First time trade shows are a bit uncertain for attendees and exhibitors alike.  It’s difficult to determine which start-up shows have a good chance of putting the products in front of the decision makers, before making the financial and time commitment to attend.  Location, time of year, competing shows, all enter into these decisions.  What help’s make the decision is who the promoter of the show is and how their other shows perform.  In the case of ASDA, TNT Productions, Inc. has many other successful shows and two more military shows in the region: BSDA in Bucharest, and GDA in Kuwait.  We expected a good show, and TNT certainly made ASDA worth going to.  Those who took the time to attend are, in the words of one exhibitor, “Plankholders” for future shows.

The City of Split, Croatia, was an excellent choice for a show in the region.  The April weather is wonderful, the sights are breathtaking, the people are hospitable and the accommodations and expenses are very reasonable.  Split is located on the Dalmatian Coast of the Adriatic Sea, and the Croatian heritage is influenced heavily by millennia of interaction with Italy, just across the Sea.  Split is also centrally located to many of the regional military groups, making it readily accessible and providing a good flow of attendees.  The Spaladium Arena is under construction at present, but it provided a nice venue in the working show area and was easy enough to access.

Croatia is expected to enter into the European Union in 2011, becoming the 28th official member of the EU.  They are planning to change currency from the Kuna to the Euro in about 2016.  On 1 April, 2009, Croatia became an official member of NATO.  This has entailed many changes, but the armed forces of Croatia must meet NATO standards, and Croatia has earmarked approximately $4 Billion (U.S. Equivalent) for this process.  The official notice says it all: “The Croatian Armed Forces Long-Term Development Plan 2006-2015, which has been approved by the government, details the acquisitions required to substantially modernize the Armed Forces.  The modernization plans include ongoing and future expected procurements in all 3 major defense sectors: air, land and navy.”  This is a strong motivator for military and procurement personnel to want to meet with NATO item suppliers, and was the foundation that ASDA was built on.  The Adriatic Sea and South Eastern European Region is one of the major regions for expansion for both NATO and the European Union.  The target countries for this event were Croatia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Montenegro, Slovenia, Kosovo, Serbia, Albania and Macedonia.

The Opening Ceremony remarks given by Justin Webb, President of TNT Productions, Inc. (ASDA promoter), introduced the NATO/EU concept to the participants, and laid the groundwork for the show.  Mr. Webb’s group had provided individual country delegate boxes on an upper floor for meetings and preparation, and the delegates from surrounding countries were evident on the showroom floor.  Croatian Prime Minister Mrs. Jadranka Kosor then addressed the attendees, and Croatian President (and Supreme Commander of the Croatian Armed Forces) Mr. Ivo Josipović made an official visit to the show.

This was a tri-service show, with land, air and sea military needs being represented as well as homeland security issues.  The local small arms production was well-developed and exhibited in a professional manner, and those companies with international vision that recognized the coming opportunities in Croatia are sure to benefit from having been “Plankholders” at ASDA.

Generally speaking, TNT hit a home run with this first time show, and most exhibitors we spoke with planned on attending the 2013 edition of ASDA.

Jurana Topić with HS Produkt HS-9 Sub-Compact 9x19mm.

HS Produkt from Croatia had a very busy booth, with a lot of professional interest in the XD pistols.

HS Produkt VHS-D 5.56x45mm bullpup rifle. The VHS-D is 30.9 inches (785mm) long with a barrel length of 19.68 inches (500mm) and 6 groove rifling in a 1:7 inch twist. The claimed 750 rounds per minute from this gas-operated system is consistent with most requirements today, and the VHS uses a rotating bolt locking system.

Mark Westrom, President of ArmaLite, Inc., with the AR-10 Super SASS rifle. ArmaLite was in Croatia pursuing local interest in the 7.62x51mm semiautomatic Super SASS rifle, the AR-30 in .338 Lapua Magnum, and the 12.7x99 (.50 BMG) AR-50A1 bolt action sniper rifle. ArmaLite has now moved into many markets outside of the USA. www.armalite.com

Israeli company Rafael featured their Samson RCWS-30, a remote controlled weapon station with 30mm cannon. The RCWS-30 keeps a low profile package that is non-intrusive into the host vehicle, and provides a -20° to +60° elevation and 360° rotation. www.rafael.co.il

Slovenian company AREX d.o.o. Sentjernej is a manufacturer of metal links for 5.56x45 (M27), 7.62x51mm (M13) and 12.7x99mm (.50 BMG M9). They’ve expanded into plastic versions of those links as well as supplying a variety of plastic blank ammo and drill rounds. www.arex.si

The Chinese are keeping what they consider the best to themselves – their basic weapon systems in the 5.8mm cartridge types.  The Type 05 submachine gun in the 5.8x21mm indigenous caliber is not for export.  This bullpup style polymer based open bolt submachine gun with its integrated but detachable suppressor is accurate, robust, and well thought out.  The export version is called the “JS” submachine gun, and it is in 9x19m.  There are other submachine guns made in China at present.  The Type 85 is an advance on the old Type 64 design with its proprietary 7.62mm cartridge, and the Chang Feng series of submachine guns are active for export and police use.

Chang Feng-designed late model CS06/LS06 submachine gun with suppressor.

The original CS06 submachine gun came from the Chang Feng manufacturing company in China and it was designed with its helical magazine to feed the 5.8x21mm cartridge, but could also use the magazine from the Chang Feng made pistol, the QSZ-92. This feature was dropped on the production model.

During a trip through Southwest Asia, we uncovered a cache of Chinese weapons and were able to disassemble, analyze a bit, and test the CS06 and its suppressor.  We are uncertain of the nomenclature: popular gun lore suggests the LS06 is the suppressor, the Chinese call this the CS06/LS06 model, but we do not know for certain.  The suppressor was an elaborate and overcomplicated design, expensive to machine, and it performed poorly.  Dr. Dater’s initial analysis of how ineffective the design would be was born out in testing.  Lack of time kept us from doing a complete armorer’s photo shoot and video.

Overall, the CS06 was an effective submachine gun platform.  Disassembly was difficult and a bit complex, not near as troubling as reassembly – until we found a manual and discovered the secret in the rear pin system.

The CS06 submachine gun barrel has rows of angled ports that aim gas into the rear entry chamber of the suppressor. Mounting the suppressor is using the lock ring of the can onto the left-hand, standard metric threads.

CS06 Specifications

Caliber:  9x19mm
Length:  591.5mm buttstock extended, 408.5mm buttstock retracted
Weight:  2.3 kg
Mag. capacity:  50 round Helical drum
Rate of fire:  not measured – reported to be 750-850 RPM
Life cycle:  8,000 rounds
Manufacturer:  PolyTechnologies (www.polyinc.com)

Raw sound test results taken on various sound suppressors 
Dr. Philip H. Dater & Dan Shea.

Temp:  83.5/29(F/C)
Humidity:  37.2%
Barometric Pressure:  675(mmHg)
Velocity of Sound:  1,143 ft/sec.
Protocol:  Mil-Std-1474D
Meter:  Larson-Davis 800B
Microphone: Larson-Davis 2530, 1/4 inch Random Incidence
Calibrator:  Larson-Davis CA250 N.I.S.T. traceable calibration and certification

Chinese manufactured (Polytechnologies offers this) CS06/LS06 submachine gun with suppressor above it. Note the 50-round helical drum to contain the 9x19mm ammunition. Charging handle is on the right. The bolt system telescopes around the barrel to shorten the action. A short Picatinny style rail is under the front of the barrel area.

Chinese SMG CS06 or LS06 (Chang Feng family), detachable suppressor, Baseline with no suppressor:

Weapon & Ammunition: CS06 / LS06  9x19mm
Suppressor:  NONE
Weighting:  A
Average of 3 samples:  157.2 dB
1st Round Pop:  -0.3 dB
Average remaining 2 rounds: 157.3 dB (157.0, 157.3, 157.3)
Standard Deviation:  0.14

Chinese SMG CS06/ LS06 (Chang Feng family), suppressor installed:

Weapon & Ammunition: CS06/ LS06  9x19mm
Suppressor:  CS06/ LS06
Weighting:  A
Average of 5 samples:  135.5   dB
Reduction:  21.7
1st Round Pop:  +1.6 dB
Average remaining 4 rounds: 135.2 dB (136.8, 135.0, 136.3, 134.3, 135.3)
Standard Deviation:  0.90

Bumar is now a household name in Poland and one in circulation for over 55 years.  But it was only in the last 10 years that it became a high-roller in Poland’s defense industry as a core company around which a concern of Bumar Group was built.

It all started in 1953 when Bumar Construction Machinery Industrial Union was organized in Warsaw as a state holding company governing construction machinery, manufacturing and trade.  Of course, as was a matter of custom in the Communist Block, ‘construction machinery’ was anything on tracks, especially if mounting a gun.  In other words, it was a cover name for exporting tanks and other military tracked vehicles, built by leading Bumar subsidiary, the Huta Łabędy in Gliwice.  Over the years the emphasis was drifting away from manufacturing – even though Warynski-branded excavators and lifts, as well as tanks, were still manufactured by specialized companies within Bumar especially after Bumar Foreign Trade Enterprise came into being in 1971.  After the fall of Communism, Bumar quickly evolved into a limited liability company and commercialized itself with foreign trade being its main activity.

Polish Defense Industry prior to Bumar Group
In the early 1980s there were as much as 150 enterprises listed as ‘National Defense Enterprises’ (NDEs), while a total of 300 others had some kind of con nections with national defense.  All of these were 100% state-owned, and every nut and bolt they manufactured made its way into the Polish Army or abroad.  The national defense industry development reached its apogee during 1985-1988 when it employed as much as a quarter of a million employees.  At the same time, these were the years when the international political climate warmed, beginning another period of thaw, or détente, between the rival military blocks, with a corresponding fall in defense spending.  The crisis struck the Polish defense industry as early as the late 1980s.  In 1989, a mere year after its peak, the coveted status of NDE has been retained by only 84 plants, compared with 150 in 1985.  At the same time the employment fell from 250,000 in 1987 to just over 180,000, mostly by massive layoffs.

Polish Future Soldier Project, code-named Tytan, is the flagship project by Division Bumar-Soldier, basing mainly on Bumar-Group’s own assets and products: Maskpol’s ballistic and NBC protection, Radom’s small arms, PCO’s optics and Radwar’s C4I.

Political changes started in Poland and eventually leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989, pushed the nation’s defense industry past the edge.  Decomposition of the Warsaw Pact nullified the orders almost overnight, both domestic and Warsaw Pact export contracts.  Export outside the Pact diminished as well, as the traditional buyers like Iraq or Libya, were now almost all blacklisted.  It was very difficult to find new markets – the prices offered ceased to be competitive, the offer was not much attractive, and some of the best, most sophisticated and best selling products had to be discontinued when the co-operation ties within the Warsaw Pact were broken.  Both the managerial and technical cadres knew very little about the realities of the free-market economy, and at the same time had to cope with aggressive marketing moves by both the Western and Russian, Chinese or former Warsaw Pact allies’ industries on the foreign markets.

As early as 1989-1991 the first steps were taken to save the defense industry’s assets, at first by their restructuring and ‘conversion’ – a forced change of scope towards civilian products.  Most of the weaker companies did not survive that phase and there were only 31 NDEs left in 1991, but still employing between them as much as 135,000 people.

The situation started to turn critical for the surviving plants, usually gigantic and at the same time crucial to the national defense capabilities.  Their debts skyrocketed while the highly specialized plants won just token contracts for both domestic and export needs.

Largest recent export success of the Bumar-Labedy – the PT-91M Pendekar, an export variant of the Polish PT-91 Twardy Main Battle Tank, 48 of which were sold to Malaysia.

Then in 1993-1996 another program was implemented, aimed at commercialization and debt restructuring of the most endangered plants.  28 state-owned enterprises were converted into state-owned stock commercial companies while the rest were commercialized with the state retaining their controlling share.  The employment fell to 68,000 in 1997 mostly through group layoffs, companies shedding most of their social and other non-production infrastructure and filial companies being trimmed from the parent company.  But still, remaining companies remained at the verge of economic collapse.  The defense industry was not able to earn their keep as employees were taking part in street protests, often turning into violent riots.  Something needed to be done to galvanize them into new life – and quick.

Bouncing Back
The mid-1990s marked the first signs of a significant turn to the better.  The technological modernization of the Army turned from fashionable figure of speech into a hard necessity with Poland’s entry in NATO became real and imminent ‘before this decade is out’-style plan.  ‘Strategic Government Programs’ (like the HUZAR helicopter gunship, and LOARA self-propelled anti-aircraft system) were launched, aimed at creating or implementing a license-production of the modern armaments programs for both domestic use and export.  Much hope was put into the new combat and transport aircraft contracts for the Polish Air Force, which was deemed to revive the ailing Polish aeronautic industry with foreign investments.  The Land Forces had their own wheeled APC program, and needed new tanks, anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles.  The Navy started their GAWRON-class frigate program as early as the 1980s, hoping to regain a first-order Baltic sea power status with it.  Most of these hopes turned out to be in vain as in this brave new world there really were no free lunches.  Modestly cut orders for the new hardware, as well as overhauls and spares for the old one, although gave some breath to the industry, were too little and too late to let it out of the quagmire on its own.  In 1999 the defense sector netted a combined loss of 149.9 million PLN (ca. 50 million USD), with debts amounted to a staggering 1.575 bln PLN (.5 bln USD).  Only about 30% of the manufacturing capabilities were employed for military production.  Despite numerous declarations the Polish defense industry failed to attract their NATO and EU counterparts into any sizeable co-operation efforts during the latter 1990s.  Such cooperation started only several years later.  At the same time, the effort to privatize the NDEs failed due to lack of interest.  But then in 2001 the government started at long last the long awaited technological modernization of the Armed Forces, while at the same time consolidating (concentrating) the defense industry into capital groups.  This was dictated by the European and American experience of the previous decade, when such development increased the competitive potential of the consolidated companies, while at the same time enabling rationalization of the management, costs and workforce.

SADJ has brought a number of articles on the RPG-7 and its technology and history to our readers.  We’ve covered light armorer work, as well as operational idiosyncrasies, and we’ve dispelled myths perpetuated by a generation of writers and Internet gurus who insist on saying “RPG” means “Rocket Propelled Grenade” no matter how many times it’s explained that this is a recoilless launcher system, with many launchers using rocket-assisted grenades.  This is a fundamental difference in system, not a minor picking point for us firearms techno-geeks.  There are many different capabilities and characteristics to consider in this.

“RPG” stands for “Ruchnoi Protivotankoviyi Granatomyot,” in the case of RPG-2 and RPG-7.  There are different Russian words with the same initials for the true rocket propelled grenades of RPG-18, RPG-22, etc.  In no case does “RPG” represent the English words “Rocket Propelled Grenade.”

Our goal is to educate the small arms community, and especially those going into harm’s way, so that they have a full understanding of the system.  While there is a stigma in the Western press, the NATO and U.S. allies in this world are now using the RPG-7 system more and more.  It is an effective, robust, reloadable and generally easy to use system.  It is entirely worthy of upgrades and operational use.

There are two stories we haven’t done yet at SADJ; identification of the grenades used in these systems, and identification of the weapons that fall into the category of “RPG.”  We decided to start with the launchers, and to concentrate on overall pictures and identifying marks, so that the reader would have the ability to perform fast forensic identification of a unit, hopefully helping solve the questions of where it might have come from.

For the museums and collectors of military pieces out there, here’s another set of items to start tracing down and filling out your displays, as if you didn’t have enough to chase already!  At the end of the RPG-7 section, we have moved further into as many of the weapons called “RPG” whether they are recoilless launcher systems or true shoulder fired rocket launchers, so that the reader can tell what they are, as well as some odd pieces that fit the category but not the nomenclature.

Previous Articles that the Reader Should Reference:

The RPG-7 System Primer by Dan Shea.  (History, some ID, light armorer work.  SADJ Vol. 1, No. 3, 2009)

Rocket Versus Recoilless; A Brief History of the RPG by Paul Newhouse.  (History, operation, good technical understanding of the systems.  SADJ Vol. 1, No. 3,  2009)

A Primer on Shaped Charges by Paul Newhouse.  (History, physics, good technical understanding of shaped charges.  Small Arms Review Vol. 11, No. 1, October 2007)

Rocket Launchers & Recoilless Rifles by Robert Bruce.  (History and operation of some WWII era systems.  Small Arms Review Vol. 4, No. 12, September 2001)

RPG-2 launcher with strap, covers and grenade in firing position. This specimen dates from 1952. Note the blast diverter at the rear, this is not necessary, nor present on all RPG-2 type designs. (Photo by Dan Shea courtesy LMO Working Reference Collection)

RPG-2
This Russian designed, reloadable, shoulder operated recoilless system is the first real step towards the RPG-7 of today. The RPG-2 was copied in many countries, and many of the subvariants are shown here. No RPG-2 grenades had rocket assist, the sheet metal bodies simply couldn’t take the added pressures in the experimental rounds that were tried and this severely limited the range and time to target. One major step up from the German designs is that instead of two charges spread out over the interior of the launching tube, the RPG-2 utilizes six in tandem to create much more velocity and keep the tube integrity intact.

Note:
The following are not illustrated due to low or non-existent production, and a resulting lack of photos.

RPG-1: Russian design. Very similar to the German Panzerfaust of WWII, this recoilless system did not progress from design.

RPG-3: Russian design. A design step up from the RPG-2 series, did not progress from design. Frequently this designation is mistaken for the infamous RKG-3 drogue-parachuted, shaped charge, hand thrown grenade that saw so much use in Africa and the Balkans (Yugoslav M79).

RPG-4: Russian design, limited production. RPG-4 is where the RPG-7 was truly born – the expanded tube from the 40mm size of the RPG-2, to 45mm, and the central “chamber area” providing for more expansion of the propellant gases, combined with the new Venturi at the rear, made for more range and faster target hits. Not issued in significant quantity.

RPG-6: Russian design. Hand thrown grenade from WWII.

RPG-8: This designation was mistakenly applied by Western intelligence to what was later known as the RPG-7D takedown model of the RPG. RPG-8 as part of this series did not exist except in some late 1960s reports.

RPG-15: This designation is seen occasionally and apparently dates to 1970s era intel reports- talking about the newly seen RPG-18. SADJ has seen no other indication that an RPG-15 was made.

The German Panzerfaust was a basic underarm fired recoilless launcher made in the early 1940s. The first ones, the ‘30’ and ‘60’ meter launchers (shown), used a single lower-pressure black powder charge in order to limit hoop pressure on the tube. Later Panzerfausts, the ‘100’ and ‘150’ models, added a second charge further down the tube in order to spread out the pressure and the time/pressure curve, thus adding velocity/range. A primary problem with the Panzerfausts was the low velocity of the projectile, causing targets that moved to be difficult to aim properly for. There is another ‘Panzerfaust’ that came into service use in the early 1960s in Germany, called the PZF44 and upgrades (2A1). The slang term was a ‘Lanze.’ This was also a reloadable recoilless launcher but more sophisticated than the originals, more akin to the RPG-2 series. This was replaced in the early 1990s by the Panzerfaust 3. (Photo by Dan Shea courtesy LMO Working Reference Collection)

Type 56 (Chinese) variant of the RPG-2. This is the 40mm straight tube launcher primarily used by the Viet Cong forces early on during the Vietnam War. It was referred to as the B40, and some B40s were made in North Vietnam. Later in the war - approximately 1967 - the RPG-7 was used. This specimen dates from 1956. (Photo by Dan Shea courtesy LMO Working Reference Collection)

Al-Yassin (Yasin). In the early 2000s, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas and their various allied forces fighting the Israelis started using a new manufacture RPG-2 variant called the ‘Yasin.’ This is indigenously manufactured, moving a step back from the much more complex to manufacture RPG-7 variants that had shown up in the Palestine area from the 1970s on. While this may be a technical step backwards, the fact is that these can now be manufactured robustly, and the grenades, while not rocket assisted, have proven effective against armor. It is not unusual to see RPG-7s of various manufacture referred to as ‘Yasin’ in photos, because the Yasin has a divergent nozzle; the large cone at the back end, much like an RPG-7. However, it does not have the RPG-7 expansion chamber and the projectiles use bent sheet metal fins, no rocket assist, and have a unique local explosives design. (Photos courtesy Al-Qassam English Forum)

Czech P-27 (shown) is an RPG-2 variant, that has been replaced in service by the RPG-75 (not shown) which is a light tube high/low pressure recoilless hybrid that gives all the appearance of being a shoulder fired rocket launcher, but due to its design is a somewhat bizarre, lightweight recoilless. Serial number marking on this P-27 is from the front sight block. Note the long time use of the front grip that has a button operated, spring loaded bipod that extends downward. (Photo by Dan Shea courtesy National Firearms Collection, Royal Armouries, Leeds)

The Thai company ‘RP’ manufactured a high quality RPG-2 variant during the 1970s. (Photo courtesy Pol. Lt. Gen. Amporn Charuchinda, Commissioner of Police Forensic Science, Bangkok, Thailand.)

Thai M13 - the launcher marked as ‘M13‘ is of unknown origin, and it has the appearance of an RPG-7, but it is actually an RPG-2. These have been found in a number of areas of Southeast Asia, but there is a notable picture from the Battle of Ampil, seen in use by KPNLF soldiers. Note the expeller cartridge and the sheet metal fins wrapped around the body of the grenade base. While the tube appears to have an expanded chamber and divergent nozzle, the rounds are definitely RPG-2 style. (Photo courtesy Pol. Lt. Gen. Amporn Charuchinda, Commissioner of Police Forensic Science, Bangkok, Thailand.)

In addition to their B-40 direct copy of the RPG-2, the North Vietnamese produced, in limited numbers, an enlarged copy as well, the 50mm B-50. Little is known of the launcher, which is believed to resemble the B-40/RPG-2. The grenade (Third from top in photo) is unique, in that rather than wraparound sheet steel fins like the PG-2, it uses fixed fins on a collar which is located behind the warhead in the unfired condition, and which slides down to the end of the tail boom following muzzle exit.

CBC Ammunition, the local ammunition manufacturer in Brazil, has a worldwide presence. Examples of CBC’s small arms ammunition were scattered in the cases; from their 9x19mm up through 12.7x99mm (.50 BMG), and the medium calibers; 20x102mm for the M61 Vulcan series and M39 revolver cannons, to the 20x110RB for the Oerlikons, and other 20mm and 30mm rounds. One other item of note was that they are in production of the 12.7x76mm (.50 spotter) round that is used as the spotter round on the M8C rifle attached to 106mm recoilless rifles. (www.cbc.com.br)

LAAD Brazil has grown in leaps and bounds over the last decade and today it is a formidable contender as a top Latin American military trade show.  We find it second only in size to the FIDAE show in Chile but that’s not a fair comparison, as FIDAE has a massive airshow attached.  Attendees and the 600+ exhibitors alike were pleased with the large turnout (24,000 people and delegations from 53 countries) that showed up for this biannual event.  The 18 national pavilions covered a very respectable 42,000+ square meters in several large halls.  This was the 8th edition of LAAD, and it was our third attendance at the show.  SADJ is very pleased to see the growth here, and we of course plan to attend the 2013 event.

A Brazilian soldier checks out Arsenal’s offerings of their Bulgarian made rifles that are based on the Kalashnikov action. He is holding the M9F in 5.56x45mm with the UBGL-M6 40x46mm grenade launcher and MK22 Colimating sight. (www.arsenal2000.com)

Russian company Bazalt had a small display showing several of their shoulder fired launchers. Top: Reloadable RPG-32 with rocket underneath it; Bottom: RPG-28 single fire launcher. (www.bazalt.ru)

ATN showcased their NVM14 Universal multi-purpose system, which functions as a monocular, on headgear as a camera adapter, handheld, or on a weapon inline. It uses one 123A lithium battery or has an AA adapter, and uses an IR illuminator with flood lens. (www.atncorp.com)

Sebastian Babula from Fabryka Broni ‘Lucznik’ in Radom, Poland was at the Bumar Group booth and here he holds the newest bullpup design rifle. Bumar Group is the pre-eminent Polish company representing over 23 Polish defense companies.

CZ had the new Evo 3A submachine gun in 9x19mm. This polymer lightweight design features a built-in ambidextrous three shot burst four position selector and modular design, as well as plenty of Picatinny rails to Mil-Spec. (cz-usa.com)

Perhaps the biggest news from the FN Herstal group was the introduction of their new FCU (Fire Control Unit) for their FN40GL 40x46mm low velocity shoulder fired grenade launcher. The FN FCU adds speed and accuracy to the FN40GL system. (fnherstal.com)

Daniel Defense announced they had just signed a co-manufacturing agreement with Ecuador that starts with 10,000 of Daniel Defense’s M4 type rifles to be made in Ecuador, and may lead up to 45,000 or more. (www.danieldefense.com)

As today’s computing power increases at an exponential rate, so does directed energy technology – a close relative.  Most think of directed energy in terms of visible light spectrum lasers or perhaps microwave beams, but the directed energy weapons of tomorrow may consist of a mix of many, giving them awesome 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).  These emerging technologies all have pros and cons with respect to capability, lethality, portability, power requirements, sustainability, maintainability, cost, and legality.  Additionally, a laser weapon small enough and light enough for individual soldiers to carry quickly thresholds the Law of Physics, which universally dictates what can and can’t be achieved.

In today’s kinder and gentler war fighting environment political expectations demand less kinetic violence.  Blood and guts warfare employed in World Wars I and II, Korea and Vietnam using guns and bombs is now politically incorrect and has been renamed “kinetic action.”  The warfare environment of the future demands non-kinetic weapons, even less-than-lethal means, of subduing an enemy and that translated into a soldier-carried weapon means some sort of non-kinetic directed energy weapon.  So the national weapon laboratories like Sandia, Los Alamos and Laurence Livermore are hard at it, as are many of the university applied physics laboratories as well as private industry, all racing to develop and weaponize directed energy technologies for battlefield use.

Perhaps the place to begin is the receiving end – a “soft” (human) target.  A directed energy weapon can be used to temporarily dazzle (blind) the eyesight of the enemy without permanent retinal damage or it can be used to permanently blind the enemy.  Another can range from making him feel uncomfortably hot to outright burning his flesh like having a bucket of scalding hot cooking oil thrown on him.  Man-portable dazzling and blinding lasers (not to be confused with laser target designation) have seen battlefield use by the special operations community for over twenty years thanks to organizations like DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Agency).

In the mid-1970s there was an experimental multi-spectral dazzling laser weapon then known as “Medusa.”  Far from man-portable, it was mounted on the top of a Navy amphibious ship taking the place of one of the ship’s massive radar gun directors and was about the same size.  It was designed to temporarily blind an enemy looking seaward during an amphibious assault.  It was a huge weapon that demanded vast power resources and required everyone to wear special laser goggles to protect their eyesight.  Multi-spectral lasers vary their emission frequencies to make countermeasures more difficult and costly.  Eye goggles require a separate protective filtering lens for each frequency so if, for example, the laser spectrum varies by a range of thirty different frequencies, the protective goggles will need thirty different filter layers to protect one’s eyes from the effects and that’s costly.  The sheer number of protective goggles on all the above deck ships’ personnel, all the Marines, pilots, etc., not to mention the cost, was impractical, but Medusa did prove its concept feasibility.

A potential less-than-lethal technology being pursued today by a small privately funded firm involved with electro-muscular incapacitation 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 a laser to induce this wave form.  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 with a simple click of a switch, select a stun or kill mode.  If this could be achieved using a microwave beam, a weapon such as this could be as monumental to warfare as the atomic bomb, especially if it could be adapted to wide area look down – shoot down UAV aerial delivery.

But will these exotic directed energy weapons ever become mainstream soldier-carried assault weapons replacing bullet launching (kinetic) rifles?  The short answer is that it’s unlikely for numerous reasons that include the Law of Physics, the Law of War and affordability.  All three are prohibitive for different reasons.

The Law of Physics simply can’t be violated.  Scaling a directed energy weapon for man portability has been done and patents exist.  Making it small and light is within our scientific and technical grasp.  Making an enduring power source the same still eludes our grasp and bumps up against the Law of Physics.  There’s only so much we can do capturing chemical energy (batteries) and there is no game changing technology on the horizon, to include energy foraging and piezoelectric generation, that will immediately lighten the soldiers load while at the same time increase power and duration.  Laser sophistication may contribute to a future solution by economizing power requirements, but again the Law of Physics prevails and at that point science can do little more than awe at the barrier.

The Law of War is also a stumbling block.  When it was written, directed energy was the stuff of science fiction so its use was not specifically spelled out.  However, there have been revisions like “The Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons,” Protocol IV of the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, issued by the United Nations on 13 October 1995 and came into force on 30 July.  This essentially says it’s okay to shoot the enemy; you just can’t blind him or burn holes into him using directed energy.  Of course, that has never stopped anyone from special purpose use of directed energy or the anti-missile / anti-aircraft directed energy programs DoD is currently developing that could easily be employed against troops on the battlefield.  It is interesting to watch how DoD packages its development of these weapons for public and media consumption.  More interesting and never reported is the lack of legal opinion for the use or misuse of such weapons.

Affordability is also a major detractor.  The M16 costs the DoD about $225 dollars a copy.  The Colt M4 variant costs around $1,100 a copy.  These are the main assault rifles in use today.  They have common ergonomics, fundamentally operate in a similar manner requiring little variation in user training and use common ammunition that is NATO interoperable.  They are manufactured by a skilled workforce that is largely similar to those which build automobiles using non-exotic processes and materials.  A man-portable general purpose directed energy weapon will need to be able to compete with all the above.

Military-grade spotting lasers, as an example, are built using exotic manufacturing processes that require a highly skilled work force and, as a result, they are expensive.  Today’s spotting lasers are low tech compared to tomorrows directed energy weapons so logic dictates that the cost of a man-portable directed energy weapon would far exceed the cost of an assault rifle.  Therefore, it is safe to assume a one for one replacement will always be cost prohibitive no matter what the defense budget looks like.

An additional aspect, almost always overlooked, is the degree of training both operators and maintenance personnel will require.  If a directed energy weapon requires much more than marksmanship-level training or the depot-level maintenance currently in use today it will likely fail as a main battle weapon.  If it’s designated a special purpose weapon and only carried by a specially trained operator it must be assumed that its other unique requirements must be supported as well.  An example might be today’s squad automatic weapon (SAW) soldier.  Even though a soldier carrying a SAW shoots a unique weapon, anyone in his squad can pick it up and shoot it.  SAW ammo can be delinked and used in any M16/M4 or the soldiers can re-link 5.56 ammo for SAW use.  Weapon interoperability and low tech operator training is a winning combination in combat.  It is hard to imagine a man portable directed energy weapon that would offer the same user friendly qualities.

While size, weight, interoperability and lethality are factors, there are other concerns that limit directed energy weapons and they involve environmental extremes.  Today’s bullet launching assault rifles are reliable in all extremes ranging from tropical, to desert, to arctic conditions.  They work in rain, snow, dust and fog.  You can generally immerse them and they’ll still shoot given a few seconds for the water to drain.  They can be covered in mud and they shoot.  Solar flares and EMP make no difference – they still work.  A directed energy weapon relies on a sophisticated electronic circuit to generate the energy beam.  While it can be isolated and shielded from outside influence, that adds weight and another level of sophistication.  There is always some sort of lens to calumniate (focus) the beam and that, in most cases is optical.  That lens must be kept unobstructed and clean to function properly which is a difficult expectation in many environments.  Water vapor mitigates directed energy.  Clouds, fog, rain and snow are all enemies of directed energy.  Today’s powerful anti-missile airborne systems simply burn their way through, but lower energy man-portable systems won’t have that sort of sustained power and will likely be unreliable in some of these unpredictable battlefield environments.

Finally, with shrinking budgets, is pursuing man-portable directed energy weapons the path DoD should follow?  As previously discussed, it has pros and cons but whatever the next generation weapon is, it must “by law” remain NATO inter-operable and within the United Nations conventions we signed.  And that’s the real challenge.

– – –

UPDATE: The U.S. Department of Defense has released 2012 U.S. DoD Non-Lethal Weapons for Complex Environments in both ebook and PDF format. This ebook highlights today’s U.S DoD non-lethal weapons and capabilities. To locate the ebook, log onto http://jnlwp.defense.gov. For more information, contact Kelley Hughes, Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate at 703-432-0905 or kelley.hughes@usmc.mil.

The new Gemtech Quicksand sound suppressor, now available for purchase, is used on 7.62 NATO rifles and utilizes a patented quick mount system.  It can be fastened securely in only two seconds and at only 17.5 ounces in weight it is the lightest quick-detach .308 suppressor available.

Modeled after the popular Gemtech Sandstorm, the Quicksand is manufactured to be as effective as it is light.  It also adds the feature of a Quick Mount.  Using an entirely new baffle design, just like the Sandstorm, the Quicksand sound suppressor is manufactured from corrosion resistant Titanium, providing a light package that is stronger than steel and tuned to maximum efficiency.  The lightweight construction is not only attractive when working in environments where extra ounces translate into a much heavier burden, but Titanium also cools much faster than many other materials and has far less impact on point-of-impact shift from changing barrel harmonics.

While one attractive feature of the Quick Mount is the speed and accuracy of the attachment method, it is equally interesting that it is “backwards compatible” with the older HVT and TPRS mounts and allows a duel-use with the G5 mount for use with the Gemtech 5.56mm series of silencers.  This gives the user a great amount of usefulness and continues to increase the versatility of the suppressor.

Alpha Group Long Range Shooting Instructor Bruce Roscoe assists in testing the Gemtech Quicksand mounted on a DPMS LR-308 Carbine.

Live Fire
The base rifle chosen to test the Gemtech Quicksand was a DPMS LR-308.  This rifle is an accurate platform and has performed very well under numerous testing conditions.  The free-floating barrel of the test rifle is 16 inches in length, with an M4 profile.  The rifling rate is 1 turn in 10 inches.  The flattop upper receiver provides a suitable base for almost any mounting option.  The magazine design of the DPMS LR-308 rifle is based on the early, original ArmaLite magazine design, and this has been adopted by several other manufacturers including POF-USA.  There is a great selection of available magazines ranging in size from 5-rounds to 25-rounds and MAGPUL is even making a .308 version of their wildly popular PMAG in this design.

Ammunition being utilized in this testing included Lake City Special Ball and Wolf Performance Ammunition Gold.  Optics for this test would be an IOR Valdata fixed 4x scope.

After an initial sighting-in period, the first order of business was to collect muzzle velocity measurements.  This was repeated with each load – suppressed as well as unsuppressed – using the Vortex-style flash hider that is built into the Gemtech Quick Mount.  It is important to note that due to the design of the Quick Mount, the suppressor can only mount on a single way.  This is a great design step above earlier 3-lug mounts and some other commercial mounts that allow mounting in numerous positions.  Since the Quick Mount only allows mounting one way, the repeatability of critical shot placement when taking the suppressor off and remounting it is held to the highest standard possible.  As anyone who shoots an accurate rifle combined with a suppressor knows well, any variable, such as mounting the suppressor in a different position, has the potential to affect the point of impact greatly.  The design of the Gemtech Quick Mount takes this potential for error out of the equation with their design.

Since the lugs of the Quick Mount are different sizes, the Quicksand can only mount in one orientation. This provides a positive lock with no shifting or unlocking possible and allows for point of impact repeatability when removing and reinstalling the suppressor. There are no tools necessary and it takes less than 2 seconds to install or remove, with precise fitting.

The suppressor had a surprisingly low impact on the muzzle velocity (MV).  We conducted the majority of our tests with 150-grain SP Wolf Gold and 173-grain Lake City M118 Special Ball.  The complete information is included in the accompanying chart but in summary the average muzzle velocity from the 16-inch DPMS AP4 barrel with the Lake City was 2,496 feet per second (fps) unsuppressed and 2,500 fps suppressed.  The Wolf Gold averaged 2,680 fps with no suppressor and 2,668 through the Quicksand.  An interesting note may be the continuity of all ammo fired through the Quicksand Suppressor.  While the overall change was not significant, the extreme spread of all ammo was decreased greatly while the suppressor was in use.

The repeatability of the suppressor was tested with great results.  Testing was performed in the following manor; a string of 10 rounds was fired and the suppressor was removed.  This was followed by another string of 10 rounds and the suppressor reattached.  This was carried out 2 times per test so we would eventually end up with 4 groups of 10 rounds each.  The return to zero was absolute each time so it actually ended up being 2 groups of 20 rounds each, one suppressed and the other unsuppressed.  The deviation was a slight point of impact (POI) shift of approximately 2 inches at 100 yards, and repeatable.  The Lake City Special Ball ammo performed the best in the accuracy phase although the Wolf Gold was much more consistent in muzzle velocity.

An interesting side note on ammo selection is that the Wolf Gold ran well in the stock 16-inch unsuppressed configuration, but we experienced some trouble while using the suppressor.  A few rounds had trouble extracting and actually blew out primers.  No other ammunition in any configuration exhibited this activity.

The Gemtech Quicksand was tested on a 16-inch DMPS LR-308. Muzzle velocity testing was measured with a PACT MKIV XP Timer & Chronograph. Shooter: Sergeant First Class Bruce Roscoe.

Summary
The Gemtech Quicksand is a very desirable suppressor.  The extremely light weight of the 17.5-ounce system caused everyone who handled it to verify that it was actually a .308 can.  All shooters testing this combination had fired numerous 7.62 suppressors in the past and all were impressed with the feel and sound signature of the Quicksand as well.  The firearm no longer exhibits that “nose heavy” feeling common with many other sound suppressors, making initial and follow-up shots very fast, especially when engaging multiple targets.  Although Gemtech claims an average decibel reduction of 32Db, the “tone” of the Titanium suppressor seems “softer” to the ear.  This seems to be a standard observation as this writer recently tested the Gemtech 5.56x45mm TREK and TREK-T series sound suppressors and the same result was noted with the Titanium model in that caliber as well.  All ammo fired was traveling well over 2,400 feet per second at 8 feet from the muzzle and none was the least bit uncomfortable without hearing protection of any kind as it was well below the threshold of discomfort.

The Quick Mount mounting system is a big advantage for a number of reasons – the most obvious is in the performance.  Since it is a Bi-Lock system with 2 different size lugs there is only one way it can mount.  This is beneficial for repeated accuracy when mounting since it will always end up with the same orientation.  When the suppressor is attached it is pushed onto the mount, rotated and released.  It is under spring tension which applies pressure to the front when released giving it a positive position lock the operator can actually feel.  When locked in place it is not possible to shift or rotate; thus maintaining position for accuracy and retention.  In the rare occurrence when the suppressor is not desired for use, the mount doubles as an effective Vortex-style flash hider/muzzle brake.  Also, the threads are protected and never exposed at any time once the mount is secured.

Close up of the Quick Mount illustrates the locking lugs below the Vortex-style flash hider / muzzle brake.

The ability to use the Quicksand with a Gemtech G5 mount allows the owner to utilize it on a 5.56x45mm (.223) platform when desired is a positive aspect as well.  While it has always been “possible” to use a 7.62mm suppressor on a 5.56mm platform, either the necessity of a thread adapter to fit, or the excessive size and weight of the 7.62mm designs didn’t make it “practical.”  The Quicksand provides a solution to both situations with the mounting system and light weight of the system.  The MSRP on the Quicksand is $1,400.

Caliber:
.308 or .300 (7.62 NATO)

Overall Length:
9.2 inches

Diameter:
1.5 inches

Construction:
Titanium

Mount:
Bi-Lock Quick Mount (Numerous available threads)

Weight:
17.5 ounces

Finish:
Bead-blasted natural Titanium (grey)

This photo illustrates the average point of impact (POI) shift at 100 yards using Lake City M118 Special Ball 7.62 NATO. Each circle represents 7 rounds fired. The top circle is suppressed and the bottom circle is unsuppressed. The light weight and design of the Quicksand silencer keep POI shift to a minimum. The Bi-Lock Quick Mount system makes it repeatable when removing and replacing the suppressor.