http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly Report Documentation Page Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED 01 JAN 2008 N/A - 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER WSTIAC Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 1 - Small Caliber Lethality: 5.56mm 5b. GRANT NUMBER Performance in Close Quarters Battle 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION WSTIAC Weapon Systems Technology Information Analysis Center, REPORT NUMBER WSTIAC-V8-N1 Rome, NY 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) Defense Technical Information Center, Ft Belvoir, VA 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release, distribution unlimited 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The original document contains color images. 14. ABSTRACT This issue of the WSTIAC Quarterly features an article on small caliber lethality and how 5.56mm rounds perform in close quarters battle, and WSTIAC 10 Spotlight: Lethality. Also included is show review, "Preparing SOF for Future Challenges" from SPECOPS East 2007 Symposium & Warfighter Expo; Fayetteville, NC. Included the WSTIAC Calendar of Events and the Directors Corner. Details on several Training Courses sponsored by WSTIAC are also included in this issue. 15. SUBJECT TERMS 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF ABSTRACT OF PAGES RESPONSIBLE PERSON a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE UU 16 unclassified unclassified unclassified Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18 http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly Welcome to the latest edition of the WSTIAC lethality to be very interesting. As one of the Quarterly.The WSTIAC program has started areas of the WSTIAC 10, lethality is a critical very strongly in Fiscal Year 2008. With the aspect of many weapon systems. With small first six months past us, I’m pleased to report caliber ammunition, given the close relative that WSTIAC is collecting and disseminating ranges, lethality is even more critical for our information and providing technical expertise warfighters. However, in the past small caliber on weapons systems technologies at a rate that lethality has not always been objectively and is significantly greater than this time last year. empirically studied. That is changing. The fea- Director’s Corner We are supporting a greater number of web ture article by Majors Dean and LaFontaine, inquiries, adding more scientific and technical discuss the performance of 5.56mm ammuni- information to our weapons library, and con- tion in Close Quarters Battle (CQB). The arti- tinuing to host students in our world class cle explores the combat performance reports weapons systems technology training courses. that we are getting concerning the 5.56mm In terms of providing technical solutions and rounds, what the science is behind them, and expertise, we are at a contract effort pace that efforts that can be taken to improve impact is expected to exceed previous WSTIAC levels. performance of these rounds in CQB. This is As this publication is distributed, look for the initial part of a greater effort that the improvements to our website as we address key Project Manager for Maneuver Ammunition DoD weapons-related strategic areas. As I dis- Systems (PM MAS), Picatinny Arsenal, New cussed in the previous edition of the WSTIAC Jersey, has undertaken to put science and Quarterly (Vol. 7, No. 4), these ten areas, physics into understanding and improving called the “WSTIAC 10”, are areas in which small caliber ammunition. WSTIAC will provide expertise and informa- Before you read this feature article on small tion as they pertain to weapon systems techno- caliber lethality, you may want to check out logical advancement. From power and energy, the brief synopsis on lethality on page 8. It to lethality, to capability, effectiveness, and gives a good introduction to the subject as well requirements analyses, just to mention a few, as some examples of technologies that are these are weapon systems areas that the De- enhancing weapon lethality. I hope that you partment of Defense and many of the services find these articles and the rest of the publica- are emphasizing. We will place a similar tion useful in contributing to your efforts to emphasis on these strategic areas from an infor- supportour warfighters. mational and a technical expertise perspective. For this quarterly edition, I believethat you MarkRider will find the feature article about small caliber WSTIAC Director The WSTIAC Quarterly is the current awareness publication of the Weapon Systems Technology Information Director Analysis Center (WSTIAC). WSTIAC, a Department of Defense (DoD) Information Analysis Center (IAC), is admin- istratively managed by the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) under the DoD IAC Program. All data and MarkD. Rider information herein reported are believed to be reliable; however, no warrant, expressed or implied, is to be construed as Editor-in-Chief to the accuracy or the completeness of the information presented. The views, opinions, and findings contained in this Benjamin D. Craig publication are those of the author(s) and should not be construed as an official Agency position, policy, or decision, unless so designated by other official documentation. The appearance of an advertisement, announcement, product/service Publication Design review,or article in the WSTIACQuarterlydoes not constitute endorsement bythe DoD or WSTIAC. Cynthia Long Inquiries about WSTIAC capabilities, products, and services may be addressed to TamaraR. Grossman Mark Rider Robert Fitzgibbon Director, WSTIAC Technical Inquiries Information Processing 703.933.3317 877.WST.USER Pamela J. Kinstle [email protected] [email protected] EMAIL: EMAIL: //wstiac.alionscience.com/ Inquiry Services URL: http: Robert Fitzgibbon We welcome your input! To submit your related articles, photos, notices, or ideas for future issues, please contact: WSTIAC Product Sales ATTN: BENJAMIN D. CRAIG Gina Nash 201 Mill Street, Rome, New York 13440 PHONE: 315.339.7019 • FAX: 315.339.7107 [email protected] EMAIL: http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly Major Glenn Dean Major David LaFontaine Not long after the US Army’s entry into Afghanistan, reports ian firearms industry. Although there have been efforts by the from the field began to surface that in close quarters engagements, military services to assess the performance of its small arms, the some Soldiers were experiencing multiple “through-and-through” levels of effort and resources involved have been extremely low hits on an enemy combatant where the target continued to fight. compared to those spent on other weapons systems: bursting Similar reports arose following the invasion of Iraq in 2003. artillery rounds, anti-tank munitions, etc. The general assump- Those reports were not always consistent – some units would tion within the services, despite evidence to the contrary from report a “through-and-through” problem, while others expressed the larger wound ballistics community, has been that small arms nothing but confidence in the performance of their M4 carbines performance was a relatively simple, well-defined subject. What or M16 rifles. The M249 Squad Automatic Weapon, which fires has developed in the interim in the ammunition industry is a identical bullets as the M4 and M16, did not receive the same number of assessment techniques and measurements that are at criticism. Often, mixed reports of performance would come from best unreliable and in the end are able to provide only rough the same unit. While many of the reports could be dismissed due correlation to actual battlefield performance. to inexperience or hazy recollections under the stress of combat, The major problem occurs at the very beginning: What is effec- there were enough of them from experienced warfighters that the tiveness? As it turns out, that simple question requires a very com- US Army Infantry Center asked the Army’s engineering commu- plex answer. For the Soldier in combat, effectiveness equals death: nity to examine the issue. Specifically, the Infantry Center asked the desire to have every round fired result in the death of the it to examine the reports of “through-and-through” wounds, opposing combatant, the so-called “one-shot drop.” However, determine if there was an explanation, and assess commercially death – or lethality – is not always necessary to achieve a military available ammunition to determine if there was a “drop in” objective; an enemy combatant who is no longer willing or able replacement for the standard issue 5.56mm M855 Ball rounds to perform a meaningful military task may be as good as dead that might provide improved performance in close quarters battle under most circumstances. Some equate effectiveness with “stop- (CQB). ping power,” a nebulous term that can mean anything from phys- What resulted grew into a lengthy, highly technical, and high- ically knocking the target down to causing the target to ly detailed study of rifle and ammunition performance at close immediately stop any threatening action. Others may measure quarters ranges that involved technical agencies from within the effectiveness as foot-pounds of energy delivered to the target – by Army, Navy, and Department of Homeland Security; medical calculating the mass and impact velocity of the round – without doctors, wound ballisticians, physicists, engineers from both the considering what amount of energy is expended in the target or government and private sector; and user representatives from the what specific damage occurs to the target. In the end, “foot- Army, US Marines Corps, and US Special Operations Command. pounds of energy” is misleading, “stopping power” is a myth, and After having made some significant contributions to the science the “oneshot drop” is a rare possibility dependent more on the sta- of wounds ballistics effects and ammunition performance assess- tistics of hit placement than weapon and ammunition selection. ment, this Joint Services Wound Ballistics (JSWB) Integrated Effectiveness ultimately equates to the potential of the weapons Product Team (IPT) was eventually able to conclude that: (1) system to eliminate its target as a militarily relevant threat. there were no commercially available 5.56mm solutions that The human body is a very complex target, one that has a num- provided a measurable increase in CQB performance over fielded ber of built-in mechanisms that allow it to absorb damage and military ammunition, (2) the reports from the field could be continue to function. Compared to a tank, it is far more difficult explained and supported with sound scientific evidence, and to predict a human target’s composition and what bullet design (3) there are steps that can be taken to immediately impact will be most advantageous. The combinations of muscle, bone, performance of small arms at close quarters ranges. organs, skin, fat, and clothing create a staggering number of target types which often require different lethal mechanisms. BACKGROUND Physical conditioning, psychological state, size, weight, and body Development of small caliber ammunition is an area which in form all play a factor in the body’s ability to resist damage, and all recent years has largely been left to the manufacturers of the civil- add to the complexity of the problem. The same bullet fired This article was originally published in the September-October 2006 edition of InfantryMagazine.Ithas been reprinted with permission from the US Army InfantrySchool. http://wstiac.alionscience.com The WSTIACQuarterly, Volume 8, Number 1 3 http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly against a large, thick, well-conditioned person has a very different virtually impossible to compare – and as it turns out, these test reaction than that fired against a thin, malnourished opponent. methods were not standardized across the entire ballistics com- The physical mechanisms for incapacitation – causing the body munity. The JSWB IPT began work to standardize test protocols to no longer be able to perform a task – ultimately boil down to among the participating agencies to allow results to be compared. only two: destruction of central nervous system tissue so that the Unfortunately, after that work had been completed and static fir- body can no longer control function, or reduction in ability to ings of a wide range of calibers and configurations of ammunition function over time through blood loss. The closest things the were under way (see Figure 1), the IPT discovered that results human body has to an “off switch” are the brain, brain stem, and were still not consistent. Despite using the same gel formulation, upper spinal cord, which are small and well-protected targets. procedures, the same lots of ammunition, and in some cases the Even a heart shot allows a person to function for a period of time same weapons, the static testing results still had differences that before finally succumbing to blood loss. What the wound ballis- could not initially be explained. tics community at large has long known is that the effectiveness The IPT was ultimately able to determine a reason for the dif- ofaround of ammunition is directly related to the location, vol- ferences. The Army Research Laboratory (ARL) at Aberdeen ume, and severity of tissue damage. In other words, a well-placed Proving Ground, MD, has long used a type of testing know as .22 caliber round can be far more lethal than a poorly placed .50 “dynamic” methods to evaluate ammunition performance, which caliber machine gun round. Setting shot placement aside for the estimate probable levels of incapacitation in human targets. moment, though, the challenge becomes assessing the potential of Dynamic methods are resource intensive – the ARL measures the a given round of ammuni- performance of the pro- tion to cause the needed jectile in flight prior to volume and severity of tis- impacting the target as sue damage, and then well as performance of the 40 Grain 45 Grain 50 Grain 52 Grain 55 Grain 62 Grain 62 Grain 62 Grain relating this back to per- COTS COTS Brass M995 AP M193 M855 COTS COTS projectile in the target. formance against a human ARL was able to identify target. inconsistencies in bullet flight that explained the TERMINAL BALLISTIC 62 Grain 62 Grain 65 Grain 69 Grain 75 Grain 77 Grain 83 Grain 100 Grain COTS COTS COTS COTS COTS MK262 COTS COTS differences in the static TESTING testing results. Ultimately, Acommon way of measur- the best features of both ing this “damage poten- static and dynamic testing tial,” or “terminal ballistic methods were combined effectiveness,” is through 115 Grain 115 Grain 53Grain 60Grain 123 Grain into a new “Static/ COTS COTS Soviet Soviet Soviet what are known as “static” 6.8x43mm 6.8x43mm 5.45x39mm 5.45x39mm 7.62x39mm Dynamic” method that testing methods. Typically, is able to much better these involve firing a assess weapon and ammu- weapon at a tissue simulant nition performance. This which is dissected after the 12M8 9G9r3ain 150M G80rain 1M751 1G8rLaRin 16C8O GTrSain 173M G72rain 12M48G8r2ain 23C0O GTrSain method takes into shot to allow assessment of 7.62x51mm 7.62x51mm 7.62x51mm 7.62x63mm 7.62x63mm 9mm .45 ACP account a range of param- the damage caused by the Figure 1. Original Study Ammunition Configurations (Source: ARL) eters from the time the bullet. Tissue simulants bullet leaves the muzzle, can be anything from beef roasts to blocks of clay to wet phone to its impact on the gel block target, its actions once in the target, books, but the typical stimulant is ballistic gelatin. Gelatin has the and then uses a dynamic analysis tool to correlate the gel block advantage of being uniform in property, relatively cheap to make, damage to damage in a virtual human target. It provides a com- and simple to process, which means that this form of static test- plete “shooter-to-target” solution that combines both live fire and ing can be done almost anywhere without the need for special facilities. Unlike other simulants, gelatin is transparent. There- Ammunition Given Weapons Tested to fore, assessment can take the form of video footage of a given Full Static/Dynamic Answer the Problem CQB Analysis Statement: shot, measurement of the cavity formed in the gelatin (“gel”) u M855 “Green Tip” (62-gr.) u M16A1 block, and recovery of the bullet or its fragments for analysis. Static methods measure real damage in gel, but have difficulty u M995 AP (52-gr.) u M4 translating that damage to results in human tissue. u M193 (55-gr.) u M16A2/A4 When the Infantry Center initially asked its questions about u Mk 262 (77-gr.) u Mk 18CQBR (10” M4) 5.56mm performance, two agencies moved quickly to provide an u COTS (62-gr.) u M14 answer through static testing, firing a small number of shots u COTS (69-gr.) against gel blocks to compare several bullet types. Unfortunately, u COTS (86-gr.) tests at the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Crane, IN, (NSWC- u COTS (100-gr.) Crane) and the Army’s Armaments Research, Development, and u M80 7.62 (150-gr.) Engineering Center (ARDEC) at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ, pro- duced significantly different results. Further analysis revealed that Figure2. Final Analysis Systems (Source: PM-Maneuver Ammuni- the two agencies had different test protocols that made the results tion Systems) 4 The WSTIACQuarterly, Volume 8, Number 1 http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly simulated testing, but is very time and resource-intensive to per- through outer garments to reach tissue, or it may break up in form. As a result, the study effort narrowed, focusing on provid- muscle without reaching vital organs underneath. The projectile ing complete analysis of the most promising 5.56mm systems, must have enough penetration to be able to reach vital organs to and one reference 7.62mm system, needed to answer the original cause them damage. At the same time, it must not have so much question (see Figure 2). penetrating capability that it passes completely through the target without significant damage – resulting in a so-called “through- TERMINAL MECHANICS and-through.” Energy expended outside the target is useless (inci- Before providing an explanation of the JSWB IPT’s results, a dentally, this is why “impact energy” is a poor measure of bullet brief discussion of small caliber, high velocity terminal ballistics comparison, as it does not separate energy expended in damaging isinorder. The small caliber, high velocity bullets fired by mili- the target from energy lost beyond the target). The ideal bullet tary assault rifles and machine guns have distinct lethality mech- would have enough energy to penetrate through any intervening anisms; conclusions provided here do not necessarily apply to barrier to reach vital organs without significantly slowing, then low velocity pistol rounds, for example, which have different dump all of its energy into damaging vital organs without exiting damage mechanisms. The performance of the bullet once it the body. Unfortunately, design of such a bullet is nearly impos- strikes the target is also very much dependent upon the bullet’s sible in a military round, even if all human bodies were uniform material and construction as well as the target: a bullet passing enough to allow for such a thing. A round that reaches the vital through thick clothing or body armor will perform differently organs of a 5-foot 6-inch 140-pound target without over-penetra- than a bullet striking exposed flesh. This study focused on frontal tion is likely to react differently against a 6-foot 2-inch 220- exposed targets. pounder,even without considering target posture. To complicate Take an average M855 round, the standard round of “green- matters, when hitting a prone firing target the bullet might have tip” rifle ammunition used by US forces in both the M4 and M16 to pass through a forearm, exit, enter the shoulder, then proceed series weapons and in the M249 SAW. The 62-grain projectile has down the trunk before striking heart or spinal cord. A flanking an exterior copper jacket, a lead core, and a center steel penetra- hit would engage the same target through or between the ribs to tor designed to punch through steel or body armor. An M16 strike the same vital regions. All these possibilities are encoun- launches the M855 at roughly 3,050 feet per second, and the tered with the same ammunition. Ultimately, bullet design is a M855 follows a ballistic trajectory to its target, rotating about its series of tradeoffs complicated by the need to survive launch, axis the entire way, and gradually slowing down. Eventually, the arrive at the target accurately, possibly penetrate armor, glass, or bullet slows enough that it becomes unstable and wanders from other barriers, and be producible in large quantities (1+ billion its flight path, though this does not typically happen within the per year) at costs the military can afford. primary ranges of rifle engagements (0-600m). (For more detailed ballistic discussion, see FM 3-22.9). FINDINGS Upon impacting the target, the bullet penetrates tissue and The significant findings of the JSWB IPT’s efforts include: begins to slow. Some distance into the target, the tissue acting on 1. No commercially available alternatives perform measurably the bullet also causes the bullet to rotate erratically or yaw; the better than existing ammunition at close quarters battle ranges for location and amount of yaw depend upon speed of the bullet at exposed frontal targets. Based on current analysis through the impact, angle of impact, and density of the tissue. If the bullet is static/dynamic framework, all of the rounds assessed performed moving fast enough, it may also begin to break up, with pieces spreading away from the main path of the bullet to damage other tissue. If the target is thick enough, all of these fragments may come to rest in the target, or they may exit the target. Meanwhile, the impacted tissue rebounds away from the path of the bullet, creating what is known as a “temporary cavity.” Some of the tissue is smashed or torn by the bullet itself, or its fragments; some expands too far and tears. The temporary cavity eventually rebounds, leaving behind the torn tissue in the wound track – the “permanent cavity.” It is this permanent cavity that is most significant, as it represents the damaged tissue that can impair and eventually kill the target, provided, of course, that the damaged tissue is actu- ally some place on the body that is critical. This is where the balance of factors in bullet design becomes important. Volume of tissue damage is important – which might suggest high velocities to enable the bullet to tumble and fragment sooner, materials that cause the bullet to break up sooner, etc. – but it must also occur in critical tissue. If the bullet immediately breaks up, it may not penetrate Figure 3. System Effectiveness for Studied Rounds (Source: PM MAS) http://wstiac.alionscience.com TheWSTIACQuarterly, Volume 8, Number 1 5 http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly similarly at the ranges of 0-50 meters. Though there might be dif- Bullet Yaw ferences for a single given shot, the tradeoffs of delivery accuracy, Motion Model penetration, fragmentation and wound damage behavior, and Projectile Motion is Complex and Varies over Range speed and efficiency of energy deposit all serve to render differ- ences between rounds minimal. The following chart (Figure 3) M855 Yaw Behavior shows the rounds of interest plotted together. The specific values otethhsft aeit tnhM agell 8ly c,0o h tffah itrrehte eoda n rrfoeer ou 7nmn.od6 tt2s h mmaec emtMa in n1rio 4ntuh grnefiufd lsle a;t, mh wpaeeht r barfteoa cnriemsdi v meoedfde pi antneh ritenfh ogferuf msulall am enivseca etlbu.h aaIennt diftoae oncr-tf, Laisrgine stht eY aCwQ VBa Rriaanbgileity gleofAttack(deg)109865437........00000000 NoMn-L8in5e5a rY Aawer oHdisytnoarymics An 2.0 performance, which would indicate that for M80 ammunition at al 1.0 least there appears to be no benefit to the larger caliber at close Tot 0.00 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Range (m) quarters range. Figure 5. Overview of Bullet Yaw (Source: ARL) 2. Shot placement trumps all other variables; expectation manage- ment is key.Though this should produce a “well, duh!” response from the experienced warfighter, it cannot be emphasized enough. We try hard to inculcate a “one-shot, one-kill” mentality into Soldiers. When they go to the qualification range, if they hit the target anywhere on the E-type silhouette, the target drops. The reality is that all hits are not created equal – there is a very narrow area where the human body is vulnerable to a single shot if immediate incapacitation is expected. Hits to the center mass of the torso may eventually cause incapacitation as the target bleeds out, Figure6. Low Yaw Impact (Source: ARDEC) but this process takes time, during which a motivated target will continue to fight. While projectile design can make a good hit more effective, a hit to a critical area is still required; this fact is borne out by the Medal of Honor citations of numerous American Soldiers who continued to fight despite being hit by German 7.92mm, Japanese 6.5mm and 7.7mm, or Chinese or Vietnamese 7.62mm rounds. A more realistic mantra might be “One well-placed shot, one-kill.” 3. Field reports are accurate and can be explained by the phenomenon of bullet yaw. Shot placement aside, why is it that some Figure 7. High Yaw Impact (Source: ARDEC) Soldiers report “through- and-through” hits while for a time, then ultimately wobbles wide and falls over demon- others report no such strates the same phenomenon. problems, despite using Unfortunately, projectiles impacting at different yaw angles the same weapons and can have significantly different performance, particularly as the ammunition? The phe- projectile slows down. Consider the two photos on this page. In nomenon of bullet yaw the first (Figure 6), the bullet impacted at almost zero yaw. It Figure 4. Bullet Yaw vs. Path of Flight. can explain such differ- penetrated deeply into the gel block before becoming unstable. ences in performance. In a human target, it is very likely that this round would go Yaw is the angle the centerline of the bullet makes to its flight straight through without disruption – just as our troops have path as the projectile travels down range (Figure 4). Although the witnessed in the field. In the second photo (Figure 7), the bullet bullet spins on its axis as a result of the barrel’s rifling, that axis is impacted the gel block at a relatively high yaw angle. It almost also wobbling slightly about the bullet’s flight path. immediately destabilized and began to break, resulting in large Yaw is not instability; it occurs naturally in all spin-stabilized temporary and permanent wound cavities. Our troops have projectiles. However, bullet yaw is not constant and rifle bullets witnessed this in action too; they are more likely to report that display three regions of significantly different yaw (see Figure 5). their weapons were effective. Close to the muzzle, the bullet’s yaw cycles rapidly, with large So all we have to do is fire high-yaw ammunition, right? changes of angle in very short distances (several degrees within Unfortunately, it’s not that easy. High yaw may be good against 1-2 meters range). Eventually, the yaw dampens out and the soft tissue but low yaw is needed for penetration – through cloth- bullet travels at a more-or-less constant yaw angle for the majori- ing, body armor, car doors, etc. – and we need ammunition that ty of its effectiverange. Then, as the bullet slows, it begins to yaw works against it all. Further, we currently cannot control at greater and greater angles, until it ultimately destabilizes. A yaw within a single type of ammunition, and all ammunition dis- spinning top which wobbles slightly when started, then stabilizes plays this tendency to some degree. Both of the shots were two 6 The WSTIACQuarterly, Volume 8, Number 1 http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly look at the effectiveness of ammunition at longer ranges, where Controlled Pairs differences in projectile mass, velocity, and composition may have greater effect. The target set for this analysis was an unarmored, Single Shots frontal standing target; against targets in body armor, or crouch- ing/prone targets, the results may be different. Of course, most targets on the modern battlefield can be expected to be engaged in some form of complex posture (moving, crouching, or behind cover) and future analysis will have to look at such targets, too. The study evaluated readily available commercial ammunition; this does not rule out the possibility that ammunition could be designed to perform significantly better in a CQB environment. 0 10 20 30 40 50 Range (m) Human damage models need further refinement to move beyond gelatin and more closely replicate the complex human anatomy. Figure 8. Improvement in Performance Due to Controlled Pairs While these caveats should not detract from the importance of (Source: ARL) the study’s findings, they should be considered as a starting point for continued analysis. back-to-back rounds fired from the same rifle, the same lot of ammunition, at the same range, under the same conditions. Yaw CONCLUSION requires more study, but the Army solved a similar problem years Soldiers and leaders everywhere should take heart from the fact ago in tank ammunition. that despite all the myth and superstition surrounding their rifles 4. There are doctrinal and training techniques that can increase and ammunition, they are still being provided the best perform- Soldier effectiveness. The analysis tools used in this study were ing weapons and ammunition available while the armaments used to evaluate some alternative engagement techniques. The community works to develop something even better. technique of engaging CQB targets with controlled pairs – two More work remains to be done in this area, and the work is aimed, rapid shots as described in Chapter 7 of FM 3-22.9 – was continuing with the participation of the major organizations from shown to be significantly better than single aimed shots (see Fig- the original study.That effortis planned to look at longer ranges, ure 8). While that should certainly not be surprising to those who intermediate barriers, and different target postures, and will fur- have been using this technique for some time, we now know why. ther refine the tools and methods developed in the original study. Not only are two hits better than one, but controlled pairs help to The lessons learned arebeing put to immediate use as partof an average out striking yaw; on average, the Soldier is more likely to ongoing program to develop a lead-free replacement for the see a hit where the bullet’s yaw behavior works in his favor. M855 cartridge; the information obtained from this study will be used to develop a round that is expected to be more precise and CAVEATS consistent in its performance while still being affordable. This study was an extremely detailed, indepth analysis of a specif- ___________ ic engagement (5.56mm at CQB range); we must be careful not Infantry Magazine is a professional magazine published by the to apply the lessons learned out of context. The study did not US ArmyInfantrySchool. in the news... for recent news stories related to weapon systems technology, please visit our website: http://wstiac.alionscience.com http://wstiac.alionscience.com TheWSTIACQuarterly, Volume 8, Number 1 7 http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly Lethality •IED Defeat Lethality may be defined as “the probability that a weapon will damage or destroy a target such that it can no longer carry out its intended mission”. It is an essential figure •Embedded of merit for any weapon system. The lethality of a given system will vary with the target Training Systems chosen and the circumstances of deployment. In the former case, for example, a given •LETHALITY weapon may be 90% lethal against a field bunker and 50% lethal against a main battle tank. In the latter, the lethality of an air-launched guided munition against a main •Target battle tank may be 50% if released from an altitude of 10,000 feet and a standoff Identification & range of 4 miles and 65% if the altitude and range are reduced to 1,500 feet and Engagement 1 mile. •Asymmetric & Any discussion of lethality must begin with the target set. Typically, a weapon system Irregular Warfare will be designed to attack a particular class of targets or sometimes more than one class, with appropriate priorities assigned. For instance, the Javelin infantry weapon •Power & Energy is primarily designed to defeat armor but can be used against fixed structures and even helicopters. The lethality required of a proposed system will be a function of expected •Command & battle scenarios, including likely number of targets, the priority of those targets, the Control number of systems available (itself a function of logistics considerations), and deploy- ment conditions. The latter must take into account adverse weather, smoke or other •Weapon Systems obscurants, and active enemy counter-measures such as jamming. Ideally, the number & Munitions of systems available, along with the lethality, should combine to produce a near-100 Readiness, percent probability of destroying all targets in the expected scenario. & Asset Visibility There are currently a number of avenues along which enhancements to weapon •Non-Lethal lethality are being pursued. These include: Weapons • Scaleable warhead design, including guided blast and fragmentation •Capabilities, warheads and kinetic energy penetrators Effectiveness, • High power micro/millimeter wave, frequency and modulation optimized & Requirements for specific targets Analysis • Chemical and other advanced laser technology • High-density munition carriage with concomitant smaller, more precise weapons and increased lethality per platform load-out WSTIAC has identified A priori predictions of lethality are made difficult by the wide range of conditions ten strategic areas encountered on the battlefield. Usually a good estimate may be made of CEP (“circular that are critical to error probability”, or probable miss distance) for guided and unguided projectiles. the DoD. Through our Warhead effectiveness against different target classes is more usually determined by network of experts, experiment. Conventional electronic jammers can usually be modeled accurately WSTIAC provides against known threat systems, such as enemy radars. Less conventional systems, such as enhanced expertise in directed energy weapons, require a combination of analysis and experiment. For any each of these areas. procurement of a new system (or upgrade of an existing one), a program of analysis and test must be designed to assess lethality in a realistic yet cost-effective manner. Learn how WSTIAC can assist you within this key strategic area: http://wstiac.alionscience.com/customercorner/ 877.WST.USER (877.978.8737) 8 The WSTIACQuarterly, Volume 8, Number 1 http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly show review... http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly SPECOPS EAST 2007 SYMPOSIUM & WARFIGHTER EXPO; FAYETTEVILLE, NC “Preparing SOF John Keefe WSTIAC for Future Challenges” Rome, NY The SpecOps East 2007 conference was recently three phases where Phase 1 is held in Fayetteville, NC. The conference was the initial concept develop- focused on the products and topics that are of ment, Phase 2 is the proto- interest to the Special Operations (SpecOps) type building / testing world of the Special Forces, such as Navy process, and lastly Phase SEAL Teams, Army Rangers and other elite, 3 is the manufacturing highly mobile groups. It was no accident that development and field- Fayetteville, NC, was chosen as the location ing of the device. In for this conference. US Army Special Forces reviewing the effective- Command is located nearby at Fort Bragg, ness of the SBIR which resulted in the attendance of many process what has been active duty personnel that would otherwise noted is that many not have been able to attend such an event. small innovative com- The 1600+ registered attendees represented a panies have failed to good mix of professionals from the military, make the transition to industry and academia sectors. There were Phase 3. The reasons for more than 140 exhibitors at the event and the this are varied. The jump 14 symposia tracks offered numerous pertinent from Phase 2 to Phase 3 is a topics for attendees. In addition, the show pro- very big leap. Most small vided two hours for various exhibitors to demon- companies do not go to Phase strate their products at an outdoor range. 3, unless approved by the gov- Shows such as SpecOps East are replete with an ernment, for basic fiscal reasons. array of products used by the military. Products and serv- According to one company, a full ices exhibited at SpecOps East included small arms and 90% of the Phase 2 innovations are weapons support (Glock, FN Herstal, LWRC, Dillon Aero, never optioned by the government to contin- Gibbs Products, Surefire, General Dynamics, Night Vision Sys- ue. For instance, after the evaluation of Phase 2 results tems, and others), soldier apparel (W. L. Gore, Performance no militaryprogram of recordwill state that “verifiable demand” Sports Apparel, Nobel Biomaterials, Duro Textiles, Source One, exists for the technology’s use with deployable units, so continua- Rocky Boots, and others), information and computer technolo- tion on to Phase 3 development rarely occurs unless it is solely gy,communication systems, mission supportservices, containers funded bythe company. and storage systems, ordnance producers, various types of con- The purpose of the technology transfer services companies sulting services, robotic systems, large mobile equipment, com- are to help with this leap and to get the technologies to the puter simulation of the battlespace, and just about anything else warfighter. One company in particular has a reasonably-sized that could be used in support of SpecOps missions. Below are budget and they are able to assist numerous projects per year. brief highlights of a fewof the exhibits present at the conference. With a technical network of experts at hand, the multifaceted transition can be made bybeing able to address any and all issues TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SERVICES that arise during the process. Developing a military product from scratch and transitioning it MilTech (Bozeman, MT) www.miltechcenter.com into a fieldable device can be a daunting task. Some companies offer a service to help with the jump from a prototype to a field- ANTIMICROBIAL SOLDIER APPAREL ed product. These services can help speed up the transition of the A unique yarn metalized with pure silver which when woven technology in order to get it into the warfighters’ hands much into the fabric of a range different materials will provide antimi- sooner than otherwise possible. One example of this service takes crobial properties. Such a product provides protection against into consideration a technology developed under the Small Busi- various microbial species including antibiotic-resistant strains ness Innovative Research grant (SBIR) program. The process has and also provides odor management. There are numerous http://wstiac.alionscience.com TheWSTIACQuarterly, Volume 8, Number 1 9 http://wstiac.alionscience.com/quarterly