The B&T Advanced Police Carbine 9 (APC9) is a rather nice blend of existing, proven design and some truly unique engineering.  It is a clever and well thought out balance between time proven features, high tech production materials and manufacturing procedures to keep costs to a minimum.  It is a statement to the excellence of Swiss engineering and innovation.

The APC, not unlike the Glock pistol, was designed from the very beginning to be produced in quantities and at an economic price that will please any administrator or logistics officer.  It also possesses enough features that any operator will appreciate and be able to rely upon.  The flexibility built into the weapon from the beginning will enable the product to be sold to law enforcement, military and even to civilian customers where local legislation allows such carbines.

When most people see the APC the first time it appears to be familiar to them.  The stock is the same stock as B&T uses on the GL06 Less Lethal Launcher which has been sold literally by the thousands all over the world (outside of the U.S.).  The optic is the well known and popular Aimpoint TL1 Red Dot sight.  The barrel lug is the same one finds on the MP5 and the magazine is the same as B&T uses in their MP9 PDW.  When one holds the weapon in the hand to test the trigger, the pull one feels is the same as the M16.  The polymer used in the APC is the same that B&T has used in the MP9 since 2003 with virtually no reported failures in the field.  What B&T has done is to incorporate proven, existing designs and technologies into a new weapon.

The entire idea of the APC is that the world still has demands for a state of the art 9mm police carbine or submachine gun that is larger than a PDW yet smaller than a 5.56mm rifle.  B&T has been producing the MP9 for some years now and has gained great experience and had much customer feedback about this subject.  Contrary to much modern thought, the 9x19mm cartridge is far from obsolete either in a handgun, submachine gun or carbine.  Other competitive products in this category are either of an old design using stampings and metal machining which results in a heavy and expensive weapon, or are designed around an envelope that is in fact the same size as an assault rifle; while other products were originally produced for larger calibers that resulted in a SMG that is as large dimensionally as a 5.56 rifle.  The APC fits into a special niche that other manufacturers have not been willing to go to for many years.  They seem to have forgotten the art of the submachine gun.

The APC is an original B&T design.  The inspiration for this came from Karl Brügger himself who saw the need for this type of weapon from the success B&T has experienced with the MP9.  “We noticed that that the market is not yet filled.”  Mr. Brügger explained, “In spite of the introduction of new calibers such as the 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm, many users still demand the 9x19mm.  As a matter of fact some are even asking for the .45 ACP…” (…more on that later…)  B&T also was able to hire some great engineering minds to work on the project, men that have many years experience in the small arms field.  The final reason was that the B&T management team thought it would be a fun exercise to make an interesting new product.

From a marketing point of view B&T set out from the beginning to create a high quality, modern, price competitive submachine gun in the 9mm caliber with the potential for other calibers.  It needed to have full modularity and flexibility to accept all types of 9mm ammunition from monobloc, hollow points, frangible, subsonic and even very lightweight bullets that are still found in Europe.  Many readers will immediately say that the 9mm is nothing in terminal ballistics when compared to the 5.56mm caliber.  The answer is that you are correct, however most police agencies the world over are led and managed by civilians who feel a 5.56 cartridge in an urban environment is just too much energy considering the much higher population density that exists in Europe and many countries in Asia.  The police agencies in these countries were the target markets.

One might also say that the capacity to penetrate a bullet proof vest is also limited with 9mm ammunition.  Here again one can get the feeling that is true when one compares standard Full Metal Jacket (FMJ) projectiles.  There are, however, a multitude of armor piercing 9mm rounds available to qualified users.  For example the Swedish m/39B will easily go through 50 layers of Kevlar and still keep going.  The mass of the 9mm bullet will be more in the body thus creating damage of a known quantity.  There also is the fact in many countries worldwide it is illegal for a non authorized person to posses a bullet proof vest much less even getting caught wearing one.  The penalties can be as draconian as having an illegal weapon.  Finally, NATO has been in combat for over ten years now.  Over the past decade the author has debriefed, discussed with and spoken informally with many NATO soldiers who have been deployed in the SWA Theater.  Many of these have been assigned to various Special Forces units.  In all cases none of these soldiers remember shooting or seeing the bodies of any insurgent or even hearing reports of any terrorist wearing a bullet proof vest.  There have been cases of NATO soldiers having to shoot persons wearing a bomb vest but not a bullet proof vest.  In all objectivity, the argument for the urgent need for all soldiers or police having a weapon that will penetrate a bullet proof vest is a bit over-stated in the popular media when compared to the actual incidents.

The APC had to accept all types of accessories straight out of the box without any further investments in extra rails or mounts.  The barrel had to be ready for mounting a suppressor.  There is then no need for an agency to spend more money for rails, or mounts to get the weapon ready for use.  The weapon comes complete with an Aimpoint TL1 Optic, single point sling, cleaning kit and Quick Detachable (QD) vertical handgrip.  The only option an operator really needs is a tactical light which B&T has recently introduced with the cooperation of In Force.

The operating system is a straight blowback function.  It fires from the closed bolt and on the last round the bolt will stay open thus facilitating quick reloads.  This overcomes one of the major issues with the MP5 family of weapons.  This one design feature will decrease by 50% the amount of time it takes to perform a tactical reload as compared to an MP5.  It is almost as fast as with a handgun.

The top of the weapon has an aluminum NAR (NATO Accessory Rail) integrated into the top receiver.  The primary sighting device is the Aimpoint TL1 which comes standard with the weapon.

There are NAR rails on the 3, 6 and 9 o’clock positions.  The lower rail is machined aluminum while the lateral rails are made of the same polymer material as the trigger housing.  The reason for this is that it is more likely that the rail in the 6 o’clock position will be used with a sighting device such as a laser, whereas the side rails will probably be used of illumination devices which do not require maintaining zero.  The sling mounting point on the APC9 is just where it should be, where the stock and receiver meet.

The Aimpoint TL1 is the Mil-Spec.  It is one of the lightest and most technically advanced parallax free red dot sights currently produced.  Aimpoint originally invented the concept of the red dot sight.  The sight has no magnification and is powered by one 3V Lithium CR2032 battery which will produce 50,000 hours (5 years) of continuous service.  It is submersible to 25 meters and the weight is only 105 grams.  The only feature that this sight doesn’t have over the standard T1 has is that it does not have a NVG setting.  It comes standard with the B&T QD mounting system.

B&T chose this optic for various reasons.  The most important reason is that it can withstand all the Mil-Spec tests that the gun goes through.  It is a very tough sight.  Simply put, the TL1 is part of the system and if the optic fails then the system fails and thus the weapon fails.  B&T just didn’t want to risk having a failure because of choosing a cheap or substandard optic.  Aimpoint sights are so good that since 1997 the company has delivered more than one million Red Dot sights just to the U.S. Army.  This number is even greater if one counts all the other NATO (and non NATO) militaries that have adopted other Aimpoint systems.  The APC9 is NOT available without the TL1.

In the unlikely event the optic should fail for some reason there are integrated flip up emergency sights that are recessed into the top NATO rail.  The rear sight is adjustable but aligns perfectly with the TL1 mounted.  The emergency sights are not exposed when kept in the storage position and thus well protected from abuse and exposure of normal wear and tear of daily handling.

The stock folds very nicely and clips securely into the right side of the receiver when not in use thus making it a very compact 385 mm in length.  There are no extra buttons to press to open the stock; just a small bit of pressure will do it.  When the stock is open the entire weapon is 600 mm in length while producing a 330 mm stock pull. The author feels the stock pull is an important feature because there has been trend for some years now in law enforcement for all officers to wear a ballistic vest or if they are on a special team either a material vest or an integrated ballistic and material vest.  These added layers have drastically reduced the pull an operator requires to effectively manipulate and fire his or her weapon.  This issue is greatly compounded if the operator is a small statured male or a typical female operator.  If the stock is too big then the weapon cannot be easily manipulated.  This is an outstanding ergonomic consideration of the APC to the realities of many modern users.  Karl mentions that an expandable stock is in the pipeline but B&T didn’t want to delay the introduction of the APC9 while the stock is being developed.  Be advised that it is not just an M4 type stock.  It will be a new design that is unique to the APC9 but also adaptable to other B&T products like the GL06 Less Lethal Launcher.

In the 1950s Sierra Bullets introduced its MatchKing, a 168-grain .30 caliber (7.62mm) open tip bullet designed to maximize accuracy.  The open tip design employs a precision deep drawn jacket with lead inserted from the front tip and ogival forming from the open tip mouth.  The result is better manufacturing control and more consistent quality than possible with traditional full metal jacket (FMJ) bullet designs formed from tip to base.

The MatchKing design originated strictly for competitive match.  The open tip’s meplat diameter was kept as small as the manufacturing process allowed to maximize aeroballistic performance.  The dimension is process controlled as a critical dimension and is approximately 0.052” while the actual opening is less than 0.030”.  Minimizing the meplat minimizes aerodynamic drag, preserving velocity, reducing time of flight, and providing a high quality flatter shooting bullet.  The MatchKing’s extremely small aperture stands in contrast to traditional hunting bullet designs that depend on large or skived openings or other enhancements to improve terminal performance.  Throughout the years, Sierra Bullets has recommended against use of the MatchKing bullet for hunting because it was not designed for terminal ballistics.  Sierra’s Reloading Manual (5th edition) states, “The MatchKing bullets are designed for pinpoint accuracy, with no consideration given to what might happen after impact.  If the bullet has arrived on target accurately, its job is done at that point.”

The 168-grain MatchKing was used by the winner in its debut at the 1959 Pan American Games and soon dominated centerfire rifle competition.  Its broad acceptance and proven performance in competition and by civilian law enforcement agencies attests to its success.  As described in this article, military interest in the MatchKing and other open tip match (OTM) bullets, including sniper use in combat, developed slowly due to misunderstandings that persist to this day.

Sierra GameKing bullet (bottom) and MatchKing bullet (top).

The confusion began in 1899 at the First Hague Peace Conference, which adopted a Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets in which governments agreed to abstain from military use of “…bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which do not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions [skiving].”  The declaration was more political than humanitarian, targeting the British .303 caliber Mk. III cartridge with its AL 9402 hollow point bullet in part due to the British War against the Boers in South Africa, notwithstanding the fact that the Mk III was never employed in that conflict.  Abstention in use of such bullets applied only between nations party to the declaration.  If a nation party to the Hague Declaration fought the military forces of a nation that was not a party or “savages,” as non-government forces were referred to in colonial times, no prohibition existed against their use.  Only thirty-four nations became parties to this treaty.  During its negotiation Captain William Henry Crozier, Ordnance Corps, U.S. Army (subsequently Chief of Ordnance, 1901-1918), and U.S. delegation member, argued against the declaration’s condemnation-by-appearance vis-à-vis a bullet’s terminal ballistics relative to other contemporary military bullets.  As will be seen, the error Captain Crozier criticized was repeated with respect to military adoption of the MatchKing and similar OTM bullets over the half century following its introduction.  The United States is not a party to the Hague Declaration, but has acted consistent with it.  Potential functioning reliability issues, particularly in machine guns, discouraged interest in projectile design other than FMJ standard ball.  Lack of military interest evolved into an assumption by many that military use of “hollow point” projectiles is prohibited in all circumstances, regardless of design intent and terminal ballistics.

Confusion existed with respect to MatchKing use because different entities used the same words differently.  Sierra categorized the MatchKing as a “boat tail hollow point” owing to its appearance, that is, its open tip.  The 1899 Hague Declaration does not use the term “hollow point” as such, but “hollow point” became the common lay term to summarize the Hague Declaration prohibition, neglecting the additional criteria that the projectile “expand or open easily” on impact with soft tissue at all distances.

In 1980 I had responsibility for conducting the legal review for new military weapons and ammunition required by the Department of Defense to ensure compliance with our treaty obligations.  The Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) contacted me to ask if it would be permissible for it to acquire the 168-grain MatchKing for competition.  My examination of the MatchKing determined that notwithstanding Sierra’s characterization of it as a “hollow point,” it was not a hollow point in the sense of the prohibition contained in the 1899 Hague Declaration.  Its extremely small aperture stood in obvious contrast to an “expanding bullet” such as the Sierra GameKing.  The GameKing contains a larger aperture than the MatchKing and skiving, that is, cuts to enhance expansion in soft tissue.  Referring to the MatchKing as an “open tip” projectile to get away from the confusion caused by the manufacturer’s description of it as a “hollow point,” acquisition for competition was approved.  The legal review suggested a request for sniper use in combat would be favorably considered.

Left to right: cut-away views of Sierra MatchKing, M80 and Sierra GameKing projectiles.

Military evaluation of the MatchKing (designated) proved its superiority over the 173-grain M118 FMJ projectile that preceded it.  Army tests noted a 36% increase in accuracy with the MatchKing at 300 meters and a 32% accuracy increase at 600 meters.  Marine Corps tests produced similar accuracy figures.  The National Guard determined that the M852 provided better bullet groups at 200 and 600 meters than the M118 under all conditions.

Confusion continued within military circles.  In 1985 the AMU sought assistance from Colonel Martin L. Fackler, Medical Corps, U.S. Army, an experienced combat surgeon and chief of the Army’s wound ballistics laboratory at Letterman Army Institute of Research.  Dr. Fackler’s tests – firing the M852 into ordnance gelatin (20x25x50 centimeter blocks of a 10% weight concentration shot at four degrees centigrade calibrated to reproduce the crush and stretch seen in living animal tissue, a protocol developed by Dr. Fackler widely accepted today) – prompted him to suggest that the MatchKing’s terminal ballistics would be improved by expanding the aperture because M852 terminal ballistics were like those of 7.62mm FMJ M80 Ball.  Dr. Fackler’s suggestion was not accepted.  But his test proved the M852 did not “expand or open easily” as proscribed by the 1899 Hague Convention.  Confusion continued.  In the late 1980s Naval Weapons Support Center Crane procured and tested 7.62 and .300 Winchester Magnum OTM ammunition with specially manufactured polished closed tips for possible sniper training and combat use, based on the belief that the OTM was prohibited for combat use because of its “hollow point.”  Although tests results were positive, Crane officials expressed concern that the projectile might violate the Hague Declaration because of bullet break up at close range, notwithstanding the fact that fragmentation of the polished closed tip M852 was no greater than U.S. military FMJ M80 Ball, and appreciably less than M80 Ball projectiles used by some NATO militaries.

Individuals judging the MatchKing solely on its appearance failed to consider the foundation law of war principle of distinction.  It obligates a government and its military to develop and apply force against an enemy military in a manner that limits risk of injury to innocent civilians.  A well-trained military sniper equipped with a contemporary sniper rifle, including its optics, using the most accurate ammunition, is the epitome of distinction.  A civilian law enforcement agency using something less than the most accurate sniper ammunition could face potential liability were an innocent civilian killed or injured by a police sniper’s shot during a hostage situation, as plaintiff’s attorneys would argue that using less-accurate ammunition was negligent when ammunition with significantly greater accuracy was available.  This rigid standard does not exist in a combat environment.  Nonetheless an important legal obligation was neglected by those who hesitated in requesting approval for combat use of the MatchKing, particularly given the significant increase in accuracy it manifested over the M118.

Caution regarding MatchKing projectile fragmentation was unwarranted.  Twentieth Century terminal ballistics history established that FMJ military rifle projectiles sometimes fragment in soft tissue at distances up to 250 meters, dependent upon velocity, angle of projectile yaw at impact, and similar factors.  Governments have acknowledged and accepted this phenomenon in international conferences over the past four decades, declining to extend the 1899 Hague Declaration’s prohibition beyond bullets designed to “expand or open easily” at every distance.

Hesitation in requesting authorization for M852 combat use faded in 1990 in the lead-up to Operation DESERT STORM, the U.S.-led Coalition effort to liberate Kuwait following Iraq’s invasion.  The request for legal review was answered in the affirmative the same day.  The logistics system was not as responsive.  M852 use in DESERT STORM cannot be confirmed.

The Sierra Open Tip Match on the left and the Sierra GameKing on the right.

The .300 Winchester Magnum 190-grain Sierra MatchKing  (MK 248 MOD 0) was adopted by the Navy in 1993.  In 1993 the Marine Corps identified its expectations for 7.62x51mm accuracy.  U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, Armaments Research, Development and Engineering Center, in conjunction with Lake City Army Ammunition Plant, requested Sierra Bullets to design and build prototype projectiles to meet Marine Corps performance objectives.  The M852 was succeeded in 1997 by the 7.62mm Special Ball Long Range M118LR with 175-grain Sierra MatchKing.  The 175-grain Sierra MatchKing exceeded Marine Corps requirements.  When shooters properly accounted for environmental factors, the 175-grain Sierra MatchKing loaded as the Federal Premium Gold Medal Match reliably struck targets at one mile.

The 5.56mm 77-grain Sierra MatchKing MK 262 MOD 0/1 (DODIC AA53) was fielded in 2000.  Navy (Crane) product improvement programs led to the 7.62 MK 316 MOD 0 Special Ball, Long Range (DODIC AB39), continuing to employ the 175-grain Sierra MatchKing, and the 220-grain Sierra MatchKing .300 Winchester Magnum Match MK 248 MOD 1 (DODIC AB43) in 2008.  In each case wound ballistics tests based upon Dr. Fackler’s protocol, today an integral part of the legal review of new military small arms ammunition, reconfirmed Dr. Fackler’s 1985 conclusion that the terminal ballistics of OTM projectiles are similar to those of FMJ Ball, that is, they do not “expand or open easily” in soft tissue.

Experts in The Netherlands and Switzerland further confirmed the legality of OTM ammunition for military sniper use.  In 2001, a Swiss ballistics expert at the Swiss Low Noise Ballistics Facility described the OTM as a “hollow point that doesn’t perform like a hollow point” with respect to its terminal ballistics.  Today OTM ammunition is offered by a number of manufacturers for law enforcement and military use and has been adopted and employed by other militaries in the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts.  OTM fielding in other calibers, such as .300 Norma Magnum and .338 Lapua Magnum are under consideration.

Misunderstanding through ignorance persists.  In 2006 a U.S. Army sniper approached his ammunition supply point in Iraq to request a re-supply of the M118LR.  The civilian contractor took the ammunition out of its storage space, looked at the marking on the box stating “NOT FOR COMBAT USE” and refused to issue the ammunition to the sniper, instead instructing him to down load less-accurate linked M80 ball for use in his sniper rifle.  The sniper turned to an Army judge advocate (JAG) for assistance.  The JAG agreed with the ASP contractor.  When provided a copy of the 1997 legal review of the M1118LR containing a detailed explanation as to its legality and rationale for approving its combat use, the JAG questioned the legal review’s value because it was “nine years old.”  Legal reviews of weapons and ammunition do not have a “shelf life,” but are “forever” documents.  The situation ultimately was resolved in the sniper’s favor, but not before it gained national media attention.

This incident was avoidable. The “not for combat use” language was placed on OTM ammunition boxes in 1980 when it was approved for military competition use.  When the M852 and M118LR were approved for combat use, no one told the contractor who made the boxes to remove the offending language.  It was deleted when the current box was ordered (illustration, lower right corner).  Confusion bred by ignorance continues in some circles.  An ally recently (and quickly) rejected a private citizen’s assertion that OTM ammunition violated the 1899 Hague Declaration.

The adage “don’t judge a book by its covers” is applicable with respect to the Sierra MatchKing and comparable open tip match projectiles.  Sierra Bullets’ characterization of the MatchKing as a “hollow point” likely exacerbated the practice of judging the projectile based solely on its appearance.  Sierra Bullets has remedied this somewhat by referring to it as “open tip match” in its invoices.  The problem was further aggravated by the failure of many to read and understand the text of the1899 Hague Declaration, and to incorrectly assume that any projectile with a “hollow point” would “expand or open easily” at all distances.  The International Criminal Court limited the prohibition to military use of bullets designed to expand or open easily only when employed to “uselessly aggravate suffering or the wounding effect upon the target.”  In this respect the international community belatedly arrived at the point argued by Captain Crozier in 1899.

“…that’s going to require us to replace an awful lot of gear that’s been used very hard over the last ten years or so.  We know what we need and we‘re going to work with you to get it.”  – Lieutenant General Richard P. Mills, Marine Corps Combat Development Command

Mills, the three-star general who heads the Corps’ concepts and capability command, was offering a glimmer of hope to a large audience of high level defense industry representatives attending the exclusive, invitation-only Report to Industry briefing at the 2011 Modern Day Marine (MDM) Expo.

Report to Industry
A tangible force-multiplier in the effectiveness of MDM’s annual Expo is much more than an ordinary trade show.  The Report to Industry and Marine Corps Systems Command’s Program Director Briefings that immediately follow cover equipment and systems research, development, testing and acquisition programs and policies.  These give representatives of America’s defense industry a clear picture of what today’s Marine Corps is intent on acquiring now and in the near future.

Inside its own large display tent, Marine Corps Systems Command showcased a variety of tools used by “Leatherneck” Warfighters to move, shoot and communicate. SYSCOM’s displays included man-portable missiles for bunker busting, tank killing and anti-aircraft applications. Note the cutaway AT-4, a particularly versatile shoulder-fired slugger. www.marines.mil/unit/marcorsyscom/. (Robert Bruce)

An earlier Report to Industry presenter – among other top Marine generals with unquestioned credibility in analyzing the cold, hard realities of Congressional intent to drastically cut America’s defense spending – had warned of a possible “fiscal Armageddon.”  But these same generals were careful to emphasize that the United States Marine Corps would adapt and overcome to faithfully perform its traditional role as America’s expeditionary warfare force.

Acknowledging the likely demise or restructuring of big ticket initiatives like next-generation replacements for the Corps’ aging tactical rotorcraft and ground vehicles – worn out during a decade of fighting the Global War on Terror – Mills and others made it clear that economical upgrades to items supporting the holy trinity of “move-shoot-communicate” would still find favor.

High-Tech Tent City
Billed as “the world’s largest military exposition focusing on enhanced capabilities for expeditionary forces,” this year’s Modern Day Marine Expo was held from September 27 to 29, hosted once again by Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia.

Co-sponsored by the base, the Marine Corps League, and Marine Corps Systems Command, the 31st MDM showcased the products and services of more than 500 companies that support military land, air and sea operations.

Eerily seeming to float on blue light as the center of attention in FNH USA’s display area, the Ballista Precision Sniper Rifle is said to be under consideration by the USMC. Built to FN specifications by Unique Alpine AG, this modular, magazine-fed, bolt-action rifle can be quickly modified by the operator to fire .308 Winchester, .300 Winchester Magnum or .338 Lapua cartridges. www.fnhusa.com. (Robert Bruce)

Exhibits at this year’s exposition filled three enormous, modern, climate-controlled tents, as well as the spacious outdoor display area, presenting the latest operational equipment and technology, along with videos, models and prototypes of items soon to enter service.

Defense contractors from throughout the U.S. and some allied nations signed on to show their products and services, get feedback from the warfighters, and respond to questions.

Much of the equipment now used by Marines and other U.S. and allied forces confronting enemies in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world was first presented to military leaders, operations planners and acquisition managers at previous editions of the expo.

Because a lot of what was on display included types that can be used not only in military applications but also in law enforcement and counter-terrorism operations, Expo officials issued a special invitation to federal, state and local law enforcement personnel to attend.

“Crossroads of the Marine Corps”
Strategically located just a few miles south of Washington DC, America’s capitol city with powerful lawmakers, the Pentagon, numerous defense contractors and foreign embassies, MCB Quantico is an ideal Expo location.

Sophistication and realism in Rheinmetall’s Vingmate FCS (Fire Control System) Trainer with its computer driven simulation makes for effective and economical training on ammo-intensive 40mm automatic grenade launchers and other heavy machine guns. www.rheinmetall-defense.com. (Robert Bruce)

It is home of the Marine Corps Combat Development Command, charged with developing Marine warfighting concepts and determines the Corps’ capability requirements for doctrine, equipment, organization, training, education and support.

The Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory at Quantico is part of the Development Command and responsible for improving current and future naval expeditionary warfare capabilities for the Marines and their amphibious roles and missions.

Also at Quantico is the Marine Corps Systems Command, principal agency for acquisition and sustainment of systems and equipment for the Marines’ warfighting mission.  Many of the personnel who staff those organizations took advantage of continuously-running shuttle buses to visit the exhibit halls and discuss missions, capabilities and requirements with defense industry professionals.

Warfighters Corner
An excellent innovation, now in its second year at the Expo, is the “Warfighters Corner,” open to all attendees and featuring presentations by Marines recently back from service in combat zones.  Seasoned combat veterans describe what equipment and systems worked best for them, and also provide suggestions and recommendations for how improvements, modifications or replacements might be made to better help Marines survive and win on the battlefield, in seaborne operations and in aerial engagements.

A very good thing gets even better for CQB when the Knight’s Armament M110 Semiautomatic Sniper System rifle (top in the photo) goes leaner and meaner with the M110 Carbine Conversion Kit, designed and built by Knight’s for USMC Special Operations Command. Major components include a quick swap upper receiver group with 16 inch barrel, a tailored sound suppressor and multi-position telescoping buttstock. www.knightarmco.com. (Robert Bruce)

Naturally, we were drawn to the Warfighter topic “Role of the Marine Sniper in Combat.”  Captain A.B. Rozic, officer in charge of the Scout Sniper School aboard MCB Quantico, introduced Gunnery Sergeant K. E. Sutherby who gave a vivid presentation on lessons learned by scout snipers in recent combat actions.   Other Warfighter topics included Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles, USMC Energy, Navy Marine Corps Medical Team, and Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Combat Equipment.

Guns, Ammo, Sights and Accessories
While this 31st annual MDM Expo was jam-packed with more than 500 exhibitors offering the complete range of items needed for expeditionary warfare, SADJ’s mission is to find the best guns and related gear on display that maximize a Rifleman’s ability to put steel on target.

“Every Marine a Rifleman,” is a basic tenet of the Corps that also serves us as a true and steady compass bearing.  There was plenty to catch our attention at dozens of elaborate display booths manned by representatives of the world’s foremost arms merchants.  From ARES to Zeiss, the roster included the most prominent names in small arms as well as several up-and-coming firms.

Weapons and related items for both long range precision shooting and close quarters battle dominated the field this year.  Not surprising given the proven effectiveness of the “one-shot-one-kill” fraternity as well as lessons learned and re-learned from the last decade of unforgiving urban and open terrain combat.

Frank Hance of General Dynamics engages the attention of passers-by, drawn in by the distinctive profile of the XM806 .50 caliber machine gun. Developed as a lightweight replacement for the classic Browning M2HB, it hits the scale at 40 pounds for superior man-portability and significantly reduced recoil that’s easy on smaller vehicle mounts. The quick-change barrel with conical flash suppressor needs no headspace and timing adjustment. www.generaldynamics.com. (Robert Bruce)

What follows here is a photo essay zeroing in on some notable examples of weapons, ammo, sighting devices and mounting systems.  Although space requirements necessarily limit the number of examples shown, a full listing of exhibitors and other information may be found at www.marinemilitaryexpos.com

Honors and Awards
With so many high-level Marine leaders converging on the Expo, it works well to put several ceremonial events on the schedule. When Wednesday’s colorful Enlisted Awards Parade, featuring the crack USMC Drill Team and Drum and Bugle Corps was rained out, the ceremony itself was held indoors. Awards, sponsored by the Capital Marines Detachment of the Marine Corps League, were presented to ten outstanding Marines and one Navy Corpsman.

That evening, the Expo’s Grand Banquet and Awards Dinner was held at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in the Crystal City section of Arlington, VA. Highlights included presentation of the Marine Corps League’s top awards. Major Paul F. Hastings, USMC (Retired), received the Iron Mike Award for his long time distinguished service to the Marine Corps League. Ms. Bonnie Carroll, founder and president of Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, received the Dickey Chapelle Award.

A realistic mockup of the magazine fed rifle/carbine version in the U.S. Army’s Lightweight Small Arms Technologies program. Three belts of ammunition provide a useful comparison of old vs. new fodder for Squad Automatic Weapons. At top is standard steel-linked, brass cased 5.56mm for the M249. Next come two versions of AAI’s experimental, polymer cased, telescoped 5.56mm for the Lightweight Small Arms Technologies’ SAW, offering significant reduction in weight and volume. SADJ has been covering LSAT development for longer than we care to note but persistence may finally be paying off for all parties. Eight AAI’s Squad Automatic Weapon variants, belt-feeding polymer cased telescoped ammo, are said to have done well in the recent Military Utility Assessment at Ft. Benning, Georgia. www.aai.com. (Robert Bruce)

Modern Day Marine 2012
The 32nd annual Modern Day Marine Expo is scheduled for 25-27 September 2012, once again at MCB, Quantico, Virginia.  This is the largest of three related shows where exhibitors meet the Marines on their own turf.

Marine Corps Base, Quantico, VA, is headquarters for the Corps’ combat development center and home to Marine Corps Systems Command, where warfighting requirements are defined and determinations made on equipment and systems to be used by Marines in worldwide operations for years to come.

Marine West Expo, slated for 1-2 February 2012 at Camp Pendleton, CA, and Marine South, 11-12 April 2012 at Camp Lejeune, NC, are held at home installations for two of the Marine Corps’ expeditionary forces, which are continually training and dispatching fighting elements to a broad spectrum of missions – in the air, on land, and at sea – around the world.

Exhibitors at the Marine Military Expos meet and exchange information, face-to-face, with not only the users of their equipment but also the men and women responsible for equipping the Corps, which is rapidly expanding to meet a broad range of existing and emerging demands.

The SR1911 in eye-catching stainless steel is Ruger’s tribute to John M. Browning’s incomparable Model 1911, a .45 ACP hand cannon that U.S. Marines have carried into battle for a century. www.ruger.com. (Robert Bruce)

At the same time, funding for equipment modernization programs to meet the far-reaching, high-tempo operations in which Marines are engaged on a daily basis is increasingly uncertain.  Political pressure from all sides on Marine Corps and Navy budgets will affect not only on the current demands of combat in Southwest Asia but also existing and developing threats in other regions.

In addition to displaying products before thousands of users, Marine Military Expo exhibitors also exchange information with their target audience, listen to their needs and gain valuable insight into what works best in a wide array of combat, combat support and combat service support situations.  Marines who have recently returned from wartime missions not only provide feedback but also convey suggestions and ideas that are often considered and adopted in designing or improving equipment and systems.

The decision-makers and procurement experts exhibitors want and need to meet attend the expos for up-close and personal exposure to the leading-edge equipment, systems and services – solutions – their Marines need for the years ahead.  At the Marine Military Expos, networking opportunities among the buyers, the users and defense industry professionals are unlimited.  Take advantage of those opportunities for your company by exhibiting at the Marine Military Expos:  www.marinemilitaryexpos.com

The XIX MSPO (which is the Polish abbreviation for “International Defence Industry Exhibition”) was held in Kielce, September 5-8, 2011.  For the past decade the show has grown bigger with every year, however the recent Euro crisis downgraded the growth this year.  Nevertheless, there were still 400 exhibitors from 20 countries participating in the show, with scores of foreign official visitors (including for the first time – the European Defense Agency).  Despite the looming general election, internal politics was conspicuously absent from the fair, and the visiting VIPs were of lesser grade than usual.  That latter thankfully – because there was less fuss and security red tape, as well.

Traditionally, the fair was more about the heavy equipment and logistics than small arms, but still the most important players of the European market were all present or accounted for.  Alas, no groundbreaking small arms were shown, though, by domestic or foreign exhibitors.

Bumar Steals the Show
As always was the case in Kielce, the Bumar pavilion, now in center-front Hall C, was the most frequented one, and held the most interesting exhibits.  Bumar – for those not following the European market – is Poland’s leading defense industry holding company, actually owning three quarters of it.  With the exception of the aerospace industry and several independent companies, too big (like intercom specialists WB Electronics, or Huta Stalowa Wola artillery systems supplier) or too small (like up-start specialized equipment trade company Works 11 from Katowice) to swallow – all that goes bang or is connected with things that go bang in Poland is Bumar.

As of 2009, Bumar took over the Future Soldier program, Uhlan 21 – now called the Tytan ISW.  A whole new core business unit called Dywizja Bumar Żołnierz was created within Bumar especially to take care of this very prestigious program, meant to shape the future of the armed forces.  The main companies taking care of the Tytan program are Bumar Żołnierz SA (formerly PCO, the optoelectronics giant), Fabryka Broni Radom-Łucznik (main small arms supplier for the Polish Army), both Tarnow companies: the Zakłady Metalowe Tarnów (machine guns) and OBR SM (sniper rifles), Maskpol SA (NBC protection, ballistic protection and uniforms), aided by non-Bumar entities like WB Electronics and Radmor SA which supply radio and electronic components of the system.  The Tytan, still on a distant horizon right now, will indeed revolutionize the Polish Army, turning soldiers into a net-centric one-man fighting force with full C4I capabilities.  So far elements of the net-warfare system are being created and integrated, as well as modern ballistic and NBC protection, and small arms, including a ground-breaking MSBS-556 Radon modular fully user-configurable battle rifle platform with shared upper receiver for a range of bull-pup and classical configured rifles, different barrel-lengths and other options.  Mockups of 3rd Gen rifles in both configurations were displayed in Kielce, while FB Radom and WAT strive to put it into metal.

OBR SM’s Sniper Rifle Family
Another company taking part in the Future Soldier program is the Tarnow factory – two of them in fact.  A mechanical factory was first established in Tarnow as early as 1917, as a railway stock repair facility, then in 1937 it begun a conversion towards defense industry, within the COP Central Industrial Region concept, but WW2 intervened.  After the war it was rebuilt as a heavy machine gun and light artillery facility, with R&D Center for Machinery (Polish: Ośrodek Badawczo-Rozwojowy Sprzętu Mechanicznego, OBR SM) added in 1971.  The OBR SM was closely interconnected with the parent ZM Tarnow company, and located on the same premises.  In the 1990s they were separated and privatized separately, but then, after some time, both were incorporated into Bumar, and now they form part of the same Bumar’s Division.  ZM Tarnow makes machine guns (GPMGs and HMGs) and automatic cannon, while OBR SM’s specialty became sniper rifles – a novelty on the Polish market, as these were the first ever true sniper weapons to be 100% designed and manufactured in Poland.

The 7.62x51 NATO Bor sniper rifle in its newest integrally suppressed version with the CWKW optical sight from PCO Warsaw.

So far three lines of bolt-action bull-pup configuration repeating rifles are offered, all with Lothar Walther match-grade barrels.  The oldest is the largest one of them – the .50 BMG-chambered WKW Wilk, an anti-materiel rifle introduced into the Army as Tor wz.2004 (Tor being Polish for thorium, a radioactive metal with atomic number 90, as per Polish nomenclature scheme, in which small arms are given cover names of the Mendeleyev table of elements or minerals).  So far less than 100 of these were manufactured and bought by the Army, issued mostly to UOD units for UXO and IED disposal (but rumors have it, that they were already as successful in a counter-sniper application).  Then the Alex line followed, the name coming from Aleksander Leżucha, the series designer.  The Alex has branched into two consecutive rifle lines, the 2008 Bor wz.2008 (Bor for boron, a metalloid with atomic number 5) precision rifle in 7.62 NATO chambering, a two sizes scaled-down Tor.  Last year a “mid-sized” rifle was first presented, in .338 Lapua Magnum, still awaiting acceptance by the Army.  This year another sniper rifle designed in OBR SM has been premiered, still in mock-up form – a semiautomatic SKW-338 bull-pup, the world’s first in this configuration chambered for the .338 Lapua Magnum. So far only the mock-up was exhibited, let’s see what happens, but the rifle’s design is catchy indeed – even if it has a bit of a Barbarella/Buck Rogers streak in it.

LSW Beryl
Despite the opinions that the Beryl wz.96 assault rifle has already hit a stone wall as far as development capabilities, Fabryka Broni keeps the design alive and new branches keep growing on the design tree with each year’s passing.  This time there was an improved prototype of the Beryl Light Support Weapon.  This is a Beryl rifle fitted with a slightly thicker barrel devoid of the classical Kalashnikovian front sight base.  Instead it has a semi-rigid two-piece accessory rail running all along the top, from mid-gas tube to rear sight bracket and then on top of the hinged, stiffened receiver cover – same line, same height all the way.  It was also fitted with a revised receiver, allowing the STANAG magazine adapter to be installed, so that STANAG feed tower Beta-Mags (or any other compatible high-capacity) magazines can be attached to it.  Other than that, the LSW is just another Beryl AR, and can do anything that is needed from a battle rifle, including rifle grenade launching and bayonet work.

PMM portable mine dispenser is a really small device, usually fitted on vehicles and capable of rapidly building a mine barrier in tactical situations. Note part of the Garden of Evil behind the PMM display cube.

Polish Negev?
The fate of the LSW Beryl is uncertain though, as it now has a very powerful competitor.  The LSW program triggered enough interest in SAW/LSW 5.56-caliber weapons to attract IWI of Israel, which proposed that FB Radom take part in manufacturing of the famed Negev SAW – a real, belt-fed machine gun as opposed to a mere machine rifle, like the LSW Beryl.  The Negev hardly needs introduction to the readers of SADJ; it has an enviable track-record so far, serving the Israeli Defense Forces in some of the world’s most difficult environment, fully compatible with the latest ‘sandbox’ deployment environment of the Polish Army.  Polish Negevs – if accepted – would initially comprise 30% of Polish components, with a rising degree of ‘polonization’ along the track.  This was already the case with Radom-assembled Walther P-99s, for which now all metal parts are made in Radom, only the plastic frame being supplied by Walther.  Polish national Police, with over 75,000 P99s already purchased, is the world’s largest force to adopt this successful design – and it shows in mutual Walther-Radom relations.  The newest Walther trigger option, called PPQ, and the new look of the Walther pistol were first offered to Poland two years ago, incorporated in the Rad pistol, with which the FB Radom factory is courting the Polish Army – so far to no avail.

New Start for the Wist-94
The pistol issue continues to linger on in the Polish Army.  The mid-1990s accepted Wist-94/94L pistol was widely criticized for its lack of reliability needed from a life-saving last-ditch self-defense weapon in real warfare conditions.  It was loudly “drummed-out” of the fighting units in Iraq, replaced with its own predecessor, the P-83 Vanad pistol – a Makarov-class (but not Makarov-copy as several misinformed internet sites proclaim it to be) compact semiautomatic chambered in 9×18 Makarov, a cartridge long deemed insufficient for self-defense if in military FMJ hard ball.  However, the troops going to Afghanistan were still armed with the Wist-94 pistols, and soon photos and clips showing stovepipe jams by the magazine full abounded in the Internet, undermining the already low confidence of the troops in their handgun.  Now, after so many years of handing the hot potato to and fro, the manufacturer of the pistol (Prexer of Łódź, a non Bumar-affiliated company) together with the Polish Army’s Materiel Command all of a sudden presented a revolutionary new (considering the previous decade of complete hiatus) version of the Wist-94L pistol.  The “L” in 94L stands for laser.  This was a Special Forces variant with a laser sight pod integrated into the frame in front of the trigger guard.  Now that was en vogue in mid-1990s, but with so many years passed since, the concept became obsolete.  The legacy of the 94L however was a mold for polymer frame with an exchangeable block – both laser and non-laser frames were molded in the same main mold, only the trigger guard/dust cover module was replaced with relevant one.  Now a third “Lego block” was added, with a Picatinny rail instead of the laser pod, allowing accessorizing the pistol with tactical light or light/laser module – or whatever else is needed and can be attached to the rail.  The new frame was the Materiel Command’s requirement, along with the revised magazine follower.  Then the Prexer, on its own, in an unprecedented and surprising bid to product-improve their pistol, decided to press on further with modifications.  The most annoying feature of the original Wist-94 pistol was its diminutive ejection opening, the heritage of the pistol’s designer’s misguided attempt at creating a “dust-free” weapon, instead of dust-proof.  The idea was to seal off the dust by minimizing the size of openings, instead of making the pistol withstand the dust intake and still operate.  The outcome was an ideal stove-pipe jam factory, with multiple spent case rebounds, resulting in re-feeding the empty shell base first into the chamber – and thus creating an extremely dangerous, hard-to-clear in the field failure.  Now the new version radically cures the situation by enlarging the ejection opening almost threefold while at the same time changing the lock-up method to more “dust-friendly.”  The original pistol had a modified closed Browning locking cam with locking ribs on top of the barrel – almost an ideal copy of the CZ 75 design.  Now it is locked into the ejection opening, Glock-style.  Whether it would cure the ailments of the original design we’ll see in the near future, after the military testing is over.

For the last 15 or so years, the AR-10 has seen a rebirth from the dust on the floor of the former Ordnance Corps.  With the lack of vision and judgment which would eventually be their demise and have their doors shut forever by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara “Tomorrows Rifle Today” wound up being “Today’s Rifle Yesterday!”  It would be Gene Stoner who would resurrect the AR-10 from the dead with the assistance of C. Reed Knight, Jr.  With the introduction of the SR-25 sniper rifle the industry would experience a shift in what a sniper rifle really was.  The very foundation of it having to be bolt action to achieve sniper grade accuracy came into question with the SR-25, which has now led to other companies coming online with their own AR-10 type rifles.  The next company to follow Knights Armament Company would be Eagle Arms, soon to become ArmaLite, owned by former Army Ordnance Officer Mark Westrom, and the name AR-10 was back main stream.  Westrom manufactures outstanding 7.62x51mm AR-10 rifles in many configurations at some of the best prices for a rifle made with no compromises.  Westrom manufactures separate upper receivers to offer his customers to fire the new .338 Federal as well as the .243 Win. and .260 Rem. calibers.

Now we go to the next evolution of the AR-10 weapon system, a Generation 3 if you will.  The father of this generation would be a name that is very common on the military, law enforcement and commercial market.  A company which is an OEM manufacturer for some of the finest companies in the Defense business as well as directly for the U.S. government.  Mr. Karl Lewis, President of Lewis Machine and Tool (LMT) of Milan, Illinois the designer of the MRP.  Previous articles have been written on the MRP or Monolithic Rail Platform which Lewis introduced to the market in late 2003.  Lewis was the first to produce a true monolithic or 1-piece upper receiver.  Technically speaking, he still does.  There are two others referred to be as one piece uppers.  The upper produced by Colt Defense has a removable lower handguard, which only makes it two pieces and the ArmaLite SPR 1, which has one piece for the barrel assembly and continuous top rail, but the rest of the handguard is manufactured of different rail segments.  The LMT MRP is one piece all the way.  There is no removable handguard.  The grenade launcher and accessories mount directly to the rail, never touching the barrel.  What also sets the MRP apart from the rest is that the barrels can be removed and replaced within a minute or two by the user.  Not only do you have the ability to put a different barrel length or configuration you can also change calibers with the turn of two little bolts.  In the standard MRP you can go from 5.56mm to 6.8mm SPC or even to the .204 Ruger.  If the market should request it, the rifle barrels could also be chambered for 7.62x39mm, 6.5 Grendel, .499 LWR and 5.45x39mm.  Not only do we now have different barrel lengths and caliber but how about operating systems?  The MRP can be converted from a direct gas to a piston operated system by removing the barrel and changing out the bolt carrier and buffer.  The MRP is that modular, the same upper receiver for multiple barrel configurations, multi calibers and convertible operating systems.

The LM308MWS has proven itself on the battlefields of Afghanistan with the British Army as the L129A1 Sharpshooters rifle. This rifle makes an excellent mid-range sniper rifle out to 1,000 yards depending on the skill of the shooter.

What we are focusing on here is the larger MRP based on the timeless AR-10, the LM308MWS.  This program began in 2009 when the British Ministry of Defense (MOD) put out an urgent requirement for a marksman rifle for use in the Global War on Terror in Afghanistan.  The Taliban were able to engage British soldiers at much longer ranges than the British troops could engage them with their 5.56mm L85A1 rifles.  Lewis was approached by Law Enforcement International of the UK and told about the requirement.  Lewis went on to develop his 7.62x51mm caliber MRP to compete for the prestigious contract with the British Army.  Already being the underdog, he was to compete with Knights Armament Company, Heckler & Koch, FN, Saber Defense and Oberland Arms.  These are companies who have much experience in the manufacturing of 7.62x51mm rifles.

Lewis redesigned his MRP to accept the 7.62x51mm cartridge.  The barrels were removable in the same fashion as the previous.  The rifle was required to shoot ball ammunition with precision accuracy, unlike the American M110 which is designed for M118 and M118LR match grade ammunition.  The original barrel length manufactured and chosen for the trial was the 16-inch barrel with a 1 turn in 11.25-inch twist which is ideal for the 147 grain Radway Green 7.62x51mm NATO ball round.  The 7.62 MRP does not have the unnecessary forward assist assembly but maintains the fired cartridge case deflector.  Quad Mil-Std 1913 rails with QD sling mounts on the front of the rail on the 3, 12 and 9 o’clock positions as well as the rear of the 3 and 9 o’clock rail.  The charging handle was modified to keep gases away from the shooters face by having the ends hang down over the sides of the charging handle.

The bolt carrier group originally was the standard M110-type, which is a chrome plated bolt and carrier.  The bolt was fired with a proof cartridge and then magnetic particle inspected.  After passing, the bolt was marked MP to signify passing the test.  The ejector is enhanced over previous designs; the spring is much longer giving more ejection force.  The carrier itself has a captive firing pin retainer pin which is an awesome enhancement considering it is the easiest lost part of the group.

Machine guns today are generally defined as firearms that shoot automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.  This modern definition has come about due to the development of such a weapon as pioneered by Hiram Maxim and John Browning and is subsequently used for all weapons that employ this mechanical means in firearms today.

Before Hiram Maxim invented the truly automatic system of feeding, loading, firing and ejecting continuously with just a single function of the trigger, “machine gun” was a term applied to a weapon that provided these functions albeit in a manual mode of operation.  In reality, the evolution of automatic weapons really began before the introduction of gun powder.  From earliest times, there has been a continual attempt to augment firepower by mechanical means.

These early machines included trebuchets, catapults, ballistas and siege engines.  These machines threw projectiles ranging from rocks and stones, dead animals, putrid corpses to convey pestilence and various flaming projectiles, to a fusillade of javelins and arrows.

While these were large crew served weapons, there was mechanical development in the individual combatant’s weapons to increase firepower, range and lethality with the crossbow being a good example that evolved into a weapon firing a number of arrows.  One could say that a general definition of an automatic weapon in these early days would be a weapon capable of discharging a number of projectiles in a short space of time, either simultaneously or in rapid sequence.

In order to study the evolution of the modern automatic weapon from its crude beginnings, it will be necessary to separate automatic weapons into four general classes with the advent of gunpowder.

• Organ Guns – machines designed for the simultaneous discharge of more than one projectile.
• Repeating and Bolt Action Guns – with the design of magazines and repeating weapons to fire in sequence.
• Hand Powered “Machine Guns” – a gun operated by hand power applied to a suitable mechanism by which cartridges are loaded, fired, extracted and ejected: the cycle continuing as long as the mechanism is worked and there are cartridges to feed the gun.
• The Modern Machine Gun – a design which automatically performs the entire cycle of operation by virtue of the forces produced by the discharge, either by blowback, recoil or expansion of powder gases.

This article will deal with elements of the first three classes of weapons.

Two sailors fire the 37mm Hotchkiss Revolving Cannon on a naval deck mount.

Organ Guns
Organ Guns (or War Carts) were primitive, yet effective, multi-chambered and multi-barreled monstrosities.  As early as 1339, a firearm called the Ribauld, or Ribauldequin, was mentioned as a having several iron tubes that were arranged to fire stone projectiles simultaneously.  This weapon was purportedly used to good advantage by Edward III in one of England’s wars with France by blasting an opening in the unyielding ranks of heavily armored pikemen who were to keep the cavalry from the bowmen.

These muzzle-loading battery guns had their barrels arranged in a side-by-side arrangement in a massive wooden frame that led to them being called “Organ Guns.”  When the iron ball projectile came into use in 1381 replacing pebbles and stones, many new variations of the Organ Gun were developed, all in an effort to deliver a great quantity of projectiles in a concentrated area all at one time.

In 1382, the army at Ghent had 200 battery guns.  A design constructed in 1387 had 144 barrels grouped in batteries of twelve allowing twelve salvos of twelve balls each to be fired.  In 1411, the Burgundian army had 2,000 battery guns at their disposal.  Louis XII (1498-1515) is reported to have used a gun having 50 barrels arranged to be fired in a single volley.

Obviously, these weapons were clumsy and difficult to transport and could be termed only a moderate success.  Though all the barrels could be fired in a single volley or in rapid succession, long periods of inaction due to the manual muzzle reloading of each barrel negated the advantage of momentary volume of fire and were thus employed in an auxiliary or supporting role due to its inability to deliver sustained fire.  Nevertheless, their volume of fire was in great demand and used in many theaters of operation throughout Europe.

The 3rd Battalion London Rifle Volunteers with their new six barrel improved Gatling in the mid 1890s.

Though there were many variations as to arrangements of barrels and mounting, the only improvement on these weapons was the train of ignition from one barrel to another.  It was shortened in order so that all the barrels could be fired simultaneously or as nearly as simultaneously as possible.

Puckle’s “Defense” Gun
Further development of rapid-firing weapons stagnated due to a lack of technological advancement, particularly in ignition.  In the beginning, the practical system of ignition was a manually applied slow-match or fuse.  From the thirteenth to the sixteenth century, the slow-match continued to be the primary means of ignition though improvements were made to the application of this method; though fire was still required for ignition.  From the sixteenth century to 1807, an era of mechanical means of producing fire evolved using friction of flint upon steel to produce a spark.  Wheel-lock and flintlock mechanical methods were prevalent at this time but they did not lend themselves to producing any new revolutionary advancement in rapid fire development.  There were many ideas presented by a variety of inventors, and, perhaps a single working model was built, but no guns were ever actually put into production – with one exception.

In 1717, James Puckle demonstrated his gun, called the Defense, to the English Board of Ordnance and a patent, number 418, was granted in London on May 15, 1718, on a single barreled gun with a revolver-like mechanism that allowed a semblance of rapid fire operation.  In a demonstration in 1722, Puckle’s gun fired 63 shots in seven minutes; a truly remarkable performance at this time period.  The English Board of Ordnance remained unimpressed and no further action was taken on their part.  Nevertheless, Puckle’s Defense gun actually went into production, an example is extant, and is historically important for a number of reasons.

The machine gun that we recognize today had to have a genesis in concept.  While Puckle’s gun is nowhere near what we now have today operationally, it did contain certain aspects that are worth noting particularly with its mount.  The gun operated using a flintlock ignition system on top of the cylinder.  A crank arrangement at the rear of the cylinder tightened the cylinder up against the barrel.  When tight, the flintlock was activated, igniting the charge in the chamber and expelling the bullet.  The crank was unscrewed loosening the cylinder, which was turned to present the next chamber to the barrel.  The screw handle was tightened and the gun was ready to fire again.  When all the chambers were empty, totally unscrewing the crank allowed it to be removed, the revolving chambers removed, and a fresh, loaded set replaced.  A particularly odd feature of the Puckle gun is that the inventor provided two sets of chambers for his gun.  One provided for shooting square bullets for use against Turks and the other shot round bullets for use against Christians.

The Puckle gun was really a flintlock revolver that could fire 63 times in 7 minutes. Shown below the gun is the chamber for square bullets for use against Turks. Mounted on the gun is the chamber for round bullets for use against Christians.

The primary weakness of the Puckle gun was the employment of a flintlock system of ignition.  On a more positive note, what is particularly interesting is the mounting system employed that is very much reminiscent of tripods used almost two hundred years later.  The legs are prevented from spreading beyond their intended width by use of a chain, solid rods connected to the legs and center post are used for holding the legs in position and the elevation mechanism of a guided metal arc has been subsequently used on a number of more modern weapons.

Once again, reliable mechanical development was hindered until the advent of percussion caps in the early 1800s, and in the next 75 years following the percussion cap patent, more was accomplished in terms of design, development and performance of firearms in general than at any time in all of history.

An interesting historical side note is that in 1829, Samuel L. Farries of Middletown, Ohio received a patent for a repeating cannon that had been in use since the War of 1812, and has the honor of receiving the first “machine gun” patent by the U.S. Patent Office.  The term “machine gun” was used and assigned to imply any mechanically operated weapon of rifle caliber or larger, regardless of whether the energy necessary for sustained fire is derived manually or from some other power source.

During this period, there was an abundance of ideas of how to make a machine gun “work,” including the use of steam and gas.  Some did actually work but were too impractical and complicated.  But it was the continued work on ignition that dictated the mechanical future of automatic weapons, and it was the advent of incorporating the detonating cap as an integral part of the fixed cartridge in 1856, and the first true metallic cartridge with a center fire primer and an inside anvil invented by George W. Morse in 1858 that set the stage for machine gun development.

Arms & Security Kyiv is the Ukraine’s yearly military, police, and hunting show.  It is a smaller show than the big internationals, but it is well attended.  The first day was a lot of Ukraine military with a smattering of Russian military as well.  The next two days were comprised of military and police attendees in civilian clothing, and civilian hunting enthusiasts.  There were quite a few knowledgeable people about small arms, with their orientation towards the old Communist Bloc weaponry.  However, the Western influence can be seen in many designs, with European weapons from FN Herstal and B&T moving into the military and LE communities.

In the Ukraine, private ownership of handguns is difficult if not impossible for most.  Ukrainians as a whole are very interested in handguns, so to adjust to the “no real bullets” laws, most self-defense handguns are made to fire special caliber rubber bullets in .45 and 9mm calibers.  These are classified as “Traumatic pistols.”  At the show, most handguns could be seen in both standard and “Traumatic” configurations.

The indigenous arms industry appears to be doing well, with a number of quality manufacturers up-grading or modifying older designs, and adapting to the world market.

Tactical-Systems from Kyiv is a distributor of law enforcement and military products that represents many international firms. Two of their mainstays are B&T in Switzerland, and FN Herstal, whose products are shown. The Tactical-Systems booths were packed for the entire show with attendees.

This AKS74U rifle in 5.45x39mm has received a number of upgrades including rail forend, EOTech optic, side-folding M4 type collapsible stock, and this interesting suppressor from Tactical-Systems in Kyiv. (www.tactical-systems.com.ua)

482 Engineering does ballistic testing and design work for many military applications. Testing against all kinds of projectiles and threats is done at their facility, as evidenced by the various calibers/materials shown in the display.

Mayak is a Ukrainian arms company that works on numerous small arms, but the two most interesting pieces shown at the show were the KM-7.62 and KT machine guns as well as the soft ammo pouch for them. These are improved PKM and PKT machine guns and both are lightened significantly. The 200-round hanging soft pouch was of great interest. (www.mayak.com.ua)

Thermal Vision Technologies is a Ukrainian company and most of their products are offered in the 324x256 resolution range, however, some are offered at 640 x 512. The Archer TSA-5 thermal optic is shown on the rifle to center of the booth. Thermal Vision Technologies works with Lahoux Optics for their sources. (www.tvt-thermal.com) and (www.lahouxoptics.com)

A Ukrainian girl with the FORT-206 sporting rifle. This is a Russian made AKM with a collapsible stock, rail forend, EOTech optic and is semiautomatic in 7.62x39mm. She was with several friends and was overheard to mention “Facebook” as they were taking her picture.

The Czech arms industry made a great impact in 20th century weaponry history with a large range of remarkable products.  Probably the most original of them all was a “special submachine gun” named the Skorpion, a successful effort for covering the gap between service pistols and traditional submachine guns chambered in pistol cartridges.  The Skorpion, in its initial, less powerful caliber, i.e. 7.65mm Browning (.32 Auto), has not met modern security unit’s requirements for some years, much less that of the armed forces; nevertheless its position as a globally respected legend has not been changed by this in any way.  It is therefore no surprise that Česká zbrojovka a.s., the manufacturer of the Skorpion, registered the name Scorpion as a trade mark in the 1990s and that it is currently using it now for the third generation of compact automatic weapons made in the town of Uherský Brod.

At the beginning of the initial Skorpion development was an interest of the then Czechoslovak Ministry of Interior in “a special submachine gun for service purposes” in cal. 7.65mm Browning (.32 ACP), which would be suitable both for so called special security activities, and for unified armament of the State Security and Public Security members.

Let us recall that the State Security (StB) was the secret political police of then socialist Czechoslovakia and the Public Security was the Czechoslovak version of uniformed police; under “special security activities” it is again necessary to look for intelligence and counterintelligence activities.  What kind of automatic weapon could suit such different requirements?  The Czechoslovak Ministry of Interior had about it a surprisingly clear vision, which it summarized in 1958 in the following requirements:

– cal. 7.65mm Browning (.32 ACP),
– weight 1 to 1.2 kg,
– overall length with shoulder stock folded 250 mm,
– overall length with shoulder stock extended 440 mm,
– height with pistol grip 150 mm,
– effective range of fire 100 m,
– two types of magazines – one for 8 to 10 rounds, the other for 20 to 25 rounds.
– besides fully automatic fire there should be provision to shoot also in single shots so “that this SMG could also fulfill the function of a pistol.”

It is obvious that such a clear and original vision had to go through a comprehensive research and analysis phase, the content of which we can only guess.  An interesting detail was the caliber chosen as it is highly unusual for an automatic weapon and additionally not quite suitable due to its relatively low performance and cartridge case with protruding head rim.  From today’s perspective one wonders if the choice of the 7.65mm Browning (.32 ACP) cartridge, which is often considered to be the greatest shortcoming of Skorpion submachine gun, what the Ministry of Interior had in their explicit intentions.  This cartridge on one hand represented a standard pistol caliber of the Czechoslovak Security Forces, and on the other hand it had several features which were ideal just for “special security activities.”  And just for this reason even the Czech Army did not mind it – but more about this later.

Task for Mr. Miroslav Rybá et al
In the first half of the 1950s within the centralization of the nationalized industry in Czechoslovakia came the end of the famous independent design offices of individual arms factories.  Instead, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia decided to build a large specialized research and development centre, which was initially named Konstrukta Brno (after its place of residence in the City of Brno) and by the end of 1955 the elite of the Czechoslovak design engineers concentrated there dealt with military weapons and ammunition up to 30mm and anti-tank recoilless weaponry.  (Concurrently there was formed a small design centre in Prague specializing in the development of civilian firearms.  This centre however lost its independence quite quickly.)

New strict rules on confidentiality have been put into force for contracting weapon development and, besides other things, it has been out of question that the Ministry of Interior itself would address relevant design centre.  The application should first have to be submitted to the Czechoslovak Ministry of National Defence (MND), and in the case of the future Skorpion submachine gun this happened in the fall of 1958.  Relevant experts from MND found this idea of their colleagues from the Interior very interesting and the decision had been made that after production commenced, the purchases would also be by the Czechoslovak Peoples Army.  For the start, military personnel claimed only a small number of units for their intelligence units, however right in the beginning they came with important comments, observations and requirements, which had a substantial influence on the final version of the Skorpion.

The requirement of the Ministry of National Defence to produce a “special submachine gun” (among soldiers also known as “multi-purpose”) was sent to the Brno firearms research and development centre at the time when the engineers on the site were swamped with work.  All the senior engineers were busy completing other projects, such as the UK vz. 59 multi-purpose machine gun or the vz. 58 submachine gun (which in fact was and is the assault rifle, but the Czech military terminology did not accept this term at that time).  Due to their overload, the task to develop a new special submachine gun was assigned to Ing. Miroslav Rybář (1924–1970) who worked at the small-bore arms design department.  This turned out to be an extremely fortunate decision.

Ing. Rybář was a talented engineer with exceptionally deep technical skills and credentials from civil and military area.  He had been involved in firearms design since 1948, but had until then served only as a team member, supervised by senior engineers.  The Skorpion was to be his first individual project, the pinnacle of his career that, unfortunately, ended prematurely.

Unlike previous generations of firearms designers, who considered mathematical calculations a dull part of their work and delegated them gladly to others, Rybář started with a comprehensive theoretical analysis.  In fact, he wrote his doctoral thesis on the Skorpion, and presented it successfully at the Military Technical Academy in Brno in 1958.  With such a sound background, the development of the new type of a special submachine gun, aptly named Skorpion, proceeded really fast: lasting only from February 1959, to summer of 1961.

It is worth mentioning that although Rybář was undoubtedly the main architect of this new weapon he was not alone who was involved in this project.  The team counted as many as 13 engineers and we have to mention above all Otakar Galaš (1904–1968).  Galaš was well known as a designer of hunting and sniper rifles (the most famous worldwide being ZG 47 rifle).  Galaš contributed substantially to the development of the Skorpion – not only he was in charge of the sound suppressors’ elaboration and the weapon’s accessories, but having enlarged the barrel bore twist rate he also satisfactorily solved the accuracy of the 7.65mm Browning (.32 ACP) cartridge at distances between 25 to 150 m.  Moreover he became an excellent advocate of the new weapon.  Galaš found a very original way of demonstrating that the Skorpion could be carried covertly underneath one’s clothing: he came to a meeting bringing the submachine gun stuck in the shoulder holster underneath his jacket without anyone noticing it.  During the meeting, when he suddenly opened his jacket and took out the gun, there was no doubt that the Skorpion was suitable for concealed carry.  Jiří Čermák (1926–2006), another legend among firearms designers, who had his name indelibly recorded in the history of weaponry with already mentioned vz. 58 submachine gun, also helped Rybář with this project.  Although Čermák did not work on the Skorpion directly, he was the co-author of one small, but very smart structural element and he claimed the key idea of implementing rate-reducing mechanism.  However, the practicalities of design engineering were taken over by Rybář.

Between Pistol and Submachine Gun
The outcome of Rybář and his team work was a weapon that combined in a unique way the features of both submachine gun and pistol.  The common feature with the submachine guns was first of all the blowback (unlocked) breech, a magazine located in front of the trigger guard and folding stock that enabled shooting from the shoulder.  At the same time the Skorpion used the same cartridge as pistols, and to the certain extent, it was provided with a similar hammer-striking mechanism and the option to fire with the bolt in the forward position, which rendered shooting much more accurate when firing single shots.

For shooting in bursts, the high rate of fire and the muzzle climb were successfully tamed by the mechanical rate-reducer, which provided full control of the weapon also in the automatic mode.  (A certain role has to be attributed also to the weapon’s weight, which slightly exceeded initial requirement by the Ministry of interior, but still with a little exertion enables efficient single-hand hold and with centre of gravity moved forward.)  Various rate reducing mechanisms had been known before, but Rybář´s patent belongs to the ones which were particularly well designed – quite simple be it in design or manufacturing process and at the same time absolutely reliable.

The basic version of the Skorpion was at the end covered by five Czechoslovak patents on behalf of Rybář.  Another four were registered for the following development of variants in other calibres, one of which was additionally used in the series production.  Apart from the rate reducer, the patents covered the technical solutions of the shoulder stock, the trigger mechanism, the spring–loaded bolt stop, and so called retaining plate of the trigger unit which prevented hammer stop pin from falling out (co-author J. Čermák).

The original concept was applied particularly to the wire shoulder stock made from aluminium alloy.  The actual folding was realized around the rear part of the trigger unit with option for easy shoulder stock removal.  The length and stiffness of the shoulder stock due to the weapon compactness are in the limits of practical applicability, nevertheless, the manner of fixation and release in both utmost positions made for a wonderfully simple solution.  Ingeniously, the simple way of unfolding shoulder stock is with a single strike of the palm from the non-shooting hand, from below to the butt, whereupon the rest of the work is smoothly and reliably done by the shoulder stock pin spring, it is hard to find any comparisons.

“Don’t underestimate your enemy.  They know the land and spend all day preparing to kill you.  Whenever you’re tired of training and rehearsing, ask yourself if the enemy is resting.”  – Sergeant Matt Yohe, Instructor, MSOS Advanced Sniper Course.

Sgt. Yohe speaks with authority based on personal experience from months of serious operations as a MARSOC sniper with the Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force – Afghanistan against hardened Taliban forces fighting on their home turf.  This tall and rawboned 29 year old fits most anyone‘s idea of a battle-hardened Marine, the product of eight years in the Corps’ most hard-charging units including 2nd Recon Battalion before his assignment to 2nd Marine Special Operations Battalion

He also typifies the quality of the combat experienced Marine operators who are hand-picked for instructor duty at Marine Special Operations School.  According to MARSOC sources, they come from Marine Special Operations Teams after two deployments or more, and are nominated by their Battalions.

SADJ met and talked at some length with Yohe and several other instructors during our visit to MSOS, MARSOC’s “Schoolhouse” at Camp Lejeune’s historic Stone Bay.  These NCOs are an impressive lot who exemplify the right stuff by appearance, demeanor and no-nonsense interaction with outsiders.

Victoria per Scientiam
Marine Special Operations School is a regimental level command, formally activated in June 2007 but already operational months earlier.

Its distinctive unit crest evokes the heritage of WWII Marine Raiders in a blue shield emblazoned with five stars, an iconic Fairbairn-Sykes stiletto fighting knife and a motto in Latin that translates to “Victory through Knowledge.“

7 April 2009, Reno, Nevada. This photo puts us shoulder-to-shoulder with an operator from MARSOC’s 2nd Marine Special Operations Battalion as he hammers silhouette targets with precisely aimed shots in rapid fire during Dynamic Assault training drills at the Washoe County Regional Shooting Facility. MSOS instructors provided SADJ with identification of his gear and weapons from head to toe: Peltor headset for MBITR radio, 5.56mm M4A1 SOPMOD Carbine with 14.5 inch barrel and telescoping buttstock with battery compartments, EOTech SU-231 reflex sight, PEQ-15 or LA-5 laser aiming module, SU-233 white light, Grip-Pod foregrip with drop-down bipod, M45 MEU-SOC .45 cal. pistol in Safariland 6004 1911 holster, Eagle Industries body armor load carrying system. (USMC photo by Lance Corporal Stephen Benson)

Most of its initial training cadre was composed of elements transferred in from the Special Missions Branch of the Marine Expeditionary Forces Special Operations Training Group.  These skilled and savvy Marine trainers are credited in large part with the amazingly short period from MARSOC’s creation to its first elements being certified by U.S. Special Operations Command as fully mission capable.

MSOS, informally known as the “Schoolhouse,” screens, assesses, selects and trains Marines and Sailors for Special Operations assignments in MARSOC; provides advanced individual special operations training; plans and executes the component exercise program.  It serves as MARSOC’s training and educations proponent and is the link between MARSOC, USMC and SOCOM component SOF schools.  Additionally, it develops MARSOF standards, doctrine and TTP (Tactics, Techniques and Procedures), and serves as MARSOC’s proponent for weapons and optics requirements

MSOS is organized with a Headquarters Company and five branches, each responsible for specific taskings that are critical to MARSOC‘s wide-ranging missions:

• Assessment and Selection Branch is the entry point for personnel seeking to come aboard MARSOC.
• Personnel Recovery/SERE Branch specializes in training programs that maximize survival, evasion, resistance and escape skills.
• Exercise Control Branch develops and executes complex and ever-changing scenarios that challenge and validate mission readiness for MARSOC elements; notably the Marine Special Operations Battalions from teams to tailored task forces.
• Language Branch teaches a wide range of tongues native to locations worldwide from Arabic to Urdu, with emphasis on those common to areas of particular interest to U.S. Special Operations Command.
• Special Operations Training Branch conducts ITC (Initial Training Course) for NCOs and company grade officers who will be assigned as “operators” (properly known as CSOs – Critical Skills Operators) in the Marine Special Operations Regiment and it’s the home for Special Operations advanced and specialty courses

Initial Training Course

The focus of our visit to MARSOC‘s Schoolhouse was Special Operations Training Branch, currently housed in an orderly formation of a dozen or so modular classrooms while construction is underway nearby on a more traditional campus.  There, Lieutenant Colonel Clark Watson, SOTB’s Director, walked us through the high points of the Initial Training Course, a comprehensive SPECOPS basic training program that is the next step following Assessment and Selection for those seeking to become CSOs.

23 October 2008, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. A pair of Marines from MARSOC’s Special Operations Support Group practice M4 Carbine handling and aiming techniques with the Rifle Combat Optic, a 4 power Trijicon ACOG day scope, in preparation for live fire exercises in the Trainers Course of Instruction. “Every Marine is a rifleman” and that goes double for all members of MARSOC. (MARSOC photo by Private First Class Stephen Benson)

It’s broken down into four phases of instruction, practice and evaluation, Watson explained, that require learned skills to be applied under increasingly adverse conditions.

As can be expected, students who have already demonstrated high levels of physical and mental toughness as an entry requirement are pushed much further in the first phase.  Escalating challenges include endurance, functional fitness and highly aggressive combatives.

During these first few weeks of long hours with heavy physical and mental stress, some otherwise “gung-ho” CSO candidates are likely to question if they have the right stuff for the job.  This is, of course, exactly as it must be.

We’re told that amphibious training is often the most difficult for many otherwise tough and capable Marines.  Combat Water Survival Level Two is a prerequisite, but Watson emphasized that the realities of training for waterborne warfare require significantly higher capability.

The Assessment and Selection Preparation Guide emphasizes that swim requirements are done in utilities (fatigue jacket and trousers) but aspirants get a break by shedding their boots.  There’s an “abandon ship” drill requiring a leap into the water from a six meter high platform, a 300 meter swim, ten minutes of treading water, and five minutes of survival float.

But that’s just to get in.  It gets harder and harder in preparation for the course’s amphibious exercises.

Watson also explained that the current class was only the third under the ITC designation and the curriculum had undergone some changes based on input from various sources including student evaluations, operational realities and other factors.  Also, because ITC is open to Marines in all MOSs (Military Occupational Specialties), the first part of the course acts as a sort of abbreviated and intensified version of the Marine Corps’ School of Infantry.