Manufacturers are zealous to recover their research, development and manufacturing investments. Firearms manufacturing and retailer sales are all about profit, while government program managers who make the big number buys are eager to score a win for their particular program as a matter of job security. In the end, it comes down to a hit or miss for the consumer and even that depends upon how technically savvy the individual consumer may be. How then is one supposed to decide?

Ammunition performance testing takes many forms as does its data analysis. Formal operational testing (OT), based on a formal operational test plan (search OPTEVFOR), is an objective means by which operational testing performance can be achieved. Its resulting data can be validated and analyzed without subjective bias. OT requires that a formal operational test plan is strictly followed, and that presents both a problematic and expensive process for ammunition and firearms developers. The default is to provide a selected military or law enforcement unit(s) the opportunity to “shoot” a particular new weapon and/or ammunition. Based upon their subjective feedback of that particular experience, the product is deemed “tested.” Thus, glowing product praise is routinely assigned, no matter how objectively unqualified it might be, and everyone in the consumer community largely accepts the product as tried, tested and proven.

But history offers more insight. The Cold War led to small arms procurement primarily focused on NATO interoperability, and the 5.56 NATO-firing AR platform became the assault rifle mainstay. As a result of our wars in Southeast Asia and the Middle East spanning the past 60 years, attention has been given to the war-fighting adequacy of the U.S. military’s current in-service arsenal of small arms and ammunition.

Much of today’s ammunition hype revolves around “new” rounds like the 6.5mm Creedmoor and the 6.8mm Remington SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge). In reality, there is nothing new about either except for the substitution of caliber designation with a millimeter designation and a slightly altered cartridge case and load. For example, the 6.5mm uses the same bullet as the .264 Winchester Magnum (.264 WinMag), and the 6.8mm uses the same bullet as the .270 Winchester. Both the.264 WinMag and the .270 Winchester have been available off-the-shelf for half a century.

What is the difference between the comparable legacy calibers and the “new” rounds? The answer is not a whole lot that matters. Felt recoil between the same caliber and corresponding millimeter cartridges is comparable and so is the projectile’s delivered energy on target using comparable loads. Accuracy claims are always an amalgamation consisting of a number of factors contributing to operational performance, but there are two fundamental elements that can be used to interpolate a round’s effectiveness—projectile weight (mass) and velocity. Projectile shape is also a contributing factor to ballistic flight characteristics. For example, each bullet diameter (caliber) has an individual “ideal” length to diameter, to shape, to weight ratio that provides its best ballistic trajectory (stable flight and range) at a given velocity (faster is not necessarily more accurate). That “ideal” formula is well understood and generally followed by ammunition manufacturers; although there is some really ridiculous ammunition available that has absolutely zero operational purpose other than it’s “cool looking.”

Another accuracy factor is barrel quality (material construction and machining accuracy) and barrel life expectancy. For the purpose of comparative example, a rifle or machine gun chambered in 7.62 NATO has an average barrel life of between 5,000 and 8,000 rounds. The same rifle or machine gun chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor has an average barrel life of only 1,200 to 1,500 rounds. The Creedmoor’s significantly reduced lifespan is the result of its higher velocity’s wear and tear on the gun’s bore. And the answer is “YES” to the question you’re probably thinking: Can’t the gun barrel be manufactured from a stronger alloy that resists wear? The problem is the cost of using exotic materials.

Comparatively, the combat-proven 7.62 NATO round (.308 Winchester) generally performs better all around than either the .264 or the .270, with recognition that the counterargument to this falls into niche categories outside general use. Additionally, the 7.62 NATO cartridge is available in a wider range of bullet weights, shapes and off-the-shelf loads. Therefore, replacing the 7.62 NATO round with either the 6.5mm or 6.8mm round for general service use has questionable operational advantage or a clear return on investment (ROI).

In a weight reduction effort, the feasibility of caseless ammunition, polymer-cased ammunition and a hybrid metal-based with polymer-cased upper cartridge was explored as a weight and cost reduction solution several decades ago. None of these were proven to be operationally suitable, combat reliable or cost-effective, and, therefore, none were adopted.

Caseless ammunition made its way into the U.S. Army’s Advanced Combat Rifle Program, but caseless ammunition was little more than a flash in the ammunition pan when the Army cancelled the program because of reliability issues and the ammo’s lack of interoperability with all other conventional rifles and pistols. However, it did help pave the way to Textron’s development of Cased-Telescoped Ammunition (CTA) for use in uniquely designed small arms that fire it.

With that as the segue, we will briefly examine new ammunition offerings available today and on the horizon. Some make sense, and some are plainly pushing the envelope of sound operational logic, not to mention return on investment—you be the judge.

Cased-Telescoped Ammunition (CTA)

In partnership with Heckler and Koch (HK) and Winchester, Textron has developed the next generation of CTA (with a focus on the 6.8mm projectile). Winchester–Olin is manufacturing the CTA while HK has designed the special magazine and belt-fed, gas-operated CTA weapons suite and will produce these specialized guns in conjunction with Textron. This has become known as the Cased-Telescoped Small Arms Systems (CTSAS) program.

What exactly is CTA? It’s a very curious-looking ammunition design that doesn’t track with any conventional ammunition shape. The CTA cartridge looks like a polymer tube about 1 ½ inches long and ½ inch in diameter. On the breech end it has a conventional primer in its center. On the muzzle end it has what looks like a second smaller tube inserted inside the larger outer tube. The smaller tube carries a 6.8mm bullet inside (by the way, this cartridge is fully scalable to larger calibers).

Here’s how it works. The gun’s firing pin strikes the primer, igniting the compacted smokeless powder propellant contained in the main tube body. As the gas pressure increases, the inside tube, holding the conventional 6.8mm round, extends forward, telescoping into the gun’s chamber, creating the necessary gas check (seal). As combustion pressure rapidly develops inside the cartridge case, the round (6.8mm bullet) releases from its telescoped tube (similar to the bullet leaving a conventional metallic cartridge case’s neck) and begins its transit down the gun’s rifled bore spinning into stable ballistic flight, just like any other conventionally fired bullet. The important point here is that a comparable conventional load with comparable bullet will perform the same throughout its ballistic flight downrange.

There are some advantages to cased-telescoped ammunition. Round for round, CTA is about 40% lighter than metallic cased ammunition. In addition, the CTA rounds use compacted propellant, which has better burn characteristics so it requires less case volume compared to conventional, loosely filled cartridge case propellant. This means CTA is approximately 12% the volume of similar caliber metallic cased ammunition, so it’s lighter and takes less overall space.

CTA ballistics, as mentioned previously, are comparable to conventional ammunition of the same caliber and bullet weight. CTA advertises improved accuracy, but that is scientifically questionable. Accuracy is the sum total of multiple variables such as the gun barrel quality, twist, caliber, bullet weight, balance and aerodynamic shape, velocity, gun sights being used, environmental conditions, shooter’s ability and so on, not the ammunition and/or gun alone.

CTSAS guns are about 20% lighter overall. For example, the 6.8mm CTA-firing machine gun variant weighs in at 14.5 pounds, compared to the Army’s current 21.8-pound M240L lightweight (7.62 NATO) machine gun. Additionally, because CTA ammunition telescopes, the CTSAS machine gun’s chamber is separated from the barrel; therefore lowering the risk of “cook off” during periods of sustained automatic fire. This claim may be true, but there is questionable thermodynamics involved for heat dissipation.

Conventional metallic ammunition extracts about 60% of the combustion-generated heat with each spent cartridge. The remaining 40% sinks into the gun barrel and receiver. That’s why guns get hot when they’re fired rapidly. Polymer (CTA) ammunition doesn’t carry (sink) heat; so how is the heat from propellant combustion managed and dissipated from the gun? Unquestionably, there is heat generated by propellant combustion, and that heat must go somewhere. Textron claims less heat is generated by its compacted propellant, but currently provides no clear explanation within the known Law of Thermodynamics that accounts for the dissipation of heat from sustained automatic fire.

There are additional legal and treaty issues needing resolution by Textron and (mostly) Program Executive Office (PEO) Soldier, before CTSAS can be adopted into general service use by U.S. forces. CTA requires a special family of cased-telescoped weapons to fire it. Conventional weapons cannot be converted to fire CTA and vice versa. That means neither the ammunition nor the CTSAS weapons are NATO-interoperable and therefore fall outside the NATO STANAG requiring ammunition interoperability.

Further, U.S. law dictates U.S. forces interoperability with our NATO allies. This leaves cased-telescoped weapons and ammunition in the “special use” category, and that in itself is a legal show stopper for its replacement as DoD’s main battle rifle and light machine gun dedicated to CTA. Nonetheless, cased-telescoped ammunition and the special weapons that fire it are a step forward in the world of firearms technology, and Textron is leading that charge. For more information see textronsystems.com.

SIG SAUER’s Hybrid Bi-metal Cartridge

On September 3, 2019, SIG SAUER, Inc., Newington, NH, announced the official award of a U.S. Army contract for the Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW). The primary objectives set forth by the U.S. Army for the NGSW-AR was a weapon with the firepower and range of a machine gun, coupled with the precision and ergonomics of a rifle. The award encompassed the complete SIG SAUER system consisting of SIG’s hybrid ammunition, a lightweight machine gun and rifle that includes suppressors. Utilized in both weapons, SIG’s 6.8mm (.27 caliber) hybrid ammunition is an interesting advance in ammunition, design, manufacturing and material metallurgy, not because of the 6.8mm round it fires, but rather the bi-metal cartridge.

SIG’s newly developed, high-pressure, 6.8x51mm hybrid ammunition is designed for increased penetration at greater range. SIG’s hybrid ammunition also achieves an important 20% reduction in cartridge weight by attaching a brass cartridge case (body) to a proprietary metallic alloy base. That’s right—a bi-metal cartridge case using dissimilar ferrous and non-ferrous metals that somewhat resembles an off-the-shelf 7.62x51mm NATO bottleneck rimless metallic cartridge.

In order to prevent metal seam separation between the alloy cartridge base and brass case upper, a lock washer (of sorts) is used between the two metals as a means to prevent case and base separation from dissimilar expansion coefficients when fired. The method SIG is using to manufacture their hybrid ammunition is otherwise proprietary, and their engineering department is not returning calls.

As outlined in the recent award, SIG SAUER will deliver a complete SIG SAUER system inclusive of the SIG SAUER 6.8x51mm hybrid ammunition, lightweight machine gun, rifle and accompanying suppressors. SIG has historically manufactured quality firearms, and no doubt their superb track record will continue. Visit sigsauer.com.

Polymer Composite Cartridge Case

It’s being manufactured and it’s available now. True Velocity, headquartered in Garland, TX, currently offers 5.56 NATO, 7.62 NATO, .338 NORMA, .50 BMG and 12.7×108 ammunition in its proprietary polymer composite case design. True Velocity’s composite case manufacturing utilizes scalable technology from 5.56 NATO through 14.5mm. This production technology allows rapid design modifications. True Velocity can also meet your packaging needs, including linked belts and individual rounds. Because they’re using composite munitions, they can offer the casing in multiple colors to match the operating environment, thereby lowering the battle signature. They can further color-code the composite casing to match a projectile type and load, making it distinctive and readily distinguishable from other ammunition. Remarkably, True Velocity loads all projectiles and powders with match-grade accuracy.

Unlike metallic-cased ammunition, the composite casing does not carry heat. True Velocity claims the weapon remains cooler, and the spent casing is cool to the touch. They also claim their ammunition provides substantial flash reduction because the gases exiting the bore are not superheated and therefore are below the flash point. These claims are made without the benefit of formal OT (as previously discussed).

True Velocity’s composite case ammo is easier to carry because it’s 30% lighter than brass casing ammunition of the same quantity and caliber. With casings that are 100% recyclable, the reduction in heavy metal byproducts also translates to reduced environmental impact. True Velocity’s “Lean is Our Culture” slogan is indeed a fact. True Velocity’s agile production technology reduces the required manufacturing footprint by 80% when compared to a traditional brass casing manufacturing facility. See tvammo.com.

Tracer Ammunition

Traditional tracer rounds have a bullet base filled with a magnesium-based pyrotechnic incendiary compound that‘s ignited when the round is fired, leaving a bright glowing trail (usually red or orange in color) behind the bullet as it streaks downrange. This allows the shooter to visually track (trace) the rounds’ actual flight path. Tracer ammo is most often linked into machine-gun-belted ammunition to provide the gunner immediate visual feedback of his bullet string’s trajectory and target hit proximity. This is especially useful when using fully automatic fire against moving targets and suppressing enemy fire.

However, this bright inflight glowing tracer tail comes at a price. It marks the bullet’s entire flight path from beginning to end, making the firing source location easily identifiable from both the sending and receiving ends. Additionally, because tracer rounds are incendiary and burn until their pyrotechnic is fully consumed, they will usually set fire to anything flammable where they come to rest downrange. For this reason, tracers are prohibited at nearly every indoor and outdoor range in the U.S. with the exception of specially designated military ranges. Another shortcoming of tracer rounds is that they are traditionally only available in NATO calibers, e.g., 5.56, 7.62 and .50 caliber, and this misses a huge consumer market of sportsmen shooters who shoot a variety of rifle and pistol calibers.

Can tracer ammunition be made non-incendiary, safe for indoor and outdoor range use, cost-effective and available across multiple popular calibers? Headquartered in Scottsdale, AZ, with its manufacturing facility in Payson, AZ, AMMO, Inc. (ammo-inc.com) has developed a cool non-incendiary tracer solution they named “Streak Ammunition.”

Streak Ammunition is a non-incendiary “cool tracer.” They achieve this by replacing the incendiary magnesium-based pyrotechnic with a non-flammable eco-friendly strontium aluminate (glow-in-the-dark) powder mixed with clear enamel. These new phosphorescent tracer rounds achieve a similar visual nighttime effect by using the same glow-in-the-dark ingredient used in many watch faces, gauge faces and kids’ glow-in-the-dark toys. When exposed (charged) to a light source, strontium aluminate compound glows brightly for a limited time after that light source exposure is removed. Streak Ammunition uses the flash from firing the gunpowder propellant as the light source to activate (charge) the strontium aluminate compound coating the rear cavity of the tracer bullet.

At night, the visual effect is nearly identical to a conventional tracer round as it streaks downrange. Another very important advantage is that Streak Ammunition tracers offer a restricted 30-degree rear-viewing angle. This means these tracers can only be viewed from the shooter’s end, not the receiving end, thus keeping the shooter’s position unmarked. Streak Ammunition’s disadvantage is that it simply does not glow bright enough to see in bright daylight. This ammunition is now in full production and will soon be available off-the-shelf in several colors for most popular calibers.

Saboted Light Armor Penetrator (SLAP)

SLAP ammunition is uniquely designed to penetrate lightly armored vehicles and aircraft and barrier armor more efficiently than conventional steel-core, or tungsten-core, armor-piercing ammunition. Designed for use in small arms, SLAP rounds can be safely fired through a conventional gun’s rifled bore without damage or any special gun modification.

Think of a shotgun shell as an analogy. In the same manner a shotgun shell uses a plastic shot cup (wad) to carry the shot down the bore, SLAP design incorporates a polymer sabot (sabot is a French word meaning wooden shoe) that carries a lesser diameter tungsten penetrator projectile down the gun’s bore. So—the sabot’s outside diameter matches the bore diameter and carries within it a smaller diameter, lightweight, high-density, sub-caliber projectile down the gun’s bore. As the sabot leaves the gun barrel, the sabot “undergoes” immediate and profound aerodynamic lift that instantaneously strips it away from the sub-caliber projectile it’s carrying. In this manner, the sabot comes to an almost immediate halt, and it “slingshots” the SLAP projectile (it’s carrying) to extreme velocity. By design, the spin-stabilized, sub-caliber SLAP projectile has greatly increased sectional density (mass), especially if it employs a heavy metal tungsten or depleted uranium core.

SLAP ammunition has been in production since 1985 by the Winchester Cartridge Company and Olin Corporation (olin.com). The sabot that contains the sub-caliber SLAP round is manufactured by Cytec Industries. SLAP ammunition is produced in two NATO calibers, 7.62×51mm NATO (.308 Winchester) and 12.7×99mm NATO (.50 BMG). The 7.62×51mm round is designated as the M948 (standard) and M959 (tracer). The 12.7×99mm (.50 BMG) round is designated as the M903 (standard) and M962 (tracer). SLAP, by nature of its design, cannot be efficiently scaled down below 7.62mm. However, it is easily scaled-up to larger bore guns and renamed “APDS” (armor-piercing discarding sabot).

Armor-piercing discarding sabot (APDS)

APDS is a form of kinetic energy projectile fired from a rifled-barrel gun to attack armored targets. APDS rounds are sabot rounds, firing a spin-stabilized armor-penetrating sub-projectile. Like SLAP ammunition, its small arms equivalent, APDS ammunition can nearly double the armor penetration of a small caliber gun, compared to armor-piercing (AP), armor-piercing—capped (APC), or armor-piercing, capped, ballistic-capped (APCBC) projectiles.

APDS technology is not new, and it actually preceded SLAP ammunition. In fact, its development began in France prior to the 1940 Franco-German Armistice. Resulting from the project engineers fleeing France to escape the Nazi’s occupation, APDS projectile technology was honed in the United Kingdom from 1941 to 1944. In mid-1944, the UK was first to operationally field the APDS projectile for use in their QF 6-pounder anti-tank gun.

However, these early APDSs had low sectional density and high aerodynamic drag, resulting in poor “carrying power” (meaning the round rapidly lost velocity and penetration over distance). As a means to eliminate these negative factors, the engineers designed a flowerpot-shaped outer sheath (sabot) that was immediately discarded upon leaving the bore.

Today, the front end of the pot (sabot) has 3 to 4 petals, depending on the bore diameter, that are covered with a bore-centering band (usually made from a sacrificial nylon derivative material). This design provides the high-density APDS core / projectile with unencumbered bore acceleration, high muzzle velocity and downrange carrying power while eliminating the consequences of high drag in flight.

Newer medium-caliber APDS cores are constructed from a frangible high-density alloy. These projectiles are called Frangible Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot, or FAPDS, when employed as APDS types. When they’re used as full-caliber projectiles they’re called FRAP rounds (Frangible Armor Piercing) because during target penetration, the projectile’s frangible core fragments into numerous high-velocity pieces. On a lightly armored target, the effect is akin to a high explosive incendiary round, but with the addition of a lethal cloud of dense high-velocity fragments penetrating deep into the target’s interior—it’s not survivable for those inside. When striking heavy armor, the FAPDS’s effect is more akin to a standard APDS, only with higher fragmentation of the core and subsequently, higher lethality if the armor is penetrated.

Penetrator with Enhanced Lateral Effect (PELE)

In case you’re not sufficiently mind-boggled by now, the FAPDS is also known as a Penetrator with Enhanced Lateral Effect (PELE). But PELE has some very subtle design modifications. It is fuzeless ammunition without any explosives that leverages its material design composition to get an explosive-like physical effect upon impact with a hard armored surface. PELE’s effectiveness derives from its design and material construction using the combination of two dissimilar density materials.

The projectile’s outer body is constructed from high-density steel or tungsten material. The inner core consists of a low-density aluminum or plastic material. When the PELE projectile impacts a target, the high-density outer component penetrates the target material. However, the low-density inner component, which has a much lower penetration performance, is dramatically slowed upon target impact. This inertia-to-mass mismatch causes a tremendous instantaneous pressure build-up inside the projectile that easily reaches values in the region of gigabars and mimics the effects of a high-explosive-shaped charge against the target.

The result is the projectile disintegrates (explodes) into a large number of highly lethal, high-velocity fragments that will punch through nearly most material like light armor, block walls, frame, body armor, etc. Better, the number and size of the fragments is adjustable as a function of the projectile‘s physical dimensions and material construction. Even better, the PELE effect is scalable to larger calibers and can be achieved by using non-exotic standard ammunition construction materials.

Reduced Range Cartridge

Nammo, headquartered in Raufoss, Norway, has developed and qualified a new .50-caliber, Reduced Range (RR) cartridge for training on smaller ranges where the normal 5-mile downrange danger area must be radically reduced. While not designed as a training round, it absolutely provides affordable training options never before available. The downrange safety template of the cartridge is the same as standard 7.62mm NATO rounds, so warfighters and law enforcement snipers can train with .50-caliber weapons at ranges previously approved for 7.62mm and below, or by carving up an existing .50-caliber range into several smaller sites. Some users are also interested in the RR cartridge for combat in urban operations where line-of-sight is limited, and there is high concern about collateral damage. The Nammo round has the same ballistics as NATO standard .50-caliber ammo to about 800m (875 yards), and accuracy has been demonstrated to be better than standard .50-caliber Ball/AP ammo within this range. The Nammo .50-caliber Reduced Range ammunition is qualified in accordance with NATO specifications and already fielded by several countries for use in both machine guns and rifles. Visit nammo.com.

EXACTO—Command-Guided Ammunition

EXACTO (Extreme Accuracy Tasked Ordnance) is the research and development (R&D) program headed by DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) for round guidance technology, involving a combination of “fire and forget” technologies currently applied to guided .50-caliber rounds. EXACTO .50-caliber rounds can make course corrections in mid-flight. As part of a DARPA-funded project, Teledyne and Orbital ATK’s Armament Systems Division developed this round and its guidance system. While the program officially ended in 2017, the EXACTO program developed new approaches and advanced capabilities to improve the range and accuracy of sniper systems beyond the current state of the art.

DARPA’s program manager, Jerome Dunn, described it like this: “EXACTO’s specially designed ammunition [employs] a real-time optical guidance system to track and direct the [.50-caliber] projectiles to their targets by compensating for weather, wind, target movement and other factors that can otherwise impede successful hits. True to DARPA’s mission, EXACTO demonstrated what was once thought impossible: the continuous guidance of a small-caliber bullet to target. Live-fire demonstration from a standard rifle showed that EXACTO is able to hit moving and evading targets with extreme accuracy at sniper ranges unachievable with traditional rounds. Fitting EXACTO’s guidance capabilities into a small .50-caliber size [round] is a major breakthrough and opens the door to what could be possible in future guided projectiles across all calibers.”

Exactly how they’ve achieved this quantum advancement in bullet guidance can only be imagined. It is believed they use a spin-stabilized projectile with internal and/or external aero-actuation control methods equipped with projectile guidance technologies, tamper proofing and macro-power supplies. The round’s guidance system consisting of advanced sighting, optical resolution and clarity technology components remains classified, as does the bullet’s guidance technology. It is likely that this program has been moved into DARPA’s “black” program side. Perhaps one day guided bullet technology will emerge and become available, but as of today that is only wishful thinking. For more information see darpa.gov.

12-Ga. Shotgun Special Purpose Ammo

The 12-gauge shotgun is perhaps the most versatile, most widely used gun for sporting purposes, home defense and law enforcement. As such, 12-gauge shotgun ammunition offers the widest selection of loads available for any off-the-shelf gauge or caliber gun. Shot-filled shells are most commonly used for across-the-broad applications, but there are other far more exotic loads available designed for special purpose use. While most of these shells aren’t cheap ($5 dollars or more per round), they generally perform as advertised. Here are some examples.

Triple Threat Round. This home defense specialty shotgun round is available in a variety of different names. It’s loaded in three layers consisting of a half-length slug, No. 8 birdshot and No.4 buckshot. Its effectiveness is limited by the range / distance / proximity to the target. The advantage a slug + birdshot + buckshot combo offers in a single shot is debatable, but the marketing concept sounds lethal.

Flechette Round. Flechette is a French word that means little arrow. Flechettes resemble miniature steel arrows. Like arrows, they have arrow-style points and stabilizing fins on the trailing end. The 1-inch long, 12-gauge versions are bundled inside the 12-gauge shot cup (wad) which acts as a sabot to carry the flechette bundle down the shotgun’s bore, releasing them into ballistic flight as the shot cup strips off from aerodynamic drag. The flechettes continue downrange and pierce through (like a straw in an apple) nearly anything they encounter with the exception of hard armor, stone, steel, thick wood and bone. They can penetrate soft body armor with little effort, and they will completely pass through soft body tissue, leaving little visible surface damage. The maximum effective range is about 30 to 40 yards. U.S. Navy SEALs first used 12-gauge flechette rounds during the Vietnam War, but found later in the war that 00 buckshot had far more immediate stopping power.

Metal Piercing Discarding Sabot (MPDS). Much like a rifled slug used for hunting, this round uses a sabot-carried, 500-grain, heat-treated proprietary-alloy, heavy metal slug designed for metal penetration. The slug rides in a sabot and makes no direct contact with the bore. Leaving the muzzle-end at a velocity of around 1,700 ft/sec, the sabot is discarded as it is subjected to aerodynamic lift. The slug has a bottom heavy hourglass shape that helps stabilize its in-flight ballistic trajectory. This projectile will easily break an engine block or penetrate through both sides of a car and continue on. These 12-gauge rounds perform as advertised and should not be taken trivially.

.50-cal. BMG Shotgun. This 12-gauge round actually contains a .50 BMG / M17 Tracer round that is carried by two sabot sleeves to maintain straight alignment throughout its travel down the bore. The incendiary tracer lights when the round is fired and burns about 3 to 4 seconds, offering about a 400m tracer burnout. It is inherently inaccurate because the .50-caliber round is not spin- or fin-stabilized. For example, at 400m a typical elevation hold of about 30 feet above the target is necessary. This round has little practical value other than its “nasty” unfired look.

Bolo Round. Like a hand-thrown bolo that whirls during flight to entangle its target, this 12-gauge shotgun round is constructed by using a short length of flexible steel wire to connect two lead slugs together. Coiled into a shot cup to carry it down the bore, the miniature bolo is released as the shot cup strips away as it leaves the muzzle. The bolo round then swirls its way downrange to mash and entwine a live target at ranges of 30 to 40 yards. The effectiveness of this round against dog-size animals and/or large goose-size birds is marginal. The round sounds interesting, but it’s no substitute for a shot-carrying shell or a rifled slug that possesses unarguable effectiveness and reliability against a given target.

Dragon’s Breath (Incendiary Round). Dragon’s Breath is a unique type of 12-gauge incendiary round loaded with magnesium shards. When the round is fired, it resembles a huge torch of white-hot sparks and scorching flames that reaches out to about 100 feet. This searing hot flame only lasts a few seconds, but it will ignite anything flammable in its path—a human’s clothing—or cause serious burns otherwise. While prohibited on all civilian ranges except for specifically designated government ranges, it must only be used outdoors with extreme caution and target discretion.

Flashbang Round. These rounds don’t fire a projectile. Rather, they produce an intensely bright muzzle flash accompanied by an instantaneous 182dB report that will disorient anyone without ear protection. The gun must be pointed down and away from a human target to prevent severe injury. If fired in rapid volley from a semiauto-loading shotgun they can immobilize a hostile within close proximity. While it’s hard to say whether they’re actually effective in a tactical situation, these rounds do exactly what they’re advertised to do; they cause an obnoxiously loud bang.

Rubber Bullet Rounds. These rounds are often used by law enforcement for riot control. They are used much like regular shotgun ammo except they must never be aimed at a person’s face or chest. They’re loaded with nothing more than rubber 00 buckshot as replacement for lead or steel shot. They are still lethal at close range and can easily knock out an eye at 40 yards.

Beanbag Rounds. Used by law enforcement as a less-than-lethal solution, this round is many times loaded with small teabag-size cloth bags filled with bismuth powder. Bismuth is close to lead in mass (weight), but unlike lead it is non-toxic and eco-friendly. There are some beanbag rounds available that are loaded with lighter materials for specific less-than-lethal use at very close range. Stick with the heavy bags and aim for the legs and lower body.

What the Future Holds

Soldier-carried Directed Energy (Laser) Weapons are well within current technical grasp. Prototypes have been built and fielded for nearly 2 decades. Miniaturizing high-power-directed energy technology has not been the limiting factor for the adoption of such weapons for battlefield use. The limiting factors really only involve two issues: one technical and one political.

Lasers of sufficient power to damage material objects like vehicles and aircraft or burn holes in other soldiers consume large amounts of power. That requires a large portable power source that can be sustained. Reducing power-source size so it can easily be soldier-carried also reduces its capacity to recharge the laser(s) it powers. So power sustainability is a major showstopper when it comes to soldier-carried offensive laser systems.

A second show stopper are the Geneva Conventions and their follow-on addendums that dictate what can and can’t be used to kill one’s enemy. While it’s acceptable to shoot holes in one’s enemy, lasers are only acceptable when used for target designation but not to blind or burn holes into the enemy. As ridiculous as this might sound, it is a recognized measure in the Rules of War. This playbook will likely change as robotic warfighting systems (drones of all types) technically mature and are fielded against similar adversary systems, both terrestrially and celestially. They will surely rely upon some form of directed energy because killing robots with robots using directed energy isn’t covered by any Convention.

Achieving an army of robotic combatants is still a decade or more in the future, but it is coming. Until then, and perhaps well into the next several decades, kinetic weapons consisting of bullet firing guns will remain the cost-effective mainstay for warfare, law enforcement and sporting purposes. As a result, ammunition will continue to evolve and so will the weapons that fire it.

LARGEST LANDPOWER EXPO AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FORUM SHOWCASES NEW TECHNOLOGY

There is no better place to see today’s defense technology on display than at the AUSA 2019 Expo, held October 4-6 in the Washington, D.C.-based Walter E. Washington Convention Center. This article provides a categorical sampling of some new noteworthy technologies.

Ammunition and Weapons

Textron, in partnership with Heckler and Koch and Winchester, has developed the next generation of cased-telescoped ammunition (with a focus on the 6.8mm projectile) and the special weapons suite necessary to fire it.

What exactly is cased-telescoped ammunition? Imagine a small semi-transparent polymer tube about 1 1/2 inches in length with a diameter of about 1/2 inch. On the closed bottom end, it has a conventional primer just like metallic-cased ammunition. On the muzzle end it has what looks like a second smaller tube inserted inside the larger outer tube. The smaller tube carries a 6.8mm bullet inside. It’s a very curious-looking ammunition design that doesn’t track with any conventional ammunition shape.

So how does it work? When the gun’s firing pin strikes the primer and ignites it, the cartridge’s powder charge is subsequently ignited, just like a conventional metallic cartridge. As the burning propellant’s gas pressure increases, the inside tube holding the conventional 6.8mm round extends forward, telescoping into the gun’s chamber, in turn, establishing the necessary gas check between the cartridge and firing chamber. As combustion pressure maximizes inside the cartridge case, the round (bullet) releases from its telescoped tube and begins its transit down the gun’s bore just like a conventional bullet.

About now you’re scratching your head thinking this ammunition seems complicated, maybe even fragile when compared to conventional metallic-cased ammunition. Plus, it requires a specially designed gun to fire it—what’s the advantage in that? And how about heat management? Conventional metallic ammunition extracts about 60% of the combustion-generated heat with each spent cartridge. The remaining 40% sinks into the gun barrel and receiver, and that’s why guns get hot when they’re fired rapidly. Polymer ammunition doesn’t carry (sink) heat, so how is the heat from propellant combustion managed and dissipated from the gun, especially the machine gun variant? Hmmm?

There are some advantages to cased-telescoped ammunition. Round for round, it’s about 40% lighter than metallic cased ammunition. It is approximately two thirds the length of comparative caliber metallic-cased ammunition with a slightly larger diameter—so it’s lighter and takes less overall space. Its ballistics is comparable to conventional ammunition of the same caliber, but its accuracy is touted to be vastly improved, especially at extreme range. However, accuracy is the sum total of several variables like the gun’s barrel quality, twist, caliber, bullet weight and aerodynamic form, sights, terrain, environmental conditions and, perhaps most important, the shooter’s ability. Accuracy, therefore, is not the product of ammunition or firearm alone.

There are some clear disadvantages to cased-telescoped ammunition as well. Cased-telescoped ammunition requires a special family of cased-telescoped weapons to fire it. Conventional weapons cannot be converted to fire cased-telescoped ammunition and vice versa. That means neither the ammunition nor the weapons are NATO interoperable and as such, fall outside the NATO Treaty requiring ammunition interoperability. Further, U.S. law dictates U.S. forces interoperability with our NATO allies. This leaves cased-telescoped weapons and ammunition in the “special use” category, and that in itself is a legal showstopper for its replacement as the DoD main battle rifle and NATO interoperable ammunition.

These concerns need to be addressed, but it appears that Program Executive Office (PEO) Soldier is currently in denial. Nonetheless, even though we’re still firing a ballistic projectile downrange like we’ve been doing for centuries (except now it’s 6.8mm), cased-telescoped ammunition and the special weapons that fire it are a step forward in the world of firearms technology, and Textron is leading that charge. For more information see textronsystems.com.

Next Generation Squad Weapons 

On September 3, 2019, SIG SAUER, Inc., Newington, NH, announced the official award of a U.S. Army contract for the Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW). The primary objectives set forth by the U.S. Army for the NGSW-AR was a weapon with the firepower and range of a machine gun, coupled with the precision and ergonomics of a rifle. The award encompassed the complete SIG SAUER system consisting of SIG’s unique 6.8mm hybrid ammunition, a lightweight machine gun and rifle (both include suppressors).

Of greatest interest, is SIG’s newly developed, high-pressure, 6.8mm hybrid ammunition that is designed for increased penetration at greater range. SIG’s hybrid ammunition also achieves an important 20% reduction in cartridge weight by bonding a brass cartridge case to a metal base. Yes–a bi-metal cartridge case using dissimilar metals (that otherwise looks like any other off-the-shelf metallic cartridge). In order to prevent metal seam separation resulting from dissimilar metal expansion coefficients when heated and stretched by firing stresses, a lock washer (of sorts) between the two metals prevents case and base separation. The method SIG SAUER is using to manufacture its hybrid ammunition is proprietary, and its guru who knows is not taking calls.

As outlined in the recent award issued by the U.S. Army, SIG SAUER will deliver a complete SIG SAUER system inclusive of the SIG SAUER 6.8mm hybrid ammunition, lightweight machine gun, rifle and suppressors. SIG has historically manufactured quality firearms, and we have no doubt in its ability to continue its stellar track record. See sigsauer.com.

Tactical Rifles 

Otis Defense acquired DRD Tactical on October 1, 2019, and has now become a firearms manufacturer in addition to offering its premier weapons cleaning product line.

DRD Tactical is a market leader in the design and manufacture of innovative modular tactical rifles (takedown guns). Each rifle is designed around three key characteristics: discretion, reliability and precision. They specialize in a patented Quick Takedown rifle that ensures the utmost concealment discretion when operators are traveling on covert missions. These rifles are designed specifically for the military’s SOF and law enforcement elite with a need for discreet carry. DRD will continue design and manufacturing of all its firearms in its Georgia facility while sales, marketing and administrative support will be run out of Otis headquarters in Lyons Falls, NY. Congratulations to Otis and DRD for a great union. We anxiously await your future offerings. See otisdefense.com.

Smart Targets

One of the more interesting technologies showcased at AUSA was Marathon Targets’ T50 autonomous robotic target for outdoor use and the T10 for indoor use. These man-sized robot target platforms are programmed to act with tactical behaviors as they move autonomously about the practice range. The battery-powered wheeled platforms carry a life-size, human-looking mannequin that reacts to being shot, using live fire or sim-ammunition from any direction. When shot, the platform instantly stops and drops the mannequin to a full-flat position. Other platforms involved in the drill will either continue an assault toward the shooter(s) or turn and run for cover, realistically simulating combatant behavior in a firefight. Better yet, should the shot at the mannequin hit the platform control box below the mannequin, the box containing the motor, batteries and computer is armored to survive anything up to and including a .338 hit without penetration.

To add training realism, any number of autonomous units can be employed in any scenario desired, from a few adversaries to a platoon-sized force consisting of dozens. Since they autonomously communicate amongst one another to fill gaps resulting from those shot (killed), or to run for cover when shot at, imagination is the only limit on live-fire training scenarios using these targets. Interestingly, Marathon’s business model is built around renting these targets to the users, both short-term and long-term, rather than selling them. Consequently, you only rent them for the period you need them, and Marathon otherwise mechanically maintains them and keeps the software upgraded. See marathon-targets.com.

Optics and Power Management

Safran Optics 1 located in Bedford, NH, displayed its High Resolution Thermal Viewer (HRTV). The HRTV is the ultimate lightweight observation and targeting device that utilizes three channels: Cooled Thermal, Color Day and Low Light Level. This multiple role viewer additionally offers a 4k-color sensor and global leading laser rangefinder, making it perfect for sniper spotter use, advanced reconnaissance and target ID at greater ranges than previously achievable. This is made possible by its high performance thermal imager, extreme long-range optical observation with an optional lens extender, remote wireless observation, photo/video capture, fall-of-shot ballistic calculator and moving target speed indication. It additionally employs See-Spot Detection that allows the user to view laser designators from JTACs or other aircraft. It runs on CR-123s or the rechargeable Bentronics BT-70915 battery (37 mw) and weighs 4.4 pounds with battery. HRTV’s ruggedized case is both shock- and weather-resistant and designed to work reliably in the extremes of all warfare environments. The HRTV is worthy of close attention. See optics1.com.

Hailing from Newington, NH, Wilcox Industries Corporation showcased its Wilcox “Fusion System.” The Fusion System is a lightweight, integrated, modular power management system that is contained in the M16/M4 assault rifle’s forearm. Its purpose is to bring critical electro-optics and sensors together within a localized Bluetooth-enabled network. This unique system energizes a reflex sight, red visible laser, NIR laser and fixed NIR illuminator as well as a SureFire dual-spectrum head with white and NIR light. The Fusion System’s BlueforceTACTICAL (BTAC) module links into the BTAC mobile command center and provides, among other things, real-time location alignment, shot records and weapon health maintenance. It’s powered by a single CR-123 battery with a second battery chamber for backup. The entire system is designed with the weapon’s center of gravity in mind and so provides a “balanced feel” when aiming, shooting and carrying. See wilcoxind.com.

Aimpoint has created the new standard in pistol reflex sights. FNH was the first manufacturer to produce a pistol with the top of the slide already factory-milled and drilled to accept a top slide-mounted reflex sight. Since the FNP-45 debuted, a number of pistol manufacturers are now offering a factory-ready slide that readily accepts a top-mounted reflex sight. And that brings us to Aimpoint’s ACRO P-1. The ACRO P-1 is a ruggedly built, NVG-compatible, ultra-clear 3.5 MOA red dot sight. It’s submersible (Navy SEALs listen up) to a depth of 82 feet and is shock-tested to survive the recoil stroke of over 20,000 rounds of .40 S&W pistol ammunition. It’s powered by a standard CR-123 3V Lithium battery and only weighs 2.1 ounces. It is the only fully enclosed system in its category and boasts a fully sealed optical channel. Changing the battery is an operator’s dream because it can be easily accomplished without having to remove the ACRO P-1 from the pistol. See aimpoint.com.

B.E. Meyers & Company, Inc., based in Redmond, WA, is known for the advanced photonic systems they develop and manufacture for the defense and aerospace industry. The company’s core competencies include laser solutions for aiming, illumination, targeting and less-than-lethal visual disruption. B.E. Meyers recently added the MAWL®-X1 to the company’s highly successful MAWL® (Modular Advanced Weapon Laser) line of high-powered aiming and illumination laser systems for individual and crew-served weapons. This DoD-specific variant sports a truly modular design comprised of three separate Head, Body and End-Cap components. This modular design allows it to be field maintainable and sustainable at a supply chain level.

The superior ergonomics designed into the MAWL®-X1 provides intuitive operation in the dark, under stress and with gloves on. As an ambidextrous system, it can easily be configured for either right- or left-handed shooters. It features a simple finger-operated switch mechanism with finely balanced power and divergence presets that allow for target transitions from close to long range in under a second. The MAWL®-X1 also features balanced and stacked beams to increase situational awareness and overcome photonic barriers created by external light sources. It additionally delivers unparalleled range and clarity through optimized VCSEL (vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser) technology that vastly increases performance, beam quality, beam clarity and operational efficiency. Even better—it’s made in America by Americans. See bemeyers.com.

Personal Protection

Team Wendy, of Cleveland, OH, is known for its lightweight ballistic helmets and face shield protection. Team Wendy showcased its EXFIL® Ballistic helmet consisting of high-grade components that include a level III-A ballistic shell, a foam impact liner with 16 individual comfort pads in two thicknesses and a boltless-design retaining system with cam-lock sliders for one-hand operation. As helmet systems go, the EXFIL Ballistic helmet provides unequalled protection, comfort and wear-resistance performance. Additionally available in its accessory offering is a fitted helmet cover that provides cable routing slots built into the cover’s loupe-portion. This simplistic solution serves to fully protect power and communications cables and completely eliminate cable snags. Team Wendy’s helmet design and material construction quality speaks for itself—try one, you’ll like it. See teamwendy.com.

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)

In the world of Class II and Class III UASs , Aeronautics Group based in Yavne, Israel, offers a variety of fixed wing drones with tailorable mission-specific payload capabilities. Of specific note is its Orbiter 4 Small Tactical UAS. With a wingspan of 5.4 meters, a speed of 70kts and a 24-hour endurance capability, this low silhouette, silent flight, non-corrosive composite construction UAS is made for coastal and maritime surveillance. It possesses six autonomous flight modes and autonomously navigates with, or without, GPS or datalink. It is propelled by a spark ignition, internal combustion, multi-fuel engine and is fully operable in harsh weather conditions below the cloud base. Compared to most of the large payload UASs in use today, the Orbiter 4 possesses most of the same surveillance capabilities but in a small, low logistical footprint. This translates to a runway-free tactical UAS that’s easily launched and recovered with a 15-minute turn around cycle. See aeronautics-sys.com.

AI-Controlled Fully Autonomous Robotics

There was an obvious gap in fully autonomous robotic systems on display, save the semi-autonomous (operator-driven) explosive ordnance disposal platforms. It is no secret that AI-controlled fully autonomous robotic land, air, sea surface and underwater platforms are under intense development by numerous international high technology corporations. The U.S. Navy recently let a contract for the purchase of both fully autonomous surface and underwater vessels, and there will be more as computing capabilities continue to advance in speed and other quantum capabilities.

This brings us to considering “Left of Conflict” concepts and future surrogate warfare between AI-controlled robot warriors where AI, and its application, may determine who wins and loses. Another facet of future AI warfare, and a most disturbing one, will be the day that a fully autonomous robot soldier intentionally takes human life. Make no mistake, this scenario is within our technological grasp today, and it will debut in battle at some point in the coming decade.

Currently, the greatest showstopper for fully autonomous robot soldiers is a portable power source with enough energy to sustain operations. Most all-humanoid robots run on rechargeable battery power. Many larger wheeled and tracked robots, including 4-legged robots (mules), carry power generators onboard. But even those are limited by the available fuel quantity carried for their generators.

Battery-powered robots require a recharging capability. A strategy being considered for humanoid solider robots is to intermingle specialized power recharging robots among the soldier robots. The analogy is akin to fighter jets being aerial refueled by specialized tanker aircraft, or the U.S. Navy’s underway replenishment of its warships at sea by resupply ships. Nonetheless, an adequate source for robot power sustainment remains a problem that still needs solving before soldier robots can carry the fight to the enemy and win.

It’s a Wrap

In closing, AUSA never disappoints; however, some years are better than others. “Better” is a relative term applied to a well-attended expo, and/or an expo that just seems to have more new technologies presented. AUSA 2019 was such a show—it was overall well-attended; the active duty military was well-represented; and the defense contractors, technology providers and manufacturers seemed to display more new products than in previous years. This could be a sign of the times and a result of rebuilding of our military, or it could simply be coincidence as the stars align. Either way, AUSA 2019 was a great show. AUSA 2020 is scheduled for October 12–14, 2020, at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center. See you there.

The answer is neither complicated nor abstract, but it is an amalgam. It involves the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), United States law and several long-standing Department of Defense (DoD) Policy directives. And, all of these require U.S. forces to be interoperable with NATO coalition members. Perhaps a quick review of how we got here might be helpful.

Achieving Objectives

Consisting of 29 nations today, the NATO Alliance was founded in 1949 to counter the threat of Soviet invasion of Europe. Its focus was to stop a Soviet-armored advance across the European plains through combined retaliation from all 29 NATO member states. But getting 29 allied states to act coherently and effectively together to achieve tactical, operational and strategic objectives requires interoperability across numerous warfighting capacities, not simply small arms in the hands of determined soldiers.

Interoperability means forces and their warfighting systems must all mesh so they can operate together. In turn, this permits them to share common warfighting doctrines and procedures, each other’s infrastructures and bases and communicate using conjoint hardware and software. Interoperability reduces duplication by adding redundancy. Duplication, unto itself, always results in added cost, weight and convolution. Interoperability requires the pooling of resources, common training and leverages synergies between allied states. This, by all definitions, provides NATO a force multiplier and the robust military might necessary to defeat any adversary.

On the other hand, NATO interoperability does not necessarily require that member states purchase and use common brand military weapons and equipment. Rather, NATO places its importance on weapons that can fire common ammunition (more on this point in a moment), on forces and equipment that can share common facilities and on communications that can connect, interact and exchange data across the alliance. Recent NATO initiatives like “Smart Defense” and “Connected Forces” reflect NATO’s quest for interoperability and common connectivity.

Interoperability Required by Law

As previously stated, NATO interoperability is required under U.S. law, formal regulations and policy. For the Unites States, the Defense Cataloging & Standardization Act, Title 10, U.S. Code Chapter 145, Section 2451-2457 (Approved July 1, 1952) is the foundation. This law established a single, unified standardization program in the DoD. It requires standardization of items used throughout the DoD to the highest degree practicable and requires standardization and interoperability of equipment with North Atlantic Treaty Organization members and other U.S. allies.

Additional applicable U.S. law, regulations and DoD policy documents directing NATO interoperability are: Public Law 104-113, National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, March 7, 1996; OMB Circular A-119, Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities; Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) paragraph 11.101(b) on Order of Precedence for Requirements Documents; CJCSI 2700.01, March 18, 2015,”Rationalization, Standardization, and Interoperability (RSI) Activities;” and DoDI 2010.06, July 29, 2009, “Materiel Interoperability and Standardization with Allies and Coalition Partners.”

Therefore, it is U.S. law and long-established policy that equipment procured for U.S. Forces employed in Europe under the terms of the NATO treaty be standardized and interoperable with equipment of other NATO members. Our policy further requires standardization of items and practices used throughout the DoD. Thus, interoperability between U.S. forces and coalition partners is permanent defense acquisition policy. Cost notwithstanding, this is why NATO dominantly plays into incorporating new small arms and ammunition into the U.S. inventory.

It Begins with Ammunition

Once all the law and policy documents are distilled, interoperability begins with ammunition. There are four approved NATO rounds: 9x19mm Parabellum, 5.56x45mm, 7.62x51mm and 12.7x99mm (.50 BMG), and none of these are commercial off-the-shelf ammunition. NATO ammunition performance is not measured the same as sporting ammunition. NATO ammunition must pass EPVAT testing. EPVAT stands for “Electronic Pressure Velocity and Action Time.” Action Time (in this context) means the (amount of) time required between the ignition of the primer and the projectile leaving the barrel. This is a comprehensive procedure for testing ammunition using state-of-the-art instruments and computers. The procedure, should you be interested, is described in NATO document AC/225 (Com. III/SC.1)D/200.

Unlike the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute’s (SAAMI) testing procedures used for the commercially available sporting ammunition market that primarily focuses on the shooter’s safety, NATO ammunition testing procedures not only includes the soldier’s safety but also a comprehensive functional quality testing in relation with the intended application (rifle, pistol, machine gun) and the capacity to incapacitate the enemy. As a result, every NATO ammunition order requires a complete acceptance testing and approval for both safety and functionality. This testing is performed by both NATO and the relevant ammunition manufacturers in a contradictory fashion. In order to accomplish this testing, a highly accurate and indisputable protocol has been defined by NATO experts using a system of reference cartridges.

The NATO reference cartridges system requires NATO’s ammunition manufacturers, under NATO’s watchful eye, to identify and set aside a batch (also termed “lot”) of ammunition they consider to be “of very good quality and representative of ammunition that should be delivered to the armies in the following years.” This batch is maintained at approved NATO test centers and distributed to the manufacturers involved as a test baseline. When a new batch (lot) of NATO ammunition is delivered, a set of 20 reference cartridges are fired, and this data baseline is compared to the performance of the new ammunition.

Each weapon and component considered vulnerable to the effects of a rapid change in pressure (for example, barrels, breech blocks and bolts) are tested by firing one dry round at a corrected minimum of 25% over pressure and one oiled round at a corrected minimum of 25% over pressure. Twenty-five percent over pressure means 25% in excess of the Service Pressure (P_max). The Service Pressure is defined as the mean pressure generated by the Service Cartridge at a temperature of 21°C (70°F). This high pressure proofing is conducted with both the weapon and ammunition conditioned to an ambient temperature of 21°C (70°F).

Since NATO test centers only deal with the four (caliber) chamberings in military use, NATO EPVAT uses technically more stringent and different proof test standards than SAAMI and C.I.P. (with headquarters in Brussels, C.I.P. is the European equivalent of SAAMI and stands for Commission Internationale Permanente pour l’Epreuve des Armes à Feu Portatives). Therefore, EVPAT pressures cannot be directly compared with SAAMI and C.I.P. testing pressures. Correspondingly, SAAMI and C.I.P. proof houses test hundreds of different commercial (calibers) chamberings requiring a multitude of different test barrels and use less comprehensive test procedures than NATO.

Commercial and NATO Cartridges

With the above in mind, one might ask, for example, if the 7.62 NATO and the commercial .308 Winchester cartridges are the same thing. They are not identical, but they are similar enough that they can be loaded into rifles chambered for one another. The primary difference is that the commercially available .308 Winchester cartridges are typically loaded to higher pressures than 7.62 NATO cartridges. Even though SAAMI does not consider it unsafe to fire the commercial .308 round in weapons chambered for the NATO round, there is substantial debate about compatible chamber and muzzle pressures between the two cartridges. This debate is based on the differing powder loads and cartridge wall thicknesses of the NATO and commercial rounds. In the end, ATF recommends checking the firearm manufacturer’s stamping on the barrel that designates whether it’s designed for .308 or 7.62 NATO. The same is true for each of the other three NATO-approved rounds.

Why Only Four?

So how did NATO end up with only four approved cartridges—why not more? The short answer is that all 29 NATO nation members must unanimously approve any deletions or additions to the approved list. While it has been attempted, unanimous agreement to add additional rounds has proven impossible time and time again. There are politics involved that outplay performance and capability. Thus, the four approved NATO rounds will likely remain NATO legacy well into this century until replaced by caseless ammunition, man-portable directed energy weapons or something else soldier-carried not yet devised.

There is another huge motivation for NATO members to not deviate from the four approved calibers, and that is cost. As previously mentioned, as long as NATO members remain interoperable using the same ammunition, they can shoot it from any gun they wish. This means that many NATO members use assault rifles and machine guns they manufacture. The defense industry is big business, not just in the U.S., but in all nations that are capable of manufacturing military arms. These nations all use their own domestically manufactured military firearms.

In the case of the U.S. military, consider what it would mean to change the entire military’s assault rifle from the M16 (variants) to something different that shoots, say, 6.5mm Grendel (6.5x39mm), instead of the 5.56 NATO round. Let’s pretend that NATO approves and adds that round to the approved list. Let’s pretend that U.S. law and DoD policy are amended as well so this change can happen. Using the DoD as an example, here’s what the change would likely involve.

The entire U.S. defense force would need to be equipped with the new assault weapon. This means that all active-duty forces, reserve forces and National Guard would need new assault rifles. They would also require new machine guns / squad automatic weapons (light machine guns) that fire the 6.5 Grendel round. Our entire force would require training on the new weapons as would the armorers and the field and depot level maintainers. Stocks of 5.56 NATO ammo would need immediate replacement with the new 6.5 Grendel ammo.

Further, ample stocks of spare parts for all the new weapons would be required, and both these and the ammo would need to be immediately put into the DoD’s vast logistics supply system for worldwide supply to U.S. operating forces. As you might well conclude, this could only be accomplished with a major revamp of the logistics supply system; a problem of some immensity unto itself. How long might this change take? Years? And at what cost? And during the change, forces would obviously be using both 5.56 NATO and 6.5 Grendel along with the old and new weapons chambered for one or the other calibers exasperating an already stressed logistics supply system to get our troops exactly what they require.

The nightmare described above will also have to pass the litmus test of practicality. For example, if the 6.5 Grendel and its new assault rifle only provide, say, a 10% increase in reliability, lethality and hit probability over the M16-firing 5.56 NATO round, it would be a very hard sell (or a non-starter). While this may sound like a fictional scenario, it is a true reflection of budgeting and procurement reality. So, is a 10% increase in performance worth the trillion-dollar price tag? Most people would agree that it is not, and they would stick with the M16 and 5.56 NATO round.

Back to reality—since changing the NATO agreement, U.S. Law and engrained DoD policies requiring interoperability are, for all practical purposes, impossible (at least it is in this lifetime), the only workable and cost-effective option is to improve the existing ammunition, and that is exactly what NATO has done and continues to do. There are a multitude of NATO-approved 5.56 rounds available that offer heavier bullets with better weight-to-length profiles, more aerodynamic shapes (boat tails and ballistic points) and penetrator cores (light armor piercing), etc., etc.

Non-NATO Interoperable Weapons

NATO, law and policy restrictions do not apply to using non-NATO interoperable weapons and calibers for special purposes. SOCOM, for example, currently procures and uses special purpose weapons, and many of those weapons shoot exotic ammunition not available to other military units and definitely are not interoperable with conventional U.S. or NATO forces. But that is okay under the NATO agreement as well as U.S. law and policy; the key phrase being “special purpose use.”

Don’t Believe What You Read

So, the next time you read an article that announces the next best replacement assault rifle that shoots the next best ammunition that will replace the M16 and the 5.56 NATO round, remember that it won’t happen no matter how convincing it sounds. The rifle (bullet launcher) may change at great cost, but the ammunition it fires won’t without unanimous approval by all NATO members. Also, remember the overall replacement cost versus the improvement percentage in overall combat effectiveness is a major factor. If the delta isn’t overwhelmingly significant, it won’t be cost-effective, and it will fail.

Last, remember that most all of the articles about replacing one or more of the four NATO-approved rounds with something new and amazing is a product of shrewd advertising and defense industry promotion. The Program Executive Office–Soldier (PEO Soldier) is the DoD lead for soldier-carried weapons. PEO Soldier is always looking at new technology, but replacement of the military’s NATO interoperable calibers, or additions to them, is a non-starter.

The short answer is that the Geneva Conventions could not have imagined robotic warfare with AI-controlled, autonomous machines (warbots) killing human combatants or machines killing machines. Therefore, the rules of war as established by the first of four Geneva Conventions back in the 1860s no longer provide suitable guidelines to control robotic warfare. Where does that leave us?

Today the United States, Great Britain, China and Russia personify some of the 40-plus countries developing a new generation of fully autonomous robotic weapons (warbots).  These warbots operate using Artificial Intelligence (AI) that can be programmed to autonomously seek out and destroy enemy targets without human interaction, intervention or control. Some military proponents argue AI-controlled warbots will provide pinpoint accuracy, and this, in turn, will avoid collateral damage and civilian casualties. Others moralize upon the life-saving qualities in warbot employment, because warbot soldiers will keep human soldiers out of harm’s way. Opponents of this emerging warbot technology fear that it will prompt a high technology AI-based arms race resulting in a New World Order that uses force (absent of Geneva Conventions guidelines) before diplomacy. Much as the 1860s were to firearms advances, we are now in the Renaissance period of Warbots.

The New Teams

The most likely scenario will be the development of warbot teams composed of human soldiers working in conjunction with weaponized autonomous warbots that possess specialized capabilities. The current buzzword phrase for teams that combine humans and warbots working side-by-side is “human–machine teaming.”  This relationship might best be understood by examining the relationship between “R2-D2” and Luke Skywalker in the science fiction movie “Star Wars.” The man–machine partnership depicts R2-D2 as a fully autonomous robot who knows when and how to save people from desperate situations by using his artificial intelligence (AI). R2-D2 is a “good” robot.

But Hollywood screenwriters and novelists more often embellish the “bad” robot scenario as in the movie “I-Robot.” Critics warn of an AI apocalypse scenario where AI becomes so autonomous, powerful and out of control that it threatens the existence of mankind. Regardless of the scenario, its reality all boils down to the level of algorithm sophistication and computing power that can be realistically achieved, which in turn affords AI the ability to think, understand and learn—to be intelligent.

On February 12, 2019, the Pentagon publically released (for the first time) its master plan for speeding incorporation of AI into advanced battlefield-related technologies.  This master plan for military AI spending spans the gambit of defense functions that include: weapon development, interoperability, sustainment, operations, force protection, training, healthcare and even recruiting.

General James Mattis, the Trump Administration’s Secretary of Defense during 2017 and 2018, repeatedly stated his primary goal was to make the U.S. military “more lethal.” This goal included the development of AI-based advanced weaponry and human–machine teaming.  Clearly, General Mattis was attempting to provide U.S. forces the technological edge beyond the battlefield—in this case, think battlespace.

However, opposition groups like the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, which expounds a conflicting understanding of the evolving world order, have been gaining public support by insisting upon an arms control ban for autonomous weapon technologies (arms control only works if everyone plays by the rules). A January 2019 poll they sponsored reported that 52 percent of Americans opposed the idea of AI-driven autonomous armed weapons systems. Whether those polled possessed an accurate technical understanding of AI, or a skewed Hollywood fictional version (or some of both), was undetermined by the poll. Hollywood movie scenarios about AI are usually scary, so the trickle down reasoning is, AI is scary—and scary is bad. Therefore, AI must be bad.

In the Mattis context, maintaining the warfighting technical advantage over our competitors, peers and potential enemies is all about winning in new-generation warfare. And, we should take whatever preparedness measures necessary to ensure we win, i.e., a more lethal military. And that simply translates to the development of AI-based advanced weaponry and human–machine teaming.

Where We Stand

Where are we on the AI warbot developmental scale compared to our potential enemies? Russia and China are investing heavily in AI development across a broad base of applications, and they are showing credible results in numerous areas from hypersonic weapons to their space programs. A 2017 report released by China’s State Council pointed China to become the AI global leader by 2030. Chinese AI developmental strategy includes broad AI applications that extend through their domestic industry with a target worth $150 billion annually. Some high-ranking members of the U.S. House and Senate have publically stated concerns that we are falling behind. While that claim may be arguable, the bottom-line question is, how long will it take us to develop and field formidable AI-driven warbot teams that can win in new generation warfare?  When it comes to winning, it is not about keeping up with our competitors; it’s about doing what it takes to stay ahead of them.

The Pentagon has also recently published a new artificial intelligence strategy that reveals the U.S. military’s shift away from “heavy-metal hardware” like ships, tanks, planes, etc., to a world where AI makes the difference between winning and losing. In concert with this strategy, a Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, or JAIC, has been established. The JIAC will work with concerned military departments, the Uniformed Services, as well as government and non-government entities, to leverage enterprise cloud adoption and shepherd development and execution of new AI mission initiatives. “The JAIC will work closely with individual components [of the Defense Department] to help identify, shape and accelerate their component-specific AI deployments, called ‘Component Mission Initiatives’ or ‘CMIs.’” Remember the term CMI because you’ll hear it a lot in the coming years.

In addition to the JAIC, the strategy names two additional organizations residing within the DoD. One is the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, which has a 6.1 budget function. DARPA’s claim to fame is pursuing fundamental technology breakthroughs by conducting high-risk, high-reward technology research (the 6.1 function, by definition) for revolutionizing the future. DARPA then passes its successes off to other agencies for further specific DoD development and/or other applications.

The other organization mentioned is the Defense Innovation Unit, DIU (previously abbreviated, DIUx, with the “x” standing for experimental). DIU consists of a small, lean and technically mean staff, whose purpose is to bring Silicon Valley innovation to the armed forces. At only three years old, DIU has enjoyed genuine success and demonstrated its value added strategies.

While the U.S. Special Operations Command’s (SOCOM) is not specifically named, the strategy suggests that any technological holes stemming from the developmental shift toward AI-empowered human–machine teaming will be filled by SOCOM. But why SOCOM?

The answer is simple. SOCOM possesses a unique tried and proven combination of meeting urgent operational needs, relative lack of bureaucracy, special acquisition authorities and a less risk adverse institutional culture than the mainstream military. Secondly, SOCOM’s Science and Technology (S&T) department is superbly proficient at “adaptive engineering.” This means they take off-the-shelf technology and combine it with other cutting edge technologies to create wholly new capabilities, which none of the contributing technologies individually possesses. SOCOM has a remarkable track record of capabilities achievement doing this type of cost-effective rapid development. SOCOM is no doubt already playing a key role in developing AI advanced weaponry and human–machine teaming toward conducting special operations in high threat and non-human permissive (to include contaminated and outer space) environments.

Critics of SOCOM’s S&T capabilities being used in this manner say SOCOM’s success record is based on “small stuff” like up-gunning aircraft, applying stealth and mechanical modifications to things like boats and planes, creating specialized off-road vehicles and mini-drones, even sophisticated cyber operations aimed at locating, identifying and neutralizing specific targets and so on. While these are small things when compared to big things like the Ballistic Missile Defense Program, or the Air Mobility Program, small things count largely when you’re operating in the ambiguous “grey zone” of proxy war, where direct-action surgical strikes and deniable cyber attacks populate the multi-domain warfare areas that SOCOM calls home. In this environment, it makes sense that SOCOM’s S&T nimbleness can be relied upon to fill any gaps in AI-empowered human–machine teaming that the mainstream can’t.

The Human Element

For all that is good, bad or ugly about the development of human–machine teaming, it is the human element that must remain central to the partnership and remain in ultimate control—the AI failsafe, if you will. Hollywood’s fictional human–machine hybrid, or cybernetic human, may not be too distant from reality. Regardless, as part of the human-centered adoption of human–machine teaming, a level of trust will need to develop commensurate with the technology. However, even between humans, trust is not finite nor should it be.

At the most basic level, human civilization is based on trust, and language is how it is communicated. Trust is especially paramount in combat, where seconds determine life and death actions. As battlefield warbot presence becomes increasingly commonplace, so must its ability to communicate with its human counterparts.

In recognition of the necessity for warbots to quickly gain their human counterparts’ trust, DARPA has launched an ambitious program to accomplish precisely that.

Officially named “Competency-Aware Machine Learning,” the DARPA goal is to develop machine–learning systems that continuously assess their own performance in time-critical, dynamic situations, and communicate that information to human team-members in an easily understood format. Further, just as humans learn to anticipate each other’s behavior to particular events, so must AI “learn” to anticipate individual human behavior to particular circumstantial events and vice versa.

Achieving this seemingly simple goal requires a suite of sophisticated sensors and the ability for AI to define its situational awareness. This real-time data stream must simultaneously be converted into language and actions that can be anticipated (and trusted) by humans – in human terms. In conjunction, the machine-learning program must also master object recognition, navigation, action planning, and decision-making, and each of these elements must have adequate programmed limitations to ensure both control and human understandability.

In the near future, the U.S. military will rapidly transition to AI-based human–machine teaming, and that will lead the way for similar development throughout the U.S. defense industry and its civil sector subsets, as a whole. The requirements of future warfare are already driving much of today’s human–machine technology development, and those advances will be applied across mankind’s every venture from farming, to medicine, to manufacturing, to space exploration. Human–machine teaming in everyday life will become as commonplace during the coming decade as PCs, self-checkout, online shopping and smart phones are today. You will either choose to be a team member and embrace AI, or you will be marginalized by default. A non-decision is still a decision.

Credit: Boston Dynamics

Credit: Boeing

Credit: Boeing

Credit: U.S. Navy photo by John F. Williams/Released

Credit: Boston Dynamics

Credit: Boston Dynamics

What is a Holding Company?

Think of a holding company as a parent corporation. It can be a limited liability company (LLC) like Blackwing Holdings, LLC, or a limited partnership that owns enough voting stock in another company to control its policies and management. In the case of Blackwing, they entirely own their subsidiary companies. Distilled to the basics, a holding company’s operations consist of overseeing the companies it owns. If necessary, it can hire and fire managers, but those companies’ managers are responsible for their operations; the holding company is not. Although the holding company does not manage the day-to-day operations of its subsidiaries, Blackwing’s owners personally understand their subsidiary companies’ operations and product lines, allowing them to evaluate the businesses’ performance and prospects on an ongoing basis. Interestingly, the two companies held by Blackwing, support one another’s product offerings and share manufacturing facilities to create unique capabilities.

Therefore, Blackwing Holdings represents the investment office of a U.S.-based, family-owned holding limited liability company created to diversify their holdings and create future cash flows. Blackwing Holdings does not have any product manufacturing operations or active business itself. Instead, it owns two companies—IEC Infrared Systems LLC (IEC) and Precision Remotes LLC (PRL) —and these are where product manufacturing takes place. So what products do these two companies offer?

IEC Infrared Systems LLC

IEC Infrared Systems LLC (IEC) was formed in 1999 by research scientists from the NASA Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio. Formally recognized as a NASA spinoff company, IEC operates out of a 23,000-square-foot facility in Middleburg Heights, Ohio, a suburb of Cleveland. IEC is an engineering and manufacturing company that specializes in the design, development and manufacture of integrated thermal and visual imaging surveillance systems. IEC has an in-house technical staff possessing diverse expertise across mechanical/aerospace systems, controls, power conditioning, communications, high-speed digital video processing, software (both imbedded and GUI) and infrared spectroscopy.

When the first line of defense involves surveillance, IEC Infrared Systems is the solution of choice. IEC’s in-house engineering talent allows it to retain complete design control and unique individual customer customization of infrared cameras, thermal imaging products and counter-UAV equipment.

IEC detection technologies are optimized to provide persistent detection of threats in an integrated operational environment using a middleware system they call “IntrudIR Alert.” This system is a combination of hardware and software that allows integration of a variety of sensors and subsystems. It is specifically designed to process and coordinate the data from a range of sensors and subsystems and disseminate real-time alerts to allow the user to take the most appropriate counter measures against threats or attacks.

In conjunction with the IntrudIR Alert system, IEC offers its Raptor Series surveillance platform. Raptor is aptly named after birds of prey with exceptionally long-range eyesight. These customizable surveillance platforms are typically configured with long-range EO/IR optics and other co-located sensors such as ground radars and other optic systems. Raptor can be installed on facilities, forward operating base or on mobile platforms, whether wheeled or tracked. Raptor can integrate with other systems and be networked wirelessly for perimeter or border security. Essentially a “plug-and-play” system, Raptor only takes about 30 minutes to unpack, set-up and connect (or uninstall) the complete system.

The Raptor Series is designed to meet performance requirements for detection and assessment at ranges from 5km to 18km+. IEC can configure the Raptor system to accommodate just about any ground radar systems in conjunction with other complex sensors. Raptor can also be equipped with an optional laser illuminator and laser range finder, and through IntrudIR Alert can not only control the system, but can communicate with other command and control systems.

One of the Raptor Series’ primary ground surveillance radars (GSR) is the SR Hawk pulse Doppler radar; Raptor uses this radar to detect distant targets, then cue the Werewolf pan and tilt platform with long-range visual and thermal optics and detectors through the IntrudIR Alert middleware. This system is ideal for detection and assessment for both short- and long-range perimeter and border security operations. Raptor is intuitive, simple to operate and provides unmatched situational awareness and force protection. Raptor is a fully developed surveillance solution product with a TRL-9 technology readiness level. It is used globally by both commercial and military customers. ITAR restrictions control its thermal cameras and detectors.

Another unique IEC product is their Lycan Counter-UAS system. Lycan detects, tracks and mitigates Unmanned Aerial Systems using both radar and RF detection paired with an Artificial Intelligence engine to find the target (and avoid false targets), long-range imagers to assess, verify and optically track the target and multi-frequency RF and GPS jamming to stop the threat. This causes the UAS to immediately lose control and navigation capability. The Lycan is much like the Raptor in its line replaceable unit configuration and tools-free / cable-free payload that swaps out in seconds. Its capabilities include 360º panoramic image creation and optical target tracking (to 3km) with a mid-wave infrared (MWIR) 40mm–825mm continuous zoom imager. Like Raptor, it has a small footprint that allows it to stand-alone or is mounted almost anywhere, static or mobile. Moreover, it can be powered by nearly any electrical power source available. The Lycan is a genuine advancement in counter-UAS technology and therefore falls under ITAR restrictions.

Blackwing Holdings’ subsidiaries produce many other quality devices that realize operational imagination. For more information on Blackwing Holdings’ product line see blackwingholdings.com.

Material and manufacturing advances accompanied or were sometimes driven by arms advances. Alloyed steel over Damascus steel, precision machining over handmade components, production manufacturing over single build, CAD and five-axis CNC milling over blueprints and manual machining operations, etc.

These weapon advances, while vastly American and European in origin, developed the tenets of warfare more generally. Weapons’ lethality drastically increased, as did the need to provide logistical support to maintain warfighting and material readiness. Wars were fought, some successfully, some not, using an array of weaponry, some advanced and much not. The result was a battle theater hodgepodge of weapon types and calibers. Fast-forward to today.

Today’s weapons are a derivative mix of calibers and operating systems that were largely used in wars fought during the 20^th century. Most weapons in military use do not possess the future warfighting attributes required to win anticipated theater-size conflicts in the 21^st century. While many firearms are newly manufactured, they’re little more than new versions of old technology with cosmetic updates. The analogy here is a 2^nd or 3^rd edition book that has the same old story, reprinted in a new font with updated cover art. This is to say that the weapons and ammunition in use today are not purposefully designed with the capabilities necessary for today’s warfare, much less the anticipated warfighting demands of the future.

The warfighting requirements of the future should also drive next-generation weapon and ammunition advances. This means thinking ahead in relation to long-range detection and engagement, sensors, artificial intelligence (AI), robotic autonomy, hypervelocity projectiles, stealth, metallic 3D printing of firearms replacement parts, directed energy and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons.  Even the high-end weapon technologies like hypervelocity projectiles and fully autonomous stealth unmanned aerial systems (UAS) will be part of the total reckoning, both from an offensive and defensive perspective.

The U.S. can no longer claim a monopoly on long-range detection of opponent forces. Open source availability of commercial space sensors’ data has increased to the point that developing nations can easily acquire and exploit it to their advantage using commercially available analysis tools. Correspondingly, the capabilities of nations possessing distributed networked sensor fields, long-range unmanned aerial vehicles, sophisticated weapon and intelligence-gathering space programs can also be exploited by an opponent. The challenge is keeping our technology from the hands of competitor nations and non-state actors.

For example, sensor capability is advancing exponentially faster than the capacity to physically counter an attack. Long-range precision-guided weapons have advanced in speed to the point of hypervelocity; they are stealthy and possess superb lethality.  They can be especially effective if brought to bear in swarms against hard or soft targets. Such weapons are capable of evading or overwhelming today’s detection technology and counter-weapon defensive systems’ ability to defeat an attack. This has changed the face of future conflict and thus the capabilities future weapons must possess.

There are seven related categorical assumptions that guide weapon advances: defense, offense, affordability, autonomy, connectivity, logistics and distribution. Many requirements writers and weapon developers fail to understand or fully appreciate the importance of connecting the dots of these characteristics. Here is a brief summary of the thinking (remember, we’re looking at the future) for each:

Defense. U.S. forces will most certainly face opponents armed with formidable new weapons and ubiquitous sensor coverage. This will require that U.S forces possess the capability to operate on a dispersed basis without losing survivability or combat effectiveness. Defensive weapons will very likely include high-volume/high-lethality, highly mobile/portable and compact short-range systems to reduce the cost, platform size and magazine demands of large, long-range defensive systems.

Offense. Our forces must have the capability and proper weapon capacity to inflict immediate offensive punishment rather than managing a time-buying force rollback. Initial offensive operations must be readily available for immediate use and tailorable to adequately counter the range and lethality of the hostile threat. Offensive operations will be largely conducted with long-range missiles and strategically distributed unmanned systems, not by land- and carrier-based manned platforms penetrating defended areas, followed by infantry and armor, as is the current U.S. modus operandi.

Affordability. Today’s uncontrolled federal deficit translates into constrained defense funding in the future. The realistic result is the Department of Defense’s (DOD) purchase of less expensive new weapons and the service life extension and modernization of select existing weapons. The purchase of any new weapon system(s) is always compared to the cost of the system(s) being replaced. New weapons must be comparably affordable, and therefore capability advancement almost always comes second to affordability.

Autonomy. We have become a data-centric world. Increases in both computing power and speed exponentially expand the variety of missions that can be conducted by unmanned (robotic) systems. AI is the key to full autonomy, and it will make us ever more reliant upon unmanned systems as integral warfighting elements. AI will also give our forces speed of action in combat and will fulfill the demand for connectivity while providing the cutting edge in both offensive and defensive operations.

Connectivity. The increasingly complex world in which we live results in an equally complex warfare environment. This drives the necessity to rapidly and correctly disperse friendly forces geographically, while at the same time overcoming the threat to communications satellites and networks. Demands on secure over-the-horizon, high-capacity data fusion and exchange networks that link dispersed units will only increase. High-flying, long-endurance unmanned aircraft and perhaps readily launched constellations of low-orbit cube satellites will be necessary to provide broad-area sensor and communication support among dispersed friendly forces.

Logistics. Historically, U.S. warfighting strategy has focused on far-forward force basing and deployment to augment in-theater allies. It is no secret that survivable logistics must be maintained to successfully conduct and sustain global operations. Our competitors’ focus is precision attack against our fixed bases and capital assets afloat. A distributed supply chain of the future will undoubtedly require the capability to rapidly manufacture most critical repair parts on site. This can only be achieved by having a robust 3D printing capability for parts (or the weapons themselves) to augment the logistics supply chain (and it can be done robotically).

Distribution. To justify force reductions, the U.S. has consolidated more capabilities into fewer assets. This redistribution and consolidation of U.S. warfighting capabilities increases target value and subsequently increases the risk of attack from precision weapons on those targets. The U.S. Navy best reflects this trend by making each new warship class more capable (and subsequently more expensive) than the predecessor. The U.S. Air Force does the same thing with its new fighters and bombers. While this concentrates more capability into a single asset, it also increases each asset’s target value within a theater of conflict, making individual asset loss a potentially greater factor to mission success. At the same time, reducing the number of assets diminishes the capacity for geographic coverage in warfighting. It is a conundrum that will require careful play on game day.

An additional consideration is almost always overlooked. Our forces must be as capable of conducting electromagnetic spectrum warfare as they are of conducting kinetic warfare. This means our forces must be capable of deploying their own signature management and deception measures to limit their identification and targeting by adversaries. Friendly forces operating closest to the threats must be able to employ a mix of both manned and unmanned ground and air weapons with secure C4I linking them to one another to assure critical control of unmanned systems.

Thus, when looking at weapon advances, we should not think in singular terms of ballistic weapons (guns and bullets). Rather, we should think in terms of interoperable weapons systems and how their advances factor into the future warfighting environment.

In an effort to address these issues, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is developing an AI-based semi-automated system that can identify and draw correlations between seemingly unrelated events. In turn, this analysis will be correlated to create broad narratives about global events of interest that can have a significant impact on national security. DARPA calls this program KAIROS, which is an acronym for Knowledge-directed Artificial Intelligence Reasoning Over Schemas.  The AI used in KAIROS is called “schema-based AI.” It works by analyzing multimedia information, correlating complex events and organizing this information into schemas.

“Schemas” refer to units of knowledge that organize events into commonly occurring narrative structures to aid humans’ comprehension of the information. Schema-based AI enables computer-generated contextual and temporal reasoning about complex, even abstract, real-world events and predicts how they will likely unfold. Schema-ordering provides both understandable and actionable predictive analysis of complex events, and the very powerful KAIROS analyzes and makes sense of the all-source picture.

Weapon advances are often defined in the context of weapons development. Weapon advances are usually quantified by using an arbitrary measure of accuracy, destructiveness or lethality.  During development, weapons are evaluated by their technical ability to achieve a set of quantifiable outcomes, such as affordability, maintainability, interoperability, availability, reliability, etc. That said, the operational nature of warfare is scenario-contingent. Consequently, any list of weapon advances will always be inherently incomplete. The best we can hope for is to highlight trends in warfare technology and assume they will be with us for decades to come, even though they will only affect the long view of weapon advances for several decades or less.

Sentient unmanned vehicles, or fully autonomous drones, as they are often called, constitute one such advancement. The emergence of unmanned fully autonomous and semi-autonomous air, land and sea (surface and subsurface) vehicles is the single most important development in the defense industry in the past several decades. This technology is intended to take over many of the warfighting roles traditionally occupied by humans. Things like piloting fighters and crewing bombers, ships and mini-submarines, conducting EOD operations, even ground combat operations will someday soon become the domain of AI-controlled fully autonomous robots and drones.

These platforms have no fear, require no rest and don’t suffer from PTSD. Their boundaries are only limited by purpose-built software and mechanical design. Endowing AI with life and death decision-making will, at some ultimate point, replace today’s human decision makers in key mission elements like target acquisition and the split-second decision, based upon best opportunity, to fire. This reliance on AI-operated (computer/machine) warfare will certainly diminish the human psychological threshold for using force and ultimately mean that confrontations will happen exceedingly fast and have devastating outcomes, with clear winners and losers. Thus, the side deploying the most advanced AI-controlled weapons that require the least human interface, human inputs and human decision chokepoints, will most likely prevail.

Electromagnetic (EM) rail guns are also a significant step forward in kinetic warfare. Unlike conventional guns (artillery) that use chemical propellants (such as gunpowder or fuel) to thrust a projectile on its ballistic path, rail guns thrust either a guided or dumb projectile over a long range (currently over 120 miles, even engaging orbiting space targets) at hypervelocity (4,500 to 5,600 miles per hour) by using a magnetic field (32-plus megajoules). The rail gun has numerous advantages that eclipse its range and precision strike capabilities. Because of its attributes, even the most advanced area defense systems are no match for it. Rail guns additionally eliminate the requirement to store the high-explosive propellant materials necessary to launch conventional projectiles.

The U.S. Office of Naval Research has had a working EM rail gun system in development since 2005. The eventual goal is to extend the range to 200 nautical miles by upping the launch power to 64 megajoules. This translates to each shot exceeding the electrical pulse apparent in a naturally occurring aurora.  Currently, rail gun capability is only limited by our material science, not by the laws of physics. For example, today’s hardiest capacitors are not capable of storing and releasing that volume of energy, and gun materials that will survive the firing pulse do not exist. That notwithstanding, EM rail gun development is proceeding in the U.S., China and Russia; it will certainly be a factor in any future conflict.

Weaponization of space is outlawed under international treaty, but that hasn’t stopped some of the countries that signed the treaty (and those who didn’t sign it) from continuing to explore technologies that might turn space into the next theater of battle. There are some outlandish weaponization schemes that have been postulated on this subject, ranging from moon bases that can launch missiles at earth to the redirection of small asteroids to impact an opponent’s homeland.

A more achievable plan is to arm orbiting space planes and satellites with nuclear or non-nuclear EMP weapons. When talking about EMP weapons, size matters. EMP weapons work by generating a massive EMP that overloads electrical grids, satellite circuits and just about everything else that relies on digital control. EMP can additionally destroy command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) architecture necessary to conduct military and civilian infrastructure operations.

If appropriately sized, an EMP attack could easily take out large portions of a country or surgically target a specific area of operations. For countries that don’t have space capabilities, an EMP could also be deployed from aircraft platforms at air breathing altitudes or carried by land- and sea-based missile systems. Regardless, EMP weapons, if strategically employed, could theoretically end a war before a single shot is fired, by nullifying adversaries’ C4ISR capabilities.

As rogue states like North Korea and Iran develop or acquire the means to deliver nuclear-tipped intercontinental (long-range) ballistic missiles (ICBMs), interest in developing high-energy space-based lasers (SBL) designed to deactivate enemy ballistic missiles during the boost phase (known as “boost-phase intercept” or BPI) will continue. The boost phase occurs right after launch, during the missile’s ascent. It is the slowest and most vulnerable phase of missile flight and the time when the odds of successful intercept are the highest.

The advantage of space-based laser platforms over BPI theater defense systems (like the Aegis system in current use) is that they can operate at orbital altitudes far exceeding an adversary’s capability to shoot down. Comparatively, to be in striking range, Aegis BPI systems must be positioned close to the targeted missile launchers, and this puts our BPI launch platforms (mostly on board USN ships, although there are several shore-based Aegis launch systems) in range of enemy attack. That said, the greatest remaining challenge in realizing an operational SBL defense system is the development of sufficiently powerful chemical megawatt-laser systems suitable for orbiters. The required science and technology is certainly within our grasp, but the cost is prohibitive.

Keeping the SBL system in mind, there are advanced megawatt-laser systems being tested today on ships, aircraft and land that can defeat incoming sea-skimming hypervelocity anti-ship missiles, both manned and drone aircraft, cruise missiles and ICBMs through BPI. Like the SBL systems, these terrestrial systems also require megawatt power sources, but that is far easier to achieve at much less expense than for their space-borne SBL cousin. These systems show great warfighting promise and are being designed into many future military platforms, such as aircraft, ships and mobile ground vehicles.

The development and use of hypersonic vehicles cruising at speeds of Mach 5+ is now a priority for both the U.S. and its competitors. Warfare has evolved to the point where mere minutes can make a difference between victory and defeat. The cruise missiles we have relied upon over the past two decades are, by future standards, too slow to meet the time on target requirement or survive opponents’ state-of-the-art intercept measures.

The requirement to strike anywhere and do so within minutes of target identification has led to a hypersonic (cruise) vehicle developmental program initiated by the U.S. DOD in 2001, named “Prompt Global Strike.” A multi-agency consortium composed of DARPA, NASA, the U.S. Air Force (USAF), the USAF Research Laboratory’s Propulsion Directorate, Boeing and Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne has centered its combined efforts on the X-51A hypersonic cruise vehicle (HCV). As an adjunct, the U.S. Navy is also reportedly exploring the development of submarine-launched hypersonic missiles.

Our competitors, like Russia, China and India, are also developing hypersonic cruise missiles. Because of their extraordinary speeds, hypersonic cruise missiles can serve multiple purposes, ranging from surgical attacks against command-and-control systems and other key high-value targets, to attacks against ships under way at sea, ports and harbors, critical infrastructure, etc.

The natural complement and response to both vehicle and missile hypervelocity is concealment through stealth technology. Quantum Stealth, also known as “adaptive camouflage,” is one such weapon advancement. While under development by a Canadian firm, it’s still far from operational. The goal is to use light wave-bending materials to significantly reduce or eliminate the thermal and visible signatures of weapons platforms, such as tanks, artillery, aircraft and ships—even individual troops. Its science is right out of a science fiction movie, yet its physics is relatively straightforward. By bending light around an object (quantum mechanics), the cloak renders what lies inside it invisible. The ability to operate unseen in enemy territory or airspace has enormous tactical (and even strategic) military capability implications.

The previously discussed developmental programs are all intended to keep the U.S. military winning in future conflicts, but for some forward-thinking military planners, the future is in sight. They know, for example, that soldier-carried weapons will truly advance when directed energy and hypervelocity weapons are miniaturized and become battlefield-mobile and/or soldier-carried and AI-controlled unmanned space, air, surface and subsurface warfare takes the man out of the loop. That will mark the next “generation” of weapon advances.

Based in California, JetPack Aviation (JPA) has developed a user-friendly ILD for U.S. Special Operations Command, the JB-10 jet pack, that will begin endurance, speed, service ceiling and payload suitability evaluation during the summer of 2019.   The JB-10 employs twin air-breathing turbine engines to provide lifting thrust with speeds exceeding 200 miles per hour. Burning commonly available jet-A fuel, the JB-10 currently carries enough fuel to remain aloft for 10 minutes, but that can probably be extended using disposable fuel bladders. It employs an electronic auto-flight stabilizing system widely used in the drone market.

JPA is driving the JB-10 technology in two related directions. The JB-10 is characterized as foot-launched, because the pilot carries the weight of the jet pack. This may work fine for high-speed missions of short duration, but one size may not fit all. When heavier payloads and greater ranges are mission-essential, the company has also developed a prototype ground-based variant that uses a rigid frame which rests on the ground and carries the total weight of the device and payload. This development has led to additional interest from the DOD and even the first responder community.

Weighing in at just 20 pounds, the SLMG is easily configured for either right or left side feed and charging, making it ideal for both dismounted and mounted operation. It comes suppressor-ready with an adjustable gas block, so its pressure can be “tuned” so that it will operate reliably with any suppressor.  Reportedly, SIG is also developing a drum-style magazine that could be optionally used to feed the SLMG. SIG has held those details close, as well as those for its side-opening feed tray option that allows the gunner to modify the gun’s loading profile from a top-opening to a less observable side-opening version.

Iron Dome is a comprehensive missile defense network that includes the David’s Sling system, intended to protect against mid-range missiles, and the Arrow Interceptor system, designed to provide defense against long-range ballistic missiles. One of the most advanced features of Iron Dome is its fire-control system, which provides the capability to accurately calculate the incoming rocket trajectory and predicted point of impact and only intercept the incoming projectiles that pose the most meaningful threats.

While Iron Dome batteries have recorded a success rate of over 90% in the past decade, the intercept range to successfully engage is limited to about 30 miles. It was not designed to be, nor is it capable of, defending against the emerging Chinese and Russian hypervelocity cruise missile threat that may soon menace U.S. and allied forces deployed overseas. A hypersonic countermeasure is needed that can “hit a bullet with a bullet.” The technology under development to accomplish this is the railgun and the high-power laser.

The Black Hornet 3 possesses the lowest size and weight of any UAS available today. Weighing in at 1.16 ounces, the Black Hornet 3 has a line-of-sight range of about 1.25 miles at speeds exceeding 20 feet per second. The 6.6-inch-long Black Hornet 3 carries the FLIR Lepton^® thermal micro-camera core and a visible sensor that transmit live high-fidelity day/night video and HD still images back to the operator. The Black Hornet 3 also employs a military-approved encrypted digital data link that enables a secure communications and imagery transmission format. This format seamlessly integrates into the military’s Android Tactical Assault Kit (ATAK) to provide battlefield networks for the distribution of surveillance information to anyone on the network.

The Black Hornet 3 pocket-size field kit consists of two UAV sensors, a controller and a small flat-screen display. It is sold directly through FLIR and available today to military, government agencies and law enforcement customers.

PRL’s ROWS consist of a highly mission-configurable, lightweight, precision-aimed, dismounted remotely-operated weapon system they call the TRAP® T360, which can stand alone or be mounted on unmanned ground or waterborne vehicles. The TRAP® T360 integrates with sniper detection technologies, surveillance systems or other sensors for automatic hand-off and slew-to-cue operation. Its aim is achieved using a ballistic reticle that compensates the aim point for ammunition type, range and camera parallax. It will additionally store multiple target locations for quick recall. It possesses a unique high-speed/precision 360° drive system that allows faster target engagement and effortless tracking capability that provides a broad elevation range of 60° up to 20° down. It can also be equipped with a target tracking option and can be securely networked to multiple TRAP® T360 systems; these can then be networked to indigenous command centers.

By Paul Evancoe 

The annual AUSA meeting and exposition was held October 8-10, 2018, at the Washington, DC, Walter E. Washington Convention Center where the latest defense technology was displayed and explained. In contrast to last year’s expo, there was a noticeable lack of uniformed officers and senior civilian Program Office and Program Management persons in attendance. Notwithstanding, the expo provided numerous enlightening advances in weaponry, sensors, communications, tactical kit and information management. This article reflects a sampling of the highlights.

Weaponry, Sights, Target Designation

Lewis Machine & Tool (LMT) is a proud Milan, Illinois-based innovator and manufacturer of numerous military firearms and related accessories. One of its most recent innovations is a pistol-like 40mm grenade launcher nicknamed the “Shorty 40.” Formally designated nomenclature as the L2XPG, the Shorty 40 can be further customized with various clip-on stocks and rail-mounted sights as a member of the LMT Shorty 40 Caliber Series 40mm grenade launcher system. This jewel of engineering has a 6.5-inch barrel with a pistol grip frame offering the shortest and lightest grenade launcher available today. Capable of being operated as its own weapon system or rail-mounted, it can be easily stowed in a ruck pocket or slung for quick access. It operates, loads and unloads like a standard M-203 requiring virtually no operator training. Designed for both law enforcement and military purposes, the Shorty 40 is a weapon that can be relied upon when 40mm standoff capabilities are crucial to winning the fight.

lmtdefense.com

Manufactured in their facility located just outside Reno, NV, U.S. Ordnance’s M60E6 7.62mm Light Machine Gun is in full production and available. The Danish Military and other U.S. State Department-approved customers have adopted it as their general-purpose machine gun. Its allure over the M-240 is part nostalgia and part operational superiority. Weighing in at just over 20 pounds, the M60E6 is considered to possess better weight distribution than the M-240. This translates to better control of alternative shot positions when kneeling or standing. Its rate of fire is 550 rounds per minute, which improves short burst shooter accuracy, reduces ammunition consumption and significantly minimizes the risk of stray fire collateral damage. It further offers a single-shot capability with superb long-range aimed accuracy. Its quick-change barrel requires neither the use of gloves nor any timing adjustment and takes only a few seconds to accomplish. It abounds with standard Picatinny rails that allow for the addition of accessories such as optical sights, tactical lights, lasers, etc.

usord.com

B.E. Meyers, located in Redmond, WA, has developed a .50 caliber heavy machine gun flash suppressor that actually works—designated the M2A1F. Flash is the result of hot, high velocity, combustible propellant gas igniting as it becomes oxygen-enriched when it exits the muzzle. As it mixes with the surrounding air, it ignites and burns, causing muzzle flash. Most flash suppressors simply divert these combustible gases in divergent directions away from the muzzle, resulting in several smaller flashes instead of one large flash. The M2A1F is uniquely designed with teeth lining the inside of the flash suppressor’s four prongs. The teeth effectively shred the exiting high velocity propellant gas, causing it to slow into numerous micro-vortexes and thus cool. As the vortexes become oxygen-enriched, they’re below the flash point and no flash—it’s darn near rocket science (we miss you, Brad).

bemeyers.com

Aimpoint, with U.S. headquarters in Manassas, VA, has a rock-solid track record designing and manufacturing superb red dot sighting systems that goes back to 1973. Aimpoint now offers its advanced design ACRO-P1 fully enclosed reflex pistol reflex sight to its product line. This red dot 3.5 MOA sight advertises an ultra-clear NVG-compatible (Pos. 1-4) sight picture for extremely fast target acquisition. Its sealed optical channel is impervious to all operational environments (submersible to a depth of 82 feet), and the CR1225 battery that powers it is replaceable without having to remove the optic from its mounted location. The ACRO-P1’s compact size (1.9×1.2×1.2 inches) and weight (2.1 ounces) make it the pistol shooter’s reflex sight of choice.

aimpoint.com

Manufactured in the U.S. by Wilcox Industries of Newington, NH, Wilcox presented its next generation RAID-X (ruggedized aiming/illumination device). Powered by a single CR123 battery, RAID-X features a visible red laser, infrared (IR) laser and variable IR illuminator all co-aligned with a single windage and elevation adjustment. RAID-X possesses an ergonomically located focus wheel that provides on-the-fly selection of three IR illuminator power modes (low, medium and high) to quickly adjust laser power intensity settings to best meet distance and environmental requirements. RAID-X also has a remote port that accepts the SureFire SR-D-IT switch for remote on/off operation. RAID-X is a light and compact device that mounts with two thumbscrews on any standard 1913 Picatinny rail without interfering with iron sights or optics. RAID-X is offered with either a red or green visible laser and in tan or black body.

wilcoxind.com

Team Wendy, located in Cleveland, Ohio, manufactures its helmets and helmet visors in the U.S. As the sole-source Army and Marine Corps supplier of the standard issue 7-pad combat helmet liner system, Team Wendy has developed a registered trademark line under the name EXFIL that includes an SL lightweight ballistic helmet, an SL helmet-compatible ballistic visor, face shield and ear covers. The new SL helmet system is NVG- and lanyard-compatible and offers adjustable pads for customized fit to any head dimension. Both the SL helmet and face shield exceed military impact and fragmentation requirements. This system is no less than all around impressive and lends itself to the old saying, “if you have a cheap head, wear a cheap helmet.” If you value your head and face, wear an EXFIL Ballistic SL helmet and face shield.

teamwendy.com

Qioptiq, an Excelitas Technologies Company, is a premiere world-class designer and manufacturer of infrared, image-intensified and fused night vision equipment. Its DRAGON COMPACT (DRAGON C) ultra-light multi-purpose thermal weapon sight is one of the company’s most advanced systems, utilizing uncooled thermal cameras and state-of-the-art optical technology. The DRAGON C can be used as a weapon-mount compact sight or in a handheld mode for observation and surveillance. This ergonomically simple-to-use in-line thermal sight provides exceptional bore sight stability in an ultra-low weight system. It is available with a non-ITAR thermal camera. It has optional features that include a laser pointer, remote control and interface cables for connectivity to RS232 comms (serial comms), video out and auxiliary external power source. Its optional accessories include shrouds to interface with various day scopes, weapon mounting bracket, lens cap, neck strap and carrying pouch.

qioptiq.com

Leupold & Stevens, Inc. of Beaverton, OR, was founded more than a century ago. As a fifth-generation, family-owned company, it designs, machines and assembles its entire product lines, which include rifle, handgun and spotting scopes; binoculars; rangefinders; mounting systems; and optical tools and accessories in the USA. Leupold now offers its new Mark 5 scope in two models. The 5-25×56 model is designed for shooters seeking maximum usable magnification, while the 3.6-18×44 version balances compactness with unparalleled optical performance. Both models are ruggedly constructed and feature a mammoth 35mm main tube that delivers extreme low-light performance and superior edge-to-edge clarity. The Twilight Max® HD Light Management System provides a perfect balance of image color and contrast, light transmission and glare management. With unparalleled performance, Leopold’s Mark 5HD long-range tactical riflescopes have all of the optical precision features both snipers and long-range shooters require with user-friendly operation. Even better, they’re covered by Leupold’s Full Lifetime Guarantee.

leupold.com

Based in Norway, Kongsberg Defense and Aerospace, showcased their THeMIS UGV; an impressively capable robotic antitank and high mobility tracked unmanned ground vehicle (UVG). THeMIS consists of two parts—its tracked high mobility body is built by Milrem Robotics, and Kongsberg mounts its PROTECTOR RWS remotely operated weapon station on top.

The THeMIS system on display at AUSA 2018, although not limited by this particular selection of armament, was equipped with a .50 caliber and a Javelin missile launcher. This selection provides the warfighter a formidable combination of remotely fired antitank and heavy machine gun capabilities. Employing weaponized robotic platforms in high threat operations helps keep warfighters out of the line of fire. This is the undeniable future of warfare. As robotic weapons systems become more and more autonomous, with the potential of becoming “killer robots,” the Kongsberg systems all have a human operator in full control of firing the weapons system.

milremrobotics.com / kongsberg.com

Ammunition and Ordnance

True Velocity, with headquarters in Garland, TX, currently offers 5.56 NATO, 7.62 NATO, .338 NORMA, .50 BMG and 12.7×108 ammunition in its proprietary composite case design. True Velocity’s composite case manufacturing utilizes scalable technology from 5.56 NATO through 14.5mm. This production technology allows rapid design modifications. True Velocity can also meet your packaging needs, including linked belts and individual rounds. Because they’re using composite munitions they can offer the casing in multiple colors to match the operating environment, thereby lowering the battle signature. They can further color-code the composite casing to match a projectile type and load making it distinctive and readily distinguishable from other ammunition. Remarkably, True Velocity loads all projectiles and powders with match-grade accuracy.

Unlike metallic-cased ammunition, the composite casing does not carry heat. This means the weapon remains cooler, and the spent casing is cool to the touch. It also provides substantial flash reduction because the gases exiting the bore are not superheated and therefore are below the flash point. True Velocity’s composite-cased ammo is easier to carry because it’s 30% lighter than brass casing ammunition of the same quantity and caliber. With casings that are 100% recyclable, the reduction in heavy metal byproducts also translates to reduced environmental impact. True Velocity’s “Lean is our culture” slogan is indeed a fact. True Velocity’s agile production technology reduces the required manufacturing footprint by 80% when compared to a traditional brass casing manufacturing facility.

truevelocityinc.com / tvammo.com

Nammo Talley Inc.’s new M72 FFE (fire from enclosure) shoulder-fired munition is the most advanced M72 ever manufactured. Weighing in at less than 13 pounds with a carry length of 32 inches, the FFE’s counter mass propulsion system allows for over 8 shots per day from inside a room with single hearing protection; and reduces decibel output to a level that allows for one shot per day without hearing protection. The ability to fire from enclosed positions, combined with reduced noise and light signature, allows the Warfighter to maintain a covered and concealed position and significantly reduces the enemy’s ability to identify the munition’s point of origin.

The FFE is available in two warhead variants; Anti-Armor and Dual Purpose—both warheads are configured with dual safe fuses. The Dual Purpose warhead incorporates a self-discriminating fuse, which increases the munitions ability to defeat a wider variety of targets by detonating in either fast or delay mode based on target construction. This allows the Warfighter to confidently engage a multitude of targets due to the ability of the self-discriminating fuse to autonomously react to target material allowing for optimized delivery of warhead payload. The M72 FFE also incorporates the improved launcher, which features an enhanced in-line trigger mechanism, shoot-through bumpers, improved sling design and MIL-STD-1913 rail for mounting accessories.

nammo.com

Sensors

In response to a U.S. military requirement for an individual (soldier-worn) gunshot detection system (IDGS), QinetiQ North America, headquartered in Waltham, MA, has developed a Shoulder-Worn Acoustic Targeting System they call SWATS^®. With the goal of increasing soldier survivability, SWATS instantly detects, locates and alerts its wearer to the location and range of incoming (hostile) fire. The SWATS system also has a built-in compass, GPS and 9-axis inertial measurement system that compensate for body motion and enable its wearer to effectively navigate on the battlefield. Manufactured in the USA, SWATS works reliably in all combat environments to include mountainous, urban and open terrain.

qinetiq-na.com

Photonis Defense Inc., a registered NATO supplier, proudly presented their new 16mm Image Intensifier Tube. These night vision tubes are the lightest mass-produced tubes on the market and can be customized to fit particular requirements with choice of photocathode, phosphor screen, gating speed and power supply. The 16mm tube was designed to meet the SWaP requirements of the modern armies with a reduced size, weight and minimum power consumption all with state-of-the-art performance. Night Vision Devices (NVD), Inc. is the exclusive distributor and integrator for these lightweight and small form-factor night vision image intensifier tubes.

photonis.com / nvdevices.com

SAFRAN Optics 1, Inc. unveiled its “Stalker” handheld target location system. The Stalker resembles a binocular, but its outward look deceives its precision capabilities. The Stalker is a lightweight, handheld, day/night target acquisition system with an intuitive user-friendly interface and mode of operations. It is particularly useful for dismounted operations in weather extremes. Capable of locating targets in adverse environmental conditions, it offers three viewing modes: direct view optics for daytime operations; thermal imaging for all weather detection and situational awareness (day or night); and low light imaging for positive target identification. Equipped with multiple interfaces including RS-232 and USB for data exchange with other devices, it further offers “SMART” design image recording, image capture and live streaming. In addition to its optics, imaging and standard interface capabilities, the Stalker also possesses a digital magnetic compass with inclinometer, a laser rangefinder capable of ranges exceeding 5,000m in harsh environmental extremes and an integrated GPS solution. The Stalker seems to have covered every operational necessity in its bag of tricks.

optics1.com

Tactical Kits

Avon Protection’s new M53A1 air purifying respirator is indeed the breathing mask of choice for all missions. Designed to meet U.S. Government Joint Service General Purpose (USGPM) requirements, the M53A1 can be configured to function as a conventional negative pressure or air purifying respirator (APR), powered-air purifying respirator (PAPR), self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA), closed-circuit breathing apparatus (CCBA) and combination SCBA and PAPR systems. It comes in four sizes for custom fit to all face dimensions. It has five interchangeable silicone nose clips that provide improved comfort. It further sports a comfortable reflex seal with a low brow that assures helmet compatibility. It uses a polyurethane single-piece, scratch-resistant flexible panoramic eye lens that provides maximum field of view along with superior ballistic protection.

Optional outserts are available for added adverse environment protection. These outserts include clear, sunlight, blue-blocker, laser, mirrored and breaching. The mask employs a 6-point skullcap head harness with low profile, pre-adjusted brow straps. It can further be configured to provide an electronic pass-through for external radio use and with an internal microphone for enhanced audio performance. The M53A1 is available in single port or twin port models depending upon your specific operational needs.

avon-protection.com

Based in Portland, OR, and manufacturing their product line in the United States, Gerber Gear featured their Center-Drive Multi-Tool. The thoughtful one-thumb opening design allows for quick deployment of the three full size tools you depend on most: the pliers, the blades and the screwdriver. The Center-Drive has an extra-long 3.2-inch magnetic bit driver that opens to align with the center axis of the tool—giving you all the torque and rotation of a traditional screwdriver. The full-size blades conveniently replace your everyday pocketknife, and the full-size spring-loaded pliers feature an X-Channel Rail System to eliminate rattle and provide smooth opening. Streamlined to offer the right tools for optimal functionality, the Center-Drive’s 12-piece Bit Kit consists of a variety of screwdriver tip sizes and shapes that fit most standard hex and screw heads. This tool is a must for everyone’s tactical field kit.

gerbergear.com

Information Management and Training Systems

NCR Government Systems, LLC, headquartered in Atlanta, GA, has business offices in 126 countries around the world. NCR showcased their Mperium™ software as a powerful solution enabler of Point of Service and Point of Sales for small to medium site installations. Mperium provides a building block for rapid application development that includes transaction processing, data security, 508 compliant user interface available in multiple languages, XML configuration, enterprise dashboard for management and custom reporting. Integration with third-party services and peripheral devices is a standard for NCR products and Mperium is no exception. Using this software as a base, customers can rapidly build kiosk and counter solutions that integrate easily with their existing operations and systems with significantly reduced software development costs.

ncr.com

Imagine the theater operation centers all showing the same real-time battle space information in an integrated, easily understood format that streamlines battle force management. Such a capability now exists. Built on Unity 3D™, a video-gaming platform known for its ease of use and scalability, LinQuest Corporation’s cloud-based 3DataLinQ provides real-time, multi-domain, integrated command and control (MDC2). 3DataLinQ is a 3-dimensional, avatar-based, virtual environment (much like a collaborative, first-person-shooter game but for multi-domain operations) providing the right data, intuitively displayed at the right time, so friendly forces can dynamically react to rapidly changing environments. The system works on PCs/laptops, mobile devices and classified environments.

terry.mckinney@linquest.com

Meggitt Training Systems of Suwanee, GA, is a leading provider of integrated live-fire and virtual weapons training products and services for armed forces and law enforcement. The FATS^® 100MIL is the foundation for the U.S. Army’s Engagement Skills Trainer II program of record, while Meggitt’s new, 300-degree FATS 300MIL, delivers unequalled realism through a fully immersive experience.

Immersion is provided via five 150×84-inch flat screens arranged in a hexagonal format, 5.1 audio, plus sounds in any direction can be added by the operator for increased realism. The system utilizes ultra-short-throw projectors that allow the trainee unprecedented distance to the entity being engaged, all while maintaining a smaller footprint than rear-projection systems. In recent months, Meggitt has created three domestic regional hubs featuring the FATS 300LE for law enforcement applications. Both the FATS 100MIL and 300MIL interface with a variety of firearms, including Meggitt’s wireless BlueFire^® weapons.

meggitttrainingsystems.com

And so ends our snapshot of AUSA 2018. Held every October in Washington, DC, the AUSA Annual Meeting is the largest land power exposition and professional development forum in North America. The Annual Meeting consists of informative presentations, panel discussions on pertinent military and national security subjects, workshops and important AUSA business meetings. It’s the “go to” expo for showcasing new products and technology, buying and selling, as well as industry networking opportunities. Information on AUSA 2019 can be found at

ausa.org.

AUSA 2018 Show Master Information

Location

Walter E. Washington Convention Center

801 Mount Vernon Place NW

Washington, DC 20001

Website

ausameetings.org

Contact

Olivia Russell

Conference & Event Center Manager

Phone: 703-907-2687

Email: orussell@ausa.org

Colleen Stembridge

Conference & Event Center Coordinator

Phone: 703-907-2405

Email: cstembridge@ausa.org

Next Show

October 14–16, 2019

Focus

The Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting is the largest landpower exposition and professional development forum in North America, which takes place over three days. The Annual Meeting’s focus is to highlight the capabilities of Army organizations and present a wide range of industry products and services. The Meeting consists of informative presentations, panel discussions on pertinent military and national security subjects, workshops and important AUSA business meetings. There will be dozens of professional development events, seminars and presentations.

Dress

For civilian attendees, business dress is recommended, although business casual is seen frequently at the show. Military personnel should be in duty uniform.

Hotel and Parking Hints

It is best to find hotels nearby the Convention Center, as parking fees in Washington, DC are very expensive. Parking in the area is very limited.

Power & Plug Types

Power: 120 V / 60 Hz

Plug: Type A: 2-pin plug or Type B: grounded 3-prong plug

Country Warnings

There are none at this time.

Cultural Hints

Generally people are very polite and helpful. It is customary to greet people with a right-handed hand shake. America is a multilingual, multireligious nation.

Tipping

Tipping is normally 15%–20% for restaurants and services in the United States.

Currency Type

The U.S. Dollar is the currency. The currency code for dollars is USD, and the currency symbol is $. For current exchange rates, please visit: xe.com.

Getting Around

The Walter E. Washington Convention Center is in close proximity to three airports:

1. Reagan National Airport (5.7 miles)
2. Dulles International Airport (28.1 miles)
3. Baltimore Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport (32 miles)

The D.C. Metro (wmata.com) or the D.C. Circulator (dccirculator.com) is the best way to get to the Center. But for those who wish to drive a rental car, left-hand drive cars are used in the U.S., driving on the right side of the road. UK style drivers may have to adapt. Garmin in particular has good GPS mapping in their U.S. package. A driver’s license is frequently required for rental cars.

Things to See

Within a half mile to 5 miles of the Convention Center are the International Spy Museum, the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum and the Historical Society of Washington, DC. Also of interest are the National Archives Museum, Library of Congress and Ford’s Theater. There are many tour companies operating in the area as well.

Tourism

Try visittheusa.com for a good resource for visiting. The U.S. is a country of 50 states covering a vast area of North America, with Alaska in the northwest and Hawaii extending the nation’s presence into the Pacific Ocean. Major Atlantic Coast cities are New York, a global finance and culture center, and the nation’s capitol Washington, DC.

The 2015 AUSA Expo premiered a number of exciting new firearm technology advances. We have chosen some we consider exemplary from various offerings in assault rifles, pistols, sights and ammunition.

SIG Sauer displayed their short-stroke gas piston SIG MCX mission-adaptable weapon system. The engineering modifications SIG has made to the existing AR design are truly noteworthy because they accomplish two premier goals demanded by everyone – increased weapon reliability and extending weapon life. First, it is important to understand the AR’s operating system design beginning with the AR upper receiver.

The steel bolt carrier rides on a cam path (two aluminum rails) located internally on either side of upper. When the weapon is fired, gas pushes the bolt-operating rod backward, driving the bolt rearward along the cam path where several mechanical events occur almost simultaneously. The bolt runs rearward out of battery, extracting (dragging) the swollen spent brass from the chamber. The force required to release the swollen spent brass from the chamber walls involves a degree of torque being applied to the bolt during the first inch or so of the backstroke. The cam path on which the bolt rides maintains the bolt’s travel alignment throughout the spent brass extraction, ejection and full backstroke, and again during the forward stroke as a new cartridge is skimmed from the magazine, pushed forward into the chamber, and the bolt locked back in battery for firing. This process is repeated every time the gun fires.

The bolt carrier group’s left side guide rail on an average AR aluminum upper receiver begins to show significant wear around the 30-40 thousand round mark (sooner if the gun isn’t maintained) from the back stroke’s extraction torque. No matter how well the gun is lubricated and maintained the AR will wear at that point and the result is the BCG gets “sloppy.” In turn, this causes ejection and/or feed malfunctions. The government’s answer is to replace the AR’s upper receiver. SIG’s solution (and it is brilliant engineering) on the MCX is to mill a precision slot through the upper receiver’s left side and replace about the first inch of the receiver’s cam path (guide rail area that experiences the most wear during the backstroke) with a fitted flush steel piece that is held in place by two countersunk machine screws. This replaces the aluminum rail’s wear point with steel. This one improvement will double, if not triple, the upper receiver’s life expectancy while also immeasurably increasing operational reliability.

A second improvement seen on SIG’s MCX upper involves the charging handle latching point. ARs have historically experienced malfunctions when the charging handle latch (made of steel) wears down the aluminum indents cast into the upper that the latch locks onto. When this occurs the charging handle will first become sloppy and then finally come loose during firing and bolt stroking operation, causing operating malfunctions (usually on the forward stroke). SIG’s solution was to simply replace the aluminum upper latch points (indents) with two small replaceable steel dowels about the diameter of a No. 2 pencil lead. The charging handle latch closes around the steel dowels and the wear (steel on steel) is insignificant. More engineering brilliance!

Offering sub-MOA perfection, FN nailed it with their new CSR-20 Compact Semi-automatic Sniper Rifle chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO.

Based upon the combat-proven attributes of the SCAR 17, FN’s new CSR-20 Compact, Semi-automatic Sniper Rife has been a long awaited addition to FN’s product offering. Attached to a monolithic aluminum alloy receiver, its 16 inch chrome-lined cold hammer-forged barrel chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO claims sub-MOA accuracy. With a fully adjustable stock providing SCAR-like ergonomics and a full length Mil-STD 1913 rail that will accommodate both scope and in-line night vision optics, this highly reliable advanced combat sniper rifle is lightweight, man-portable and user-maintenance friendly. Its superb accuracy and handling ease will make it a favorite for military, law enforcement and sporting applications.

LWRC International manufactures the Compact Semi Automatic Sniper System (CSASS 20) chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO and it’s a tack driver.

Headquartered in Cambridge, MD, LWRC International, LLC, manufactures a complete military-grade line of AR-style short-stroke gas piston assault rifles. Their latest is their C.S.A.S.S. 20 chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO with a unique 20-position adjustable gas block. Weighing in at 10 ¾ pounds this precision sniper rifle has a spiral fluted hammer forged barrel mounted on a monoforge upper receiver that utilizes an AR-style charging handle. Its fully ambidextrous lower receiver reflects AR ergonomics and employs a Geissele SSA trigger with a Magpul PRS fully adjustable stock on its recoil end. This striking sub-MOA precision rifle portrays exactness and scrupulous purpose-driven engineering. Better still, it will reliably reach out and touch somebody.

ST9 by Sarsilmaz Firearms is a quality pistol available in 9mm, 40,S&W and .45 ACP

From Istanbul, Sarsilmaz Firearms, Inc. has brought us a work of art in the form of a superbly well-engineered pistol they call the ST9. This pistol has numerous beautifully engineered features that reflect Turkish design and manufacturing elegance. The ST9 is offered in 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP. Its overall ergonomics are thoughtful with three changeable back straps to fit any hand geometry. Its snag proof dovetail-mounted front and rear combat sights can be easily replaced if user upgrades are desired. The forged steel slide and barrel ride above a composite polymer lower that has aggressive non-slip checkering and it’s offered in seven colors options. The operating buttons and levers are ambidextrous with a well-placed thumb operated mag release button located at the rear of the trigger guard. The ST9’s double stack high capacity dishwasher-safe magazines are made of clear high-strength polymer with a firm installed fit and solid lock-up. This is a gunfighter’s pistol you can bet your life on.

The shoulder-fired PGL6-40LR built by Penn Arms is a potent 40mm low velocity grenade launcher that will get the attention of the receiving end.

Penn Arms of Jamestown, PA showed its 10½ pound PGL6-40IR pump action 40x46mm HE/HEDP compatible low velocity shoulder-fired grenade launcher. The six barrel revolving cylinder advances with each pump, achieving positive barrel alignment with a locking pin. Uniquely, the cylinder chambers and barrel both have right hand 6 grove rifling with a 1:47 twist, making this launcher as accurate as the sight placed upon its top receiver 1913 Picatinny rail – and most rail-mounted sights are compatible. It further sports a length-adjustable composite polymer stock. This is an all American solidly built gun that will reliably perform under all field conditions imaginable.

Aim point has greatly improved their Micro T-2 now in use by the FBI’s HRT and SOF.

Aimpoint, with headquarters in Chantilly, VA, has greatly improved their Micro T-2 with a redesigned extruded high strength aluminum housing, improved lens and crisper dot. Even under magnification, the dot is now perfectly round. T-2’s operating range goes from -50° to +160° F and it’s submersible to 25 m (82 ft). It’s powered by one CR2032 3v lithium battery that provides 50,000 hours of run time between battery changes – and no radioactive signature. With integrated rail mount and flip-covers it weighs a mere 4.9 ounces. It has undergone rigorous operational testing with the FBI and is now in use by their famed Hostage Recuse Team.  The Micro T-2 is likewise in use with U.S. Special Operations Forces.

Schmidt &Bender’s new PM II ultra short sniper scope is a prefect fit for in-line night vision on rifles with limited top rail length.

When it comes to high-end optics, Germany’s Schmidt and Bender has proven that bigger isn’t necessarily better. They recently debuted their PM ll – an ultra short sniper scope not short in capability. Less than a foot long, with a robust 34mm diameter tube, this 5-20×50 full metal rugged military design shorty even has a 4x zoom. It also has an ultra low profile double turn locking elevation turret and a capped windage turret. Better, it’s completely waterproof to a depth of 25m (82ft). Schmidt and Bender designed this potent little scope for use on small caliber and/or short barrel sniper rifles where full size scopes and limited rail space prevents the use of in-line night vision devices. The PM ll is the solution. The PM ll is available in a number of colors, illuminated and non-illuminated versions, turret configurations and several types of reticles.

Nammo’s new .50 cal Reduced Range cartridge exhibits exceptional accuracy typical .50 cal energy out to 800 Yards but beyond that it drops off significantly allowing it to be used for practice on ranges approved for 7.62 weapons and operationally where using a standard .50 cal is out of the question for risk of down range collateral damage.

With headquarters in Raufoss, Norway, Nammo has developed and qualified a new .50 cal Reduced Range cartridge for training on smaller ranges and to reduce the danger area downrange of the shooter. While not designed as a training round, it absolutely provides affordable training options never before available. The safety template of the cartridge is the same as standard 7.62mm NATO rounds, so warfighters and law enforcement snipers can train with .50 caliber weapons at ranges previously approved for 7.62mm and below, or by carving up an existing .50 caliber range into several smaller sites. Some users are also interested in the RR Cartridge for combat in urban operations where line of sight is limited and there is high concern about collateral damage. The Nammo round has the same ballistics as NATO standard .50 cal ammo to about 800m (875 yards) and accuracy has been shown to be better than standard .50cal Ball/AP ammo within this range. The Nammo .50 Cal Reduced Range ammunition is qualified in accordance with NATO specifications and already fielded by several countries for use in both machine guns and rifles.

DARPA’s EXACTO program seeks to provide guided .50 cal rounds that can be fired from any standard .50 cal MG or sniper rifle. 

What is the EXACTO Program you might ask? Teledyne and Orbital ATK’s Armament Systems Division have the answer but remain very tight lipped about any details – and for good reason, EXACTO is ITAR protected. EXACTO is the research and development (R&D) program headed by DARPA for round guidance technology involving a combination of “fire and forget” technologies currently applied to guided .50 cal rounds. That’s right – guided .50 cal rounds that can make course corrections in mid flight.

DARPA’s official description goes like this: EXACTO’s specially designed ammunition and real-time optical guidance system help track and direct projectiles to their targets by compensating for weather, wind, target movement and other factors that can impede successful hits. “True to DARPA’s mission, EXACTO has demonstrated what was once thought impossible: the continuous guidance of a small-caliber bullet to target,” said Jerome Dunn, DARPA program manager. “This live-fire demonstration from a standard rifle showed that EXACTO is able to hit moving and evading targets with extreme accuracy at sniper ranges unachievable with traditional rounds. Fitting EXACTO’s guidance capabilities into a small .50-caliber size is a major breakthrough and opens the door to what could be possible in future guided projectiles across all calibers.”

The EXACTO program developed new approaches and advanced capabilities to improve the range and accuracy of sniper systems beyond the current state of the art. The program seeks to improve sniper effectiveness and enhance troop safety by allowing greater shooter standoff range and reduction in target engagement timelines.

The above statement translated: DARPA is developing the technology to create command-guided ammunition for military applications in a variety of direct fire systems – primarily medium-caliber at this time. EXACTO models on existing .50 BMG ammunition and rifles instead of needing new hardware. How they’re achieving this quantum advancement using a fin-stabilized projectile, or spin-stabilized projectile, internal and/or external aero-actuation control methods, projectile guidance technologies, tamper proofing, macro-power supplies, advanced sighting, optical resolution and clarity technologies is up to the imagination. An educated guess could be hazarded but we might be right and compromise things that should not be revealed. More to follow when known – maybe at the 2016 AUSA Expo.

Militaries of the world always are looking for a lighter weapon and improved ammunition lethality, but some firearms and the rounds they fire leave little room for improvement. Gene Stoner’s AR-15 design has been around since the early 1960s and has proven itself to be one of history’s most versatile and modifiable guns ever built. Numerous manufacturers provide the M16 to the U.S. military as its main assault rifle and many U.S. allies around the world have adopted the M16 as well. Since the early days, semiautomatic AR versions also have been built by a multitude of manufacturers for sporting purposes. The semiautomatic sport AR has nearly 98% parts interchangeability with the military’s automatic-fire versions. Can the AR be made lighter without sacrificing performance and reliability? First, consider the following background information.

In the mid-1990s, Program Executive Office – Soldier (PEO – Soldier), the U.S. Army’s lead for acquisition of all small arms service-wide, issued an edict to “lighten the soldier’s load.” Lightening the load a soldier carries into combat became essential as the soldier’s load grew from a rifle, ammunition and a day pack, containing a change of socks and some rations, to include individual communications, navigation, target designation, night vision, etc., along with loads of batteries to power it all. It is no secret that carrying a heavy combat load through the desert and mountains, along with the harsh temperature extremes encountered in the Middle East, is physically demanding. The immediately logical answer was to lighten the load carried. PEO-Soldier began looking at ways to shave off weight in everything the soldier carried and wore, but warfare was evolving.

Technological advancements in sights, lights and communications all require a power source, not to mention the dead weight of the equipment itself. That means the soldier carries more items, and more items have more weight. So, it seems for every ounce of weight that can be shaved off a weapon or a piece of kit, it has been replaced by a new “must have” gadget that, in some way, provides the individual soldier a combat edge. Besides, even if the gadgetry doesn’t provide an actual combat advantage, it looks cool hanging on a Picatinny rail, and that alone is ample justification to carry it.

Excepting the U.S. Marine Corps, gone are the days of honing individual soldier marksmanship skills using basic open sights. Instead of training the soldier to run up a hill and time his shots between heartbeats; target ranging, weapon stabilization, laser spotting and fire control systems are relied upon. The fact that the main battle weapon issued is still launching a 55 or 62 grain, 5.56 round has gone largely unchallenged. All these Gucci gadgets, when hung on the AR’s rails, provide the soldier a “cool looking” assault rifle, but hardly provide him more lethality or knockdown power.

So why not change the rifle and/or the caliber it launches? Given adequate funding, that seems superficially easy to accomplish, but it isn’t as easy as one might believe. A one to one replacement, besides being cost prohibitive, would involve a logistical nightmare. The logistics supply chain, with regard to stockpiled 5.56 ammunition, spare weapon parts, unique maintenance tools and all the other unique AR aftermarket items used like optics, magazines, sound suppressors, rail systems, etc., that are made specifically for AR compatibility and ergonomics, would be destroyed or surplused at a significant loss.

A restrictive legal reality also exists that many are unaware of. Under the terms of the NATO Treaty, the 28 independent nations who compose it must only use battle rifles (and pistols) that fire NATO standard ammunition. NATO-common rounds like the 5.56x45mm, 7.62x51mm and 9mm Luger are examples. Furthermore, in the 1970s during the height of the Cold War and NATO’s finest hour, the U.S. Congress passed a law that required U.S. Forces to be fully interoperable with NATO. At the time it made sense, assuming that U.S. Forces would be fighting beside their NATO allies on the plains of Europe in an all out effort to stop an overwhelming westward Soviet advance. But times have changed and neither the NATO treaty nor the standing U.S. law has kept pace.

Today, several basic realities are being overlooked. Our nation’s future opponents likely will be wearing body armor. Therefore, we need a battle rifle that will defeat body armor. That of course means that any battle rifle that can defeat the enemy’s body armor can be picked up and used against our troops. Therein lies the first conundrum in the puzzle to lighten the soldier’s load. We need a weapon that will effectively defeat the enemy but can’t be used against us.

Secondly, there are numerous rounds available that out perform the NATO standard 5.56 and 7.62 rounds. The problem is that by treaty and by law new rounds cannot be adopted for general NATO use without the unanimous approval of every NATO member-nation. A real-world example of this erupted in the late 1990s when FN-Herstal, a Belgium arms company, created the FN Five-seveN pistol and the P-90 submachine gun that both fired FN’s unique 5.7x28mm round. This round is impressively lethal and burns through soft body armor like a hot knife through butter. Imagine the ability to defeat soft body armor with a pistol or a sub-gun.

At about the same time, Germany’s Heckler and Koch debuted their 4.6x30mm round as a direct competitor to FN’s 5.7x28mm round. Both Belgium and Germany are NATO members and each blocked unanimous NATO approval of the other’s newest round. That relegated the FN 5.7 round, for example, to the special purpose category as far as military use goes, and a purgatory label that marked it forever as a law enforcement and sporting round. H&K’s 4.6 round never made it into the mainstream even though its performance was similar. Try buying a box of HK’s 4.6 rounds today.

What then does it take for unanimous NATO-nation approval? Perhaps a more basic question is why is NATO still viable today? The short answer is that, for a variety of reasons, it isn’t. NATO was created for the sole purpose of defending Western Europe against Soviet invasion. The Cold War, along with the Soviet Empire, has been over for more than two decades. Some NATO-member nations have provided token troops to the U.S.’s Middle East conquest but only as a token show of support for an ally they grudgingly support in a theater of war they abhor. Yet, NATO nations remain bound to a treaty of mutual support against a common enemy that no longer exists. And they all still continue to arm their militaries with weapons that fire NATO-approved rounds even though those rounds may not meet the future combat challenge.

With the above in mind, there is an exception that allows NATO member-nations to use any rounds they choose (outside the NATO interoperability requirement) and that is known as “special purpose use.” U. S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) is well aware of this exception and has taken advantage of it by providing its special operations forces with some of the most lethal bullet launchers, both rifles and pistols, available today. In doing so, SOCOM operates outside the bounds of PEO-Soldier as the lead for U.S. military small arms procurement and the interoperability restrictions binding the NATO treaty.

In the white” following machining. MagTac/Uselton magnesium alloy upper (stripped) weighs 3 ounces and their magnesium lower (stripped) weighs 3.2 ounces for a combined weight of just 6.2 ounces compared to the MIL-SPEC AR upper and lower at 17.1 ounces.

PEO-Soldier recently announced its quest to identify and ultimately procure a replacement pistol for the Beretta M9. They are seeking a modular, general use pistol that is both lighter and more lethal than the M9. They specified that it be made from metal, immediately disqualifying polymer composite hybrids. The logic in specifying the construction material reflects little to no wisdom, but that’s not necessarily surprising.

It’s a given that PEO-Soldier is already restricted by NATO treaty and U.S. law as to the round the gun can fire (that’s why the U.S. military ended up with a 9mm-firing pistol in the first place). Therefore, assuming that the M9 replacement will also fire a NATO 9x19mm Luger round, increased lethality is a moot point to argue. True, there are some very “hot” 9x19mm rounds available. The problem is they’re not NATO-approved and therefore not available for general use.

Finding a lighter pistol with improved accuracy, maintainability, reliability and life span is achievable but probably not cost effective. The Beretta M9 was adopted as Department of Defense’s service pistol in the early 1980s, replacing the tried and proven Model 1911 .45 ACP, an all steel gun. Beretta, an Italian company, made DoD pistol history by winning the contract with its high capacity double stack magazine, aluminum lower frame, topped with a steel slide M9. The original test guns (test models were the Beretta 92S and 92F) had a billet-machined steel slide and they proved reliable during joint service testing. Once Beretta won the contract and began mass-producing the M9, they changed their slide manufacturing process from using a machined billet to a sintered slide.

Sintering is a process that uses powdered metal that is compressed under tons of pressure in a mold. A part can be molded with very close tolerances that only require minimal machining. Sintering saved Beretta time and money because the slides could be produced faster than billet machining and there was little to no waste. The problem was that the sintered slides were brittle and many times fractured upon the slide’s back recoil stroke, launching a one inch chunk of the slide’s most rearward section
into the shooter’s face.

Beretta’s immediate solution was to provide extra slides with a safety notice that recommended a new slide replacement every 2,500 rounds. That meant every few days at the range required a slide replacement. As impractical as this was, it bought Beretta time to resolve the annealing problem in their slide sintering process. Since that time, Beretta has proven its oats, as has their M9 pistol.

What might PEO-Soldier find today? It’s now 2015 and sintering metals for weapon applications are perfected and proven in combat conditions. The main detractor remaining is that sintering doesn’t shave weight off the firearm. The weight saving cutting edge of firearms metallurgy today revolves around exotic metal alloys like titanium and magnesium and the explosive bonding process (bonding aluminum or titanium to stainless steel) that has only recently come to light for use in firearms.

Explosively bonded metal billets appear to provide a best available, weight-saving solution at a cost just slightly more expensive per billet than the all steel counterpart. The explosive bonding first was observed around the late 1800s with the advent of high (velocity) explosives. The explosive bonding process is used to bond two dissimilar metals together at the molecular level, e.g., aluminum and stainless, that could not otherwise be permanently bonded. It is achieved by simply placing the two dissimilar metals in contact with one another on an anvil. A measured quantity of high explosives is placed on top of the metal stack and detonated. The extreme pressure (hundreds of thousands of pounds per square inch) created by the explosives slamming the two metals together creates an inseparable molecular bond (not a weld).

One U.S. arms manufacturer, Uselton Arms Manufacturing, Inc. (www.useltonarms.com), located in Franklin, Tennessee, currently builds explosively bonded aluminum and stainless steel Model 1911 .45 ACP pistols. These pistols are machined from explosively bonded aluminum and stainless billets so that the slide and lower frame wear surfaces meet on stainless steel and the rest of the slide and lower frame are aluminum alloy. This affords the Uselton Arms, Model 1911, a 34 percent weight savings without sacrificing even the slightest reliability or life expectancy associated with an all steel gun. Better yet, conventional 1911 parts are still fully interchangeable with Uselton’s explosively-bonded 1911 lower frame and slide.

The use of exotic alloys like titanium and magnesium in firearms save weight but they’re generally expensive metals compared to steel, and some require exotic casting, machining and fabrication processes. That said, when ceramic coating is applied, their wear characteristics approach steel with almost half the weight.

Mag Tactical Systems (www.magtacticalsystems.com/) and Uselton Arms recently achieved exciting metallurgical advancements by producing a proprietary AR magnesium alloy upper and lower with significant weight saving. Here’s a comparison. A standard 7075 aluminum upper (stripped) weighs 8.7 ounces and a standard 7075 aluminum lower (stripped) weighs 8.4 ounces for a combined weight of 17.1 ounces. The MagTac/Uselton magnesium alloy upper (stripped) weighs 3 ounces and their magnesium lower (stripped) weighs 3.2 ounces for a combined weight of just 6.2 ounces. That is a significant weight savings without sacrificing performance or gun life expectancy.

This unique proprietary magnesium alloy contains a fire retardant to prevent the ignition hazard conventional magnesium presents. Fully built like an M4, the MagTac/Uselton magnesium alloy AR weighs only 4 pounds compared to the 6.5 pound conventional aluminum AR.

The application of these alloys for significant weight saving could be applied across nearly every man-portable weapon, in addition to most hardware in the war fighter’s inventory. By simply substituting the materials of construction, significant weight savings on two well-known weapons (Model 1911 pistol and the M4 assault rifle) could be applied to most weapons in the inventory in a cost effective manner. Another true advantage is that the weapons remain fully interoperable with all currently available spare parts (and build kits), as well as all the other aftermarket “cool stuff.”

PEO-Soldier seriously should consider alloy and explosive bonding for material construction of all future weapons. As MagTac and Uselton already have proven, the ability to make a combat weapon essentially “dishwasher safe for cleaning” without sacrificing performance and material life expectancy, while simultaneously reducing the soldier’s load, is achievable today at minimal cost.

Cyber-attack. Strategic penetration of an opponent’s government, financial and military systems can be used to confuse, slow or stop an enemy. Cyber-attack targets might include public utility systems and everything else from power generation, to water purification and management, to fuel refinement and distribution throughout the country.

Hacking into intelligence, industrial, financial and utility infrastructure networks, emplacing malware, and conducting cyber espionage is commonplace today and is on the rise. Formidable hacking attacks against opponent’s and potential opponent’s military and industrial complexes, financial system, power grid, diplomatic and political bureaucracy are discovered on a near weekly basis. Attribution of these attacks is even more difficult to ascertain than the attacks themselves.

On November 20, 2014, Admiral Michael Rodgers, who heads the National Security Agency (NSA) and collaterally serves as head of U.S. Cyber Command, told a Congressional panel, “The United States has detected malware on U.S. computer systems from China, Russia and elsewhere that affect the daily lives of every American.” In testimony before the House Intelligence Committee Rogers warned, “It enables you to shut down very segmented, very tailored parts of our infrastructure that forestall the ability to provide that service to us as citizens.” He also stated that nation-states and other actors are conducting “cyber reconnaissance” to seek out and identify U.S. vulnerabilities, thus providing them a means to catalog vulnerabilities and prioritize attacks. “We see them attempting to steal information on how our systems are configured, the very schematics of most of our control systems, down to engineering level of detail so they can look at where are the vulnerabilities, how are they constructed, how could I get in and defeat them. We’re seeing multiple nation-states invest in those kinds of capabilities,” he noted.

In related testimony, FBI Director Robert Mueller recently stated, “The cyber threat will equal or surpass the threat from (radical) terrorism in the foreseeable future.” Both government and industry cyber experts predict a devastating cyber-attack resulting in significant loss of life and financial damage will occur against the U.S. by 2025 and it will be done through keystrokes and computers. Powerful firewalls, encryption and light-speed counter-attacks are the only countermeasures on the horizon.

Automatous artificial intelligence will navigate, interact and operate side-by-side with humans in all manners imaginable. This will be coupled with various robots that can rapidly assemble-reassemble themselves into a variety of configurations by teaming with other robot specialists to meet specific operational requirements. The potential for warfighting applications are as infinite as are the applications to improve the human condition. As artificial intelligence advances exponentially, Japan is preparing for the mass commercialization of hyper-real robots (androids) that will, for example, replace TV news readers, receptionists, fast food order takers, restaurant servers, teachers and some categories of skilled workers. It is anticipated that, within the next ten years, androids will become so real, that humans will take them as sex partners and live-ins as these fully independent “humanoids” become nearly indistinguishable from humans in looks and behavior.

TALOS. Before realizing mature hands-off artificial intelligence, TALOS will be fielded. TALOS (Tactical Assault Light Operator Suit) is a robotic exoskeleton that the U.S. Special Operations Command is currently working to field as soon as technically possible. Stated TALOS requirements are that it must be bulletproof, weaponized, have the ability to monitor vitals and give the wearer superhuman strength and perception. The 1st generation suits currently being tested comprise interactive layers of smart material coupled with sensors that are
externally powered.

Development of the TALOS suit is a remarkably collaborative effort shared between the national laboratory complex, a variety of U.S. government agencies, numerous universities and industry. They are working to develop a climate controlled, powered exoskeleton that provides the wearer super-human strength, full-body armor that can be scaled to defeat a
particular threat level, and interactive situational-awareness displays. SOCOM plans to field a TALOS independently operational (internally powered) combat suit prototype system by 2018.

Beyond unanticipated developmental costs, there are a number of scientific and technical development issues that may slow TALOS’s realization. Because some of the TALOS technologies simply don’t exist today, a number of scientists and engineers close to the project believe that TALOS, as envisioned, probably can’t be achieved before 2025. TALOS technologies needing development include next-generation full-body ballistic armor materials, powered exoskeletons for mobility and agility, conformable and wearable power generation, suit thermal management, computers, communications, antennae, and real-time combat-ready displays with non-traditional information presentation, as well as embedded medical monitoring and biomechanical modeling. Much of this technology must be invented and that is being achieved by a number of different developers. Interoperability of these newly developed components is also a challenge rivaling the modules composing the International Space Station. Power generation is perhaps the biggest problem, because there is currently no self-contained, lightweight, low-bulk, wearable, power generation system adaptable to TALOS’s anticipated power demands that keeps the suit light enough to remain agile. That said, we are optimistic that TALOS will become a reality, and in doing so advance the potential of cyborg and android warfighting robot specialists.

Soldier-carried laser weapons. The future warfare environment demands the addition of effective non-kinetic weapons. That translated means a soldier-carried (non-kinetic) directed energy weapon. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has funded national weapon laboratories like Los Alamos, Sandia, and Laurence Livermore, university applied physics laboratories, as well as private industry, to develop and weaponize directed energy technologies for battlefield use.

Directed energy technology increases exponentially as does today’s computing power, its close relative. Many think of directed energy in terms of microwave beams or visible light spectrum lasers, but the directed energy weapons of tomorrow may consist of a mix of many, giving them effectiveness requiring countermeasures so sophisticated and/or expensive the enemy won’t attempt them.

There are a multitude of directed energy possibilities that are being considered for use as a soldier-carried battlefield anti-personnel weapon (See www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/ADA476320.pdf). Developing an affordable battlefield laser weapon small enough and light enough for individual soldiers to carry, challenges the Law of Physics that universally dictate what is and is not possible. These emerging technologies all have pros and cons with respect to capability, reliability, lethality, legality, portability, power requirements, sustainability, maintainability, produceability and cost.

Electromagnetic rail gun technology. Unlike a coilgun, which employs a series electromagnetic coils wrapped around the gun barrel that are sequentially energized at precise times to move the projectile down the bore, a railgun uses two bus bars (rails) to conduct the current lineally along the barrel (not bore) through a cross-connector (armature) that turns the current from one rail and back down the other. The force generated is analogous to that of the hydraulic force that straightens a curved fire hose. Railgun-fired projectiles ride the inside of the launch barrel in a sabot – the projectile itself is not in contact with the barrel. As the projectile exits the barrel, the sabot is stripped away from the projectile by aerodynamic lift, and the 60 to 80 pound hyper-velocity projectile is on its way to the target at speeds exceeding Mach 10. A typical target can be a missile, a floating platform or something land based. The importance of this emerging railgun technology to the future battle-space is that it provides a single weapon with a multi-role capability. Its elimination of propellant, high capacity (deep magazine), and low engagement cost, along with its minimum requirement for kinetic kill energetics, significantly reduces it logistics tail. Its precision accuracy in air and missile defense, counterbattery fire and surgical strike, additionally offer a low potential for collateral damage.

Current railguns are large systems that require large power generators and capacitor storage banks. Using current technology, a land based system would require two mammoth M1070 tractor-trailer units that each carry generators, thermal management apparatus, a battery unit and pulse power unit. These two trailers plug into a third tractor-trailer unit that carries the railgun, ammunition magazine and fire control system. This railgun system is based on shipboard installation requirements, where volume is less precious. General Atomics is working to reduce the size of land-based mobile systems (Navy funded a shipboard application), but for now, it’s big, but it’s also “bad!” The Railgun can shoot a multipurpose projectile over a hundred miles with pinpoint accuracy several times a minute. Future versions can even shoot ballistic missiles out of their in-bound trajectory prior to reentry. The railgun’s long-range projectiles have a guided capability that gives them their pinpoint accuracy and allows them to adjust their path in flight. There are even special projectiles used for space targets that contain small maneuver-thrusters for steering/course correction in a non-air environment.

As this technology is perfected, we will undoubtedly see it shrink in size, but will it ever become man-portable? The scientific answer is that this technology will be refined, and at some point, it will become smaller, lighter and modular. It will reach a point where the Law of Physics will limit the reduction of its size and it can go no smaller. Man portability may never be attained, but robot modular portability potentially could, if such a capability was seen as operationally justifiable and cost effective. More exciting however, is the likely refinement in its accuracy and capability through the use of super sophisticated fire control computers that are interoperable with other powerful target detection and direction systems. While General Atomics flatly refuses to discuss the potential (and understandably so), there is no reason why this gun couldn’t be used to shoot hostile satellites out of space orbit (with little to no attack signature). There is also probably no reason why, if fired from a sea based, or friendly country’s mobile platforms, it couldn’t be used to shoot down hostile ICBMs during the boost stage, or the orbital phase, or take out the launch facility all together. Again, the imagination is the limit for this technology.

Rods from God. So you ask, what is a “Rod from God?” Quite simply, the rods are inert (containing no explosive) 20 feet long one foot diameter finned pole-like tungsten rods, launched from a space-based orbital platform (God), that re-enter Earth’s gravity with tremendous velocity. They are guided by the launch satellite through re-entry and are capable of striking practically any surface or sub-surface target (land or sea) anywhere on the face of the earth. Their destructive force comes from the high velocity kinetic energy they deliver on target, comparable to that of a small nuclear detonation minus the radiation. Rods from God can easily penetrate hundreds of feet into solid rock and deliver a high-energy blast, along with hyper-velocity shock wave pressures, that effectively shatters surrounding rock or reinforced concrete for thousands of feet within the shock radius. Deep underground structures (DUGS) within the blast radius cannot survive no matter how reinforced they may have been designed.

The satellite carrying multiple rods can change orbits and altitudes as necessary bringing the rods to bear above the targets selected for kinetic bombardment. It otherwise remains passively in orbit, waiting for the launch code. Once the rods are released, the time between re-entry and impact would only take a few minutes. Additionally, because the rods present a very small re-entry signature and they re-enter at hyper-velocity speeds exceeding Mach 10 at very high angles, they are virtually impossible to defend against. Countermeasures for the rods once launched have yet to be developed. The only countermeasure is to destroy the orbital launch platform prior to its launch of the rods.

While the 1979 Strategic Arms Limitation Talks between the U.S. and the Soviet Union led to mutual agreement to prohibit the deployment of third generation orbital weapons of mass destruction (nukes) containing Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs), it did not prohibit the deployment of conventional weapons. Neither is the Rods from God system prohibited by either the Outer Space Treaty that provides the basic legal framework of international space law specifically barring party states from placing weapons of mass destruction in Earth orbit, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or to otherwise station them in outer space.

Electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) weaponry. Within the grasp of most nuclear-capable states and non-state actors, an EMP weapon is an undeniable threat to modern electronic-dependent infrastructure, but is it operationally feasible without attribution and retaliation? The short answer is no. Nukes are exceedingly expensive to build and deliver and all have a specific origin of manufacture fingerprint. But can a non-nuclear EMP be generated? The longer answer is yes – and here’s how. There are a number of natural phenomena that generate EMP. Sunspots, lightening; even major earthquakes are some examples of natural EMP generators. Manmade examples are nuclear and non-nuclear EMP generators. While we’re all somewhat familiar with EMPs resulting from nuclear detonation and power grid surges, there is another non-nuclear means to explosively generate a sizeable EMP and you don’t need to be a nuclear power to build them.

An explosively-pumped flux compression generator (EPFCG) is a device used to generate a high-power electromagnetic pulse by compressing magnetic flux resulting from detonating a small conventional high explosive charge. The compression process resulting from the explosion, transforms the chemical energy of the explosives into the energy of an intense magnetic field that correspondingly produces a large electric current electromagnetic pulse. Because an EPFCG is physically destroyed by the explosive charge that is used to generate its pulse, it can be used only once. A very formidable EPFCG package small enough to be easily man-carried can produce a pulse in the range of millions of amperes and tens of terawatts, exceeding the power of a lightning strike by orders of magnitude. Most EPFCG designs require a starting current pulse to operate, usually supplied by a bank of high capacity capacitors. One or more of these EMP weapons detonated in the heart of any major city will result in massive EMP destruction and/or interruption of all systems that are electronically reliant.

Electro-muscular disabling technology. A potential less-than-lethal technology being pursued today by a small privately funded firm involves electro-muscular incapacitation. Their patented technology induces a very select waveform into the body’s spinal cord, shutting down the individual’s Sympathetic Nervous System’s “fight and flight” ability without affecting the higher portion of the Autonomic Nervous System’s (ANS) ability to keep a person’s heart beating or one’s respiration. Currently, physical contact is necessary to induce this waveform into the body but there is talk of using directed energy to induce this waveform. Obviously, if an attack on a particular part of the ANS is possible, they could likewise attack the part that controls the heart and breathing and like Star Trek, with a simple click of a switch, select a stun or kill mode. If this could be achieved using a directed energy beam, a weapon such as this could be as monumental to modern warfare as the atomic bomb was to WWII, especially if it could be adapted to wide area look down-shoot down UAV aerial delivery.

Man induced weather extremes as a weapon. California’s current drought is in its tenth year with no end in sight. Reservoirs and freshwater sources like rivers and wells are at their lowest levels in recorded history. Rationing of potable water has been imposed upon residents, and even sufficient quantities of non-potable water for farming irrigation is critically limited. Discounting the non-scientific climate change claims made by former vice-president Al Gore, these drought conditions are the result of weather patterns that man has no control over. But what if man could influence the weather, or, at least manipulate specific regional weather patterns to intentionally cause floods, drought and/or temperature extremes within an opponents’ home country or area of operation(s)? Perhaps, in the not too far distant future, man will be able to influence weather patterns by employing atmospheric chemical seeding and dynamic thermal energetic stimuli utilizing lasers and electromagnetic influence.

In 1994 the U.S. Air Force revealed a master plan they named Spacecast 2020. Among several stated objectives, the plan includes the stated unambiguous goal of weather control. The plan openly acknowledged, “Using environmental modification techniques to destroy, damage or injure another state are prohibited.” The Air Force justified its weather modification research based upon advances in (weather modification) technology that “compels a reexamination of this sensitive and potentially risky topic.” In 1997, while at a high-level conference on weapons of mass destruction, U.S. Secretary of Defense William Cohen went on record with a revealing statement, “Others (nations) are engaging in an eco-type of terrorism,” he noted, “whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves. So, there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nation. It’s real, and that’s the reason why we have to intensify our own efforts.”

DARPA has considered a number of potential weather modification technologies over the last twenty years. Some of the open source reports point to manipulating lightening, hurricanes and earthquakes in projects code named respectively, Skyfire, Stormfurry and Prime Argus. DARPA also invested $30 million in a secret project (likely much more on the black side), code named HAARP. HAARP is short for High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program. It works by beaming more than 1.7 gigawatts (1.7 billion watts) of radiated power into the electrically charged layer above Earth’s atmosphere known as the ionosphere. This literally boils the upper atmosphere and selectively displaces the surrounding ozone layer, allowing weather modification above a planned location. The weather extreme desired and the area targeted can be manipulated by the amount of energy used and the direction it is aimed. While HAARP’s official story characterizes it as an experimental antenna used for submarine communications (and it may well do that), but it has far more sinister applications the military isn’t revealing.

There are many more technologies that can be explored. The technologies chosen for this article show both game-changing promise and future direction. It is our sincere desire that you find this thought provoking, disturbing, or even somewhat comforting. Perhaps there is a big picture somewhere out there in the ether. If so, its boundaries need to be defined.