not complete.  This aspect of the registration process is much easier.  Payment has also gotten a little easier.  In mid-2011, the State Department required a type of payment that not all banks were able to perform.  In response to the issue, the State Department has provided clear wire transfer instructions; it is very easy for domestic and foreign registrants to wire the required registration funds.

Filing, Retention, and Return of Export Licenses and Filing of Export Information
Under the old policy, exporters were required to return exhausted and expired DSP-5 export licenses to the State Department.  Under the proposed policy, there is no requirement to return expired or exhausted licenses to DDTC if the license was issued electronically by DDTC, and the license was filed with Customs and Border Protection via the Automated Export System (AES).  This is a proposed rule that is very likely to be implemented.  A copy of the full text can be found by searching online for 76 FR 68311.

Defense Trade Cooperation Treaty Between the United States and the United Kingdom
The U.S. and the UK have entered into a trade agreement that allows the export of defense articles to be shipped under exemption.  There are many details to this exemption – much more than can be elaborated within this issue’s column.  Nevertheless, those that export U.S.-made defense articles to the United Kingdom should know that the regulation creates an exemption for the export of ITAR controlled items to the UK.  The exemption only applies to shipments to pre-approved government agencies and companies, and shipments may only be shipped to pre-approved locations within the UK.  Not all defense items qualify for the exemption, and re-export or re-transfer of defense articles still requires approval of the U.S. and/or British government.

Debarred Freight Forwarders
The U.S. State Department listed five freight forwarders on the debarred list due to allegations of contract fraud and other irregularities.  The five freight forwarders include BAX Global Inc., Kuhne and Nagel, Panalpina Welttransport, Panalpina Inc., and Schenker AG.  These five freight forwarders are not permitted to transport U.S.-made defense articles without prior approval from the U.S. State Department.

Exports to Iraq
On December 15th, 2011 an end to military operations in Iraq was officially declared.  Effective December 26th, 2011 the United States Department of State will no longer expedite any license application submitted in support of Operation New Dawn (OND).

Exports to Afghanistan
Expedited handling and review of export licenses from the United States are still available for exports to Afghanistan.  To be eligible for this expedited handling, the following criteria must be met and the requests must be for defense articles and services to forces or organizations deployed in Afghanistan, or defense articles and services to forces or organizations within 90 days of a scheduled deployment.  The export license application must be clearly marked so as not to delay processing, and the transaction ID should begin with the letters “OEF,” as applicable.

The export of fully automatic firearms to private contractors is typically prohibited, but the U.S. State Department will allow that fully automatic weapons may be exported via DSP 73 or DSP 5 to civilian contractors and/or private companies operating in Afghanistan.  The applicant must provide justification for the number of weapons being requested, as well as end use assurances on the parties receiving the firearms and the plan to return the firearms to the U.S. once the mission is complete.

Changes to the Commodity Jurisdiction Process
The purpose of a commodity jurisdiction (CJ) request is to determine whether an item or service is covered by the U.S. Munitions List (USML) and therefore subject to export controls administered by the U.S. Department of State pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).

If after reviewing the USML and other relevant parts of the ITAR, in particular ITAR §120.3 and §120.4, you are unsure of the export jurisdiction of an item or service, you should request a CJ determination.

Under the old process, written correspondence to State and Commerce Departments was required to determine which agency had proper export jurisdiction over the item.  The new process involves an electronic submission to the U.S. State Department.  Applicants seeking a commodity jurisdiction determination are not required to be registered with DDTC – See 22 CFR 120.4(b).  Additional information on the new process can be found online at http://pmddtc.state.gov/commodity_jurisdiction/index.html.

Export regulations are changing constantly.  The above changes to the export regulations are only a small fraction of the changes made within the past year.  This article should not be construed as legal advice.  Readers are reminded to seek out the most current version of the ITAR regulations and to seek professional legal assistance if questions arise.

Mr. Wong is a Washington licensed attorney.  He regularly provides legal counsel to the firearm and defense industry via his law firm, The Firearms Law Group.  Mr. Wong also maintains Hurricane Butterfly, an import/export company that assists U.S. firearm manufacturers and foreign buyers that do not wish to wade into the regulatory morass of U.S. import/export regulation.  He may be contacted via email at jmwong@FirearmsLawGroup.com.    

The guidance provided within this article was correct and current at the time it was written.  Policies and regulations change frequently.  The preceding article is not intended as legal advice, and should not be taken as legal advice.  If the reader has specific legal questions, seek competent legal counsel.