Jul 20, 2009, post by awatrobski
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
 Since 2003, we provide satellite Internet in Iraq and Afghanistan globally enabling Iraqi and Afghan citizens, businesses and remotely deployed personnel to have broadband Internet access, enterprise connectivity, VoIP and videoconferencing services at affordable costs.
Contact: phone +48 22 630 70 70
www.ts2.pl
|
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Three dozen soldiers wearing body armor and carrying heavy packs are hiking into the rising sun amid mountainous terrain.
Their forward operating base (FOB) is barely perceptible in the distance from high up along a ridge, and the soldiers know it will be many hours before they return to a hot meal and the comfort of a cot.
In between will be a day like all others since they arrived: long marches, entering and exiting armored vehicles, firing rifles, scrambling through obstacle-laden villages and treacherous insurgent houses and wolfing down an MRE (meal ready to eat) in stolen moments at midday.
If this sounds like a typical day for a soldier in Southwest Asia, the Training and Exercise Management Office at Yuma Proving Ground has arranged similar conditions for soldiers in Arizona. Recently, the proving ground delivered a realistic environment in support of a critically important exercise aimed at developing the next generation of body armor.
The perfect fit
Since the beginning of American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan earlier this decade, YPG has played an instrumental role in reducing the incidence of the most horrific events experienced by soldiers in theater.
Fatalities from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) have diminished with the mass fielding of the MRAP (mine-resistant ambush-protected) vehicle, which underwent extensive testing at the proving ground, as well as cutting-edge electronic counter-IED technology developed and tested at YPG.
Yet while the most horrific fatalities have been dramatically reduced, heavy body armor can impede the mobility of soldiers on the battlefield. Consequently, soldiers run the risk of being outmaneuvered by the enemy.
To counter this threat, in December 2008 the Defense Department issued a request for information to find a more lightweight armor system for American soldiers.
“Our goal is to field a lighter, more mobile body armor system to allow soldiers operating in high elevations increased mobility without lessening the amount of protection the armor provides,” said Jeremy Reed, a project officer from Fort Benning’s Maneuver Battle Lab who served two tours in Iraq.
Since the new armor system would be especially beneficial to soldiers deployed in the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan, evaluators needed a site that accurately simulated the topography encountered in Southeast Asia. Yuma Proving Ground’s extensive range space was a logical choice.
“We wanted a location that mimics the environment there and YPG meets all the requirements,” said Lt. Col. Robert Myles, product manager for soldier survivability at Program Executive Office (PEO) Soldier of Fort Belvoir, Va.
PEO Soldier is an Army organization responsible for developing, acquiring and fielding virtually everything soldiers wear or carry. A key part of its mission is to constantly improve soldiers’ equipment to enhance their lethality, survivability and comfort.
Using volunteers from Fort Bragg’s 82nd Airborne Division and the 173rd Airborne Brigade based in Vicenza, Italy, the Maneuver Battle Lab staged a two-week long exercise at YPG in May to evaluate personal armor systems. All troops that participated had previously been deployed to Iraq and/or Afghanistan.
Since the systems under test will likely be tested at YPG’s Tropic Regions Test Center (TRTC) at a future date, TRTC personnel provided support for the evaluation. Of the eight YPG data collectors who recorded test data, five are typically based at TRTC’s facility in Panama.
“We’re testing the compatibility, mobility and effectiveness of the equipment,” explained Maj. Michael Williams, branch chief of the Maneuver Battle Lab. “Our job is to test in conditions as close to combat as possible.”
Average day
Each day began with a conference at the FOB in which each soldier donned the armor that would be evaluated that day. The soldiers were organized into teams, each of which was assigned a different armor system each day.
For comparison purposes, one of those systems was the Improved Outer Tactical Vest currently in use in Iraq and Afghanistan. The soldiers carried the exact same rucksack every day, which data collectors weighed to confirm that the previous day’s specifications would be duplicated.
The soldiers then undertook a foot march into a nearby mountain range. The soldiers and several data collectors climbed uneven rocks up the slope, wound their way across the top of a ridge, then descended back to the valley below.
“The terrain is exactly like Afghanistan,” remarked Staff Sgt. Joshua Vaughn, who served in both Afghanistan and Iraq, as he marched up the mountain. “It even smells like Afghanistan.”
After data was collected, the soldiers proceeded by bus to a rigorous obstacle course outside the K9 Village, one of YPG’s simulated insurgent villages.
Each soldier tested the maneuverability of the body armor by climbing walls, negotiating a tire course, crawling through narrow tunnels and covered ditches and climbing up and down deceptively steep A-frame roofs and staircases.
They pulled themselves up through high windows, and navigated through the narrow, dark warren of a simulated insurgent house. Each soldier went through the course multiple times while carrying their rifles and occasionally throwing an inert grenade at a distant insurgent mannequin.
Even for these highly conditioned veterans of overseas combat, the course was physically challenging, but representative of the conditions encountered by ground forces in theater.
There was little time to rest, however, as the troops proceeded to a firing range, where they practiced combat maneuvers while still wearing the armor. Under the blazing hot sun, groups of soldiers took turns following a series of directions from a uniformed leader who barked instructions through a megaphone.
“On my command, you will run to the 10-meter line and engage your target,” he boomed through the megaphone. “Ready? Run!”
The participants charged the 10 meters and fired as the retractable targets moved upright, sending them falling to the ground amidst crackling reports and the acrid smell of gunpowder.
At the conclusion of this stage of the day’s activities, the soldiers returned to the FOB and ate a quick lunch of MREs, then spent the remainder of the afternoon rotating through a series of test stations.
The stations measured how quickly soldiers could enter and exit a series of common combat vehicles that were on site, the range of motion each soldier was capable of while wearing the armor, how easily the armor could be donned and doffed in a variety of positions while wearing a helmet. They also examined how quickly a simulated wounded soldier could be evacuated while wearing the armor.
When the day’s objectives were completed, the soldiers ate a hot meal in the FOB’s mess area and retired to their tents to rest up for another day of the same exercises.
Culmination
Over two weeks, testers collected quantitative data on the performance of each armor system, as well as more than 10,000 pages of feedback from the soldiers who participated in the exercise. The tested armor systems will next undergo ballistics testing at another facility.
The evaluations conducted at YPG could benefit deployed soldiers as early as this summer.
“YPG is a great place,” said Williams. “We couldn’t have asked for a better place or better people to work with.”
Jun 18, 2009, post by Artur Nowak
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Since 2003, we provide satellite Internet in Iraq and Afghanistan globally enabling Iraqi and Afghan citizens, businesses and remotely deployed personnel to have broadband Internet access, enterprise connectivity, VoIP and videoconferencing services at affordable costs.
Contact: phone +48 22 630 70 70
www.ts2.pl
|
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Using computers and enormous databases, information analysts are better than ever at weaving together a flow of biometric data-mostly fingerprints-collected from the field to identify individual insurgents.
Many of the fingerprints are extracted from bomb-making materials by experts after buildings are cleared by Soldiers, but there aren’t enough experts to do the collecting. The Army thinks the answer may be a well-trained private, as part of the Biometric Intelligence Project, an Army effort to collect, exploit and analyze biometric material collected on the battlefield in order to produce timely and actionable intelligence.
The heart of the initiative is a database with more than 3.1 million biometric records. So far, the system has produced 690 detentions in theater, 18 convictions in the Central Criminal Court of Iraq and has stopped approximately 59 would-be terrorists from entering the United States.
The system can also be used on the battlefield to flag a detainee as a maker of improvised explosive devices.
“Because privates do most of the looking, terrorists need to be smarter than the private,” said Byron Cousin, a retired first sergeant and mobile-training-team assistant leader sent to teach battlefield forensics at the Army’s Joint Readiness Training Center here.
“A private yells, ‘Sergeant, I found an arms cache’ as he’s rubbing his leg. The sergeant says ‘Good job. Army Achievement Medal. Don’t tell nobody you fell in on it,’” he joked with the paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne’s, 1st Brigade Combat Team, during the four-day forensics course.
The paratroopers were taught to use the handheld interagency identity detection equipment, which looks and feels like a professional camera without an attached lens. The device captures images of the face, the iris and fingerprint and was designed for forward units in the field.
Next, the Soldiers moved to hands-on labs at another training site, followed by two days of practical battlefield scenarios. The 40-hour course wraps up with a written test and one final graded scenario, said team leader Bryant Cox, a former Marine combat photographer who has worked in intelligence for many years.
Soldiers learned the basics of battlefield forensics in one of the buildings in a mock, realistic Iraqi village: how to dust and lift latent prints from common household surfaces; to roll prints from detainees; to photograph fingerprints, deceased enemies, detainees and cleared rooms; as well as how to document it all properly.
“You learn not only to look for the basic materials, but to put two and two together,” said Sgt. Clifton Whitley of the 2nd Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment, who was retaking the course. “For instance, in one house, a guy may be making something that you think is nothing; in the next house, a guy is making something else; and then there’s a third guy. Individually, there’s nothing there, but you put them all together, and suddenly you have pressure plates for an IED,” he said, suggesting that every team leader at the squad level and above should take the course.
Look in the kitchen for homemade explosives, said Cousin. He asked who had looked inside Iraqi and Afghan refrigerators. A few hands rose.
“You know what I’m talking about then,” he said. “In Iraq, they may have things in there you don’t recognize, but in Afghanistan, you see things that sometimes need to be shot again.”
When the laughter subsided, the Cousin explained that bomb makers are separating components and hiding them in the kitchen, he said.
There will be 29 training events this year, including all of the rotations at JRTC as well as the National Training Center in Fort Irwin, Calif., and Joint Multinational Readiness Center in Hohenfels, Germany.
“The need for trained forensics collectors on the battlefield is immediate,” said Cox. “During the last NTC training cycle we attended, three of the teams in our class were told before they even completed the course that they would have a forensics mission upon arriving in Afghanistan.”
In a well-known, real-life video of a U.S. Soldier shot by a sniper in Iraq, the Soldier’s armor stopped the 7.62mm slug. Following the discovery of the sniper’s rifle, numerous bare-handed Soldiers handled it, obliterating the shooter’s fingerprints. No chain of custody was documented, and the weapon was not packaged for most of its travel to the forensics lab.
However, after hours of meticulously dismantling and processing the weapon, forensics techs thinking outside the box developed many latent prints left on the rifle by the sniper. The sniper was positively identified three years later.
“Fingerprints are forever,” Cousin said. “Finding and documenting this biometric data is a way for you to serve long after you’re out of the Army,” he said.
Jun 11, 2009, post by Artur Nowak
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Since 2003, we provide satellite Internet in Iraq and Afghanistan globally enabling Iraqi and Afghan citizens, businesses and remotely deployed personnel to have broadband Internet access, enterprise connectivity, VoIP and videoconferencing services at affordable costs.
Contact: phone +48 22 630 70 70
www.ts2.pl
|
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Using computers and enormous databases, information analysts are better than ever at weaving together a flow of biometric data-mostly fingerprints-collected from the field to identify individual insurgents.
Many of the fingerprints are extracted from bomb-making materials by experts after buildings are cleared by Soldiers, but there aren’t enough experts to do the collecting. The Army thinks the answer may be a well-trained private, as part of the Biometric Intelligence Project, an Army effort to collect, exploit and analyze biometric material collected on the battlefield in order to produce timely and actionable intelligence.
The heart of the initiative is a database with more than 3.1 million biometric records. So far, the system has produced 690 detentions in theater, 18 convictions in the Central Criminal Court of Iraq and has stopped approximately 59 would-be terrorists from entering the United States.
The system can also be used on the battlefield to flag a detainee as a maker of improvised explosive devices.
“Because privates do most of the looking, terrorists need to be smarter than the private,” said Byron Cousin, a retired first sergeant and mobile-training-team assistant leader sent to teach battlefield forensics at the Army’s Joint Readiness Training Center here.
“A private yells, ‘Sergeant, I found an arms cache’ as he’s rubbing his leg. The sergeant says ‘Good job. Army Achievement Medal. Don’t tell nobody you fell in on it,’” he joked with the paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne’s, 1st Brigade Combat Team, during the four-day forensics course.
The paratroopers were taught to use the handheld interagency identity detection equipment, which looks and feels like a professional camera without an attached lens. The device captures images of the face, the iris and fingerprint and was designed for forward units in the field.
Next, the Soldiers moved to hands-on labs at another training site, followed by two days of practical battlefield scenarios. The 40-hour course wraps up with a written test and one final graded scenario, said team leader Bryant Cox, a former Marine combat photographer who has worked in intelligence for many years.
Soldiers learned the basics of battlefield forensics in one of the buildings in a mock, realistic Iraqi village: how to dust and lift latent prints from common household surfaces; to roll prints from detainees; to photograph fingerprints, deceased enemies, detainees and cleared rooms; as well as how to document it all properly.
“You learn not only to look for the basic materials, but to put two and two together,” said Sgt. Clifton Whitley of the 2nd Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment, who was retaking the course. “For instance, in one house, a guy may be making something that you think is nothing; in the next house, a guy is making something else; and then there’s a third guy. Individually, there’s nothing there, but you put them all together, and suddenly you have pressure plates for an IED,” he said, suggesting that every team leader at the squad level and above should take the course.
Look in the kitchen for homemade explosives, said Cousin. He asked who had looked inside Iraqi and Afghan refrigerators. A few hands rose.
“You know what I’m talking about then,” he said. “In Iraq, they may have things in there you don’t recognize, but in Afghanistan, you see things that sometimes need to be shot again.”
When the laughter subsided, the Cousin explained that bomb makers are separating components and hiding them in the kitchen, he said.
There will be 29 training events this year, including all of the rotations at JRTC as well as the National Training Center in Fort Irwin, Calif., and Joint Multinational Readiness Center in Hohenfels, Germany.
“The need for trained forensics collectors on the battlefield is immediate,” said Cox. “During the last NTC training cycle we attended, three of the teams in our class were told before they even completed the course that they would have a forensics mission upon arriving in Afghanistan.”
In a well-known, real-life video of a U.S. Soldier shot by a sniper in Iraq, the Soldier’s armor stopped the 7.62mm slug. Following the discovery of the sniper’s rifle, numerous bare-handed Soldiers handled it, obliterating the shooter’s fingerprints. No chain of custody was documented, and the weapon was not packaged for most of its travel to the forensics lab.
However, after hours of meticulously dismantling and processing the weapon, forensics techs thinking outside the box developed many latent prints left on the rifle by the sniper. The sniper was positively identified three years later.
“Fingerprints are forever,” Cousin said. “Finding and documenting this biometric data is a way for you to serve long after you’re out of the Army,” he said.
May 06, 2009, post by Artur Nowak
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Since 2003, we provide satellite Internet in Iraq and Afghanistan globally enabling Iraqi and Afghan citizens, businesses and remotely deployed personnel to have broadband Internet access, enterprise connectivity, VoIP and videoconferencing services at affordable costs.
Contact: phone +48 22 630 70 70
www.ts2.pl
|
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
There is no argument that the United States Military is the most powerful military in the World. We have achieved a level of technology in military weapons and equipment that no other nation on earth comes close to.
So, what weapons and equipment is available to our military service members in times of war and conflict? This series will describe some of the main weapons and equipment items used by our members. It would take a very large book to thoroughly discuss all of the weapons and equipment used by the United States Military today, and I won’t even try. This series will try to cover the highlights, starting with some of the main weapons and equipment used by the Infantry and Special Operations Units. In future parts of this series, I’ll cover military vehicles, including tanks and armor, missiles and artillery, military aircraft, and military ships and submarines.
Small Arms
The basics of basics are the small arms weapons used by the individual infantryman. Here are the basic small arms used by the United States Army:
M16A2 Rifle. The M16A2 is the standard issue rifle. It’s carried by pretty much every soldier in a combat zone. Most people simply call it the M-16. The M-16 has been around in one version or another since the Vietnam war (the first version, the M16A1 entered Army service in 1964). It’s longevity is creditable to its usefulness as a general assault weapon. It’s quite simply one of the finest military rifles ever made (although advocates of the M-4 Carbine may argue with me). The rifle is lightweight, simple to operate, and puts out a lot of lead.
The M16A2 5.56mm rifle is a lightweight, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed, shoulder or hip-fired weapon designed for either automatic fire (3-round bursts) or semiautomatic fire (single shot) through the use of a selector lever. The weapon has a fully adjustable rear sight. The bottom of the trigger guard opens to provide access to the trigger while wearing winter mittens. The upper receiver/barrel assembly has a fully adjustable rear sight and a compensator which helps keep the muzzle down during firing. The steel bolt group and barrel extension are designed with locking lugs which lock the bolt group to the barrel extension allowing the rifle to have a lightweight aluminum receiver.
Primary function: Infantry weapon
Manufacturer: Colt Manufacturing and Fabrique Nationale Manufacturing Inc.
Length: 39.63 inches (100.66 centimeters)
Weight, with 30 round magazine: 8.79 pounds (3.99 kilograms)
Bore diameter: 5.56mm (.233 inches)
Maximum effective range:
Area target: 2,624.8 feet (800 meters)
Point target: 1,804.5 feet (550 meters)
Muzzle velocity: 2,800 feet (853 meters) per second
Rate of fire:
Cyclic: 800 rounds per minute
Sustained: 12-15 rounds per minute
Semiautomatic: 45 rounds per minute
Burst: 90 rounds per minute
Magazine capacity: 30 rounds
Unit Replacement Cost: $586
M-4 Carbine
The M-4 combat assault rifle first entered Army service in 1997. The rifle is the standard weapon used by some Army units such as the 82nd Airborne Division and special operations units, such as Army Rangers.
With a shortened barrel and collapsible stock, the M-4 is ideal for close quarter marksmanship where light weight and quick action are required. Firing a standard 5.56 millimeter round, the weapon weighs a mere 5.6 lbs. (empty). A revised rear sight allows for better control of the weapon out to the maximum range of the ammunition used. With the PAQ-4 (Infrared Sight) mounted on the forward rail system, the M-4 can be fitted for increased firepower.
The M-4 Carbine can also be fitted with the M-203 40mm grenade launcher. The M-203 is a lightweight, compact, breech loading, pump action, single shot launcher. The launcher consists of a hand guard and sight assembly with an adjustable metallic folding, short-range blade sight assembly, and an aluminum receiver assembly which houses the barrel latch, barrel stop and firing mechanism. The launcher is capable of firing a variety of low velocity 40mm ammunition. The launcher also has a quadrant sight that may be attached to the M-4 carrying handle and is used when precision is required out to the maximum effective range of the weapon. The M-4 in this photograph also has an M-68 close-quarters battle sight mounted on the rear rail and a PAQ-4 infra-red sight on the forward rail.
Type: Compact assault rifle
Entered Army Service: 1997
Specifications:
Caliber: 5.56mm
Weight: 5.65 lbs
Range: 500 m
Rate of fire: variable, depending on rate selected
M-24 Sniper Weapon
The M24 Sniper’s Weapon System (SWS) represents a return to bolt action sniper rifles by the US Army. The rifle entered Army service in 1998. The M24 uses the Remington 700 action, although the receiver has been made for adaptation to take the .300 Winchester Magnum round. The stock (HS Precision) is made of a composite of Kevlar, graphite and fiberglass bound together with epoxy resins, and features aluminum bedding block and adjustable butt plate. A detachable bipod (Harris) can be attached to the stock’s fore-end.
The rifle is a bolt-action, six-shot repeating rifle (one round in the chamber and five rounds in the magazine). It is used with either the M3A telescope (day optic sight, usually called the M3A scope, a 10X fixed Leupold M3 Ultra telescope) or the metallic iron sight. This is the sniper weapon used by the Army.
Caliber: 7.62x51mm NATO (.308 win)
Operation: Bolt Action
Feed: 5-Round internal magazine
Weight: 12.1 lb (5.49 kg) empty without telescope
Length: 43in (1092mm)
Sights: 10×42 Leupold Ultra M3A telescope sight (Mil-Dots), plus detachable emergency iron sights. (Redfield Palma International)
Barrel: 24″ length, 1 twist in 11.2″, 5 lands & grooves.
Stock: HS Precision – adjustable length.
Max Effective Range: 800 meters (875 yards)
Expected Accuracy: 1 MOA with M118 (Ammo is limiting factor)
M40A1 Sniper Rifle
This is the preferred sniper rifle for the U.S. Marine Corps. The M40A1 sniper rifle is based on the Remington model 700. It is a heavy barrel, bolt action, magazine fed 7.62mm rifle that is optimized for accuracy with Match Grade ammunition. The rifle is equipped with a special 10 power Unertl sniper scope. With scope, the rifle weighs approximately 14.5 pounds. It is equipped with a built-in five round magazine.
The unique characteristics of the M40A1 Sniper Rifle are: commercial competition-grade heavy barrel, McMillan fiberglass stock and butt pad, modified Winchester Model 70 floor plate and trigger guard, and modified and lightened trigger. In addition, each stock is epoxy bedded for accuracy and all weapons must shoot less than one minute of angle (MOA).
The M40A1 was put into service in the 1970s to meet the need of a long range sniper rifle. Each rifle is hand built by specially trained and qualified personnel at the Marine Corps Marksmanship Training Unit (MTU) at Quantico, Virginia.
Length: 44 inches (111.76 centimeters)
Barrel length: 24 inches (61 centimeters)
Weight: 14.5 pounds (6.58 kilograms)
Bore diameter: 7.62mm (.308 inches)
Maximum effective range: 1000 yards (914 meters)
Muzzle velocity: 2550 feet (777 meters) per second
Chamber pressure: 50,000 psi
Magazine capacity: 5 rounds
Unit Replacement Cost: $2,105
M-249 SAW
The M-249 is unofficially called the Minimi. The official name for the weapon is SAW which means Squad Automatic Weapon. Early test versions of the M-249 were plagued with problems, but the current model is considered reliable. The weapon entered Army service in 1987, replacing the M-60 Machine Gun.
The M-249 is a .223 cal (5.56mm) gas operated light weight machine gun which feeds from a belt held in a 100 or 200 rounds box under the gun. This weapon has a plastic pistol grip and a folding stock so it can be kept compact and light.
The M-249 machine gun is an ideal complementary weapon system for the infantry squad platoon. It is light enough to be carried and operated by one man, and can be fired from the hip in an assault, even when loaded with a 200-round ammunition box. The barrel change facility ensures that it can continue to fire for long periods. The US Army has conducted strenuous trials on the M249, showing that this weapon has a reliability factor that is well above that of most other small arms weapon systems. The weapon is used by the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps.
Type: Squad automatic weapon
Entered service: 1987
Specifications:
Caliber: 5.56mm
Length:100 cm
Weight:16.3 lbs
Range: 800 meters
Rate of fire: 750 rounds per minute
M-240 Machine Gun
The M-240 entered Army and Marine Corps service in 1997. The M-240 is a version of FN’s MAG 58 general-purpose machine gun. The M-240 fires the 7.62mm NATO round and is very reliable, with an estimated 26,000 Mean Rounds Between Failure (MRBF).
Advantages of this weapon include its popularity with other nation’s forces and number of configurations. For example, in a helicopter crash, the M-240d helicopter-mount version could be quickly modified by installing the bipod and butt stock of the M-240b version, which would then allow the weapon to be used for self defense by the surviving helicopter crew members.
The M-240 is manufactured in the following configurations: M-240b is designed for infantry use. The “B” version weapon is equipped with a thermal shield over the rear of the barrel to protect the operator. The M-240c version is designed for use internally in M2/M3 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle. The M-240d is designed for use on pintel mounts in helicopters and on the outside of tanks and armored vehicles. The M-240g version is used by special operations forces. The heat shield on this version is removed and there are special fittings for night sights.
Type: Medium machine gun
Entered service: 1997
Specifications:
Caliber: 7.62mm
Weight: 27.6 lbs
Range: 1,100 m
Rate of fire: 600-9 rounds per minute
M-2 Machine Gun
The Browning M2 .50 Caliber Machine Gun, Heavy barrel is an automatic, recoil operated, air-cooled machine gun with adjustable headspace and is crew transportable with limited amounts of ammunition over short distances. By repositioning some of the component parts, ammunition may be fed from either the left or right side. A disintegrating metallic link-belt is used to feed the ammunition into the weapon.
This gun is has a back plate with spade grips, trigger, and bolt latch release. This gun may be mounted on ground mounts and most vehicles as an anti-personnel and anti-aircraft weapon. The gun is equipped with leaf-type rear sight, flash suppressor and a spare barrel assembly. Associated components are the M63 antiaircraft mount and the M3 tripod mount.
The M-2 is used by all of the United States Military Services.
Builder: Saco Defense
Length: 61.42 inches (156 centimeters)
Weight:
Gun: 84 pounds (38 kilograms)
M3 Tripod (Complete): 44 pounds (19.98 kilograms)
Total: 128 pounds (58 kilograms)
Bore diameter: .50 inches (12.7mm)
Maximum effective range: 2000 meters with tripod mount
Maximum range: 4.22 miles (6.8 kilometers)
Cyclic rate of fire: 550 rounds per minute
Unit Replacement Cost: $14,002
M-9 Handgun
Did you know that in combat, it’s mostly officers who carry handguns? Most enlisted don’t. Notable exceptions are military police, and special operations forces. The M-9 pistol is the primary sidearm for all of the military services. It entered the services in 1985 (1990 for the Army), pushing out the older M-1911A1 .45-caliber pistol, a weapon with an 80-year military history, and 4-inch-barrel, .38-caliber revolvers. The adoption of the M-9 pistol was the result of a congressional mandate to equip all U.S. services with a standard handgun.
The Colt-designed M-1911A1 served soldiers well in many wars; some older soldiers argued, why replace it? As with other Army weapons, competition proved the M-9 to be the best sidearm.
To get the nod, the M-9 had to meet strict requirements for functional reliability, speed of first shot, rapidity of fire, speed of reloading, range, penetration and accuracy to 50 yards. Also, the pistol’s components had to be interchangeable, so a working weapon could be pieced together from the parts of others.
The M-9 went through a series of rugged tests to evaluate its functionality. An extreme climatic test checked its ability to withstand temperatures between minus 40 and 140 degrees. A 10-day salt water immersion and humidity trial tested its resistance to corrosion. It tackled mud, sand, dirt and water to test its operation under adverse field conditions. A fully loaded weapon was dropped four feet onto a hard surface to test for accidental discharge.
To test the ability to swap pistol components, testers fired and then disassembled 10 weapons. The parts were randomly put back together, then the weapons were fired again with no problems. If needed, the parts of weapons can be cannibalized to create a working pistol from broken ones.
Type: Semiautomatic pistol
Entered Army service: 1990
Specifications:
Caliber: 9mm
Length: 217mm
Barrel length: 125mm
Weight: 850 g
Magazine capacity: 15 rounds
Range: 50 m
M-1014 Joint Service Combat Shotgun
The Joint Service Combat Shotgun is a a compact, lightweight, semi-automatic, 12 gauge weapon configured with a standard magazine with a minimum capacity of six 2 3/4 inch cartridges. The Combat Shotgun is capable of firing 12 gauge 3.0 inch magnum ammunition and is interoperable with standard 2 3/4 inch ammunition without adjustment to the operating system.
The M-1014 is constructed of lightweight polymer materials and corrosion resistant metal components. To enhance mission performance and provide increased operator flexibility, the M-1014 is equipped with modular components such as modular stocks in various configurations and modular barrels of various lengths.
The Marine Corps was the lead agency in the test and evaluation of this shotgun. It is designed to replace the many different shotguns used in all of the military service. The shotgun was officially accepted for production in 2001. The weapon is primarily used by security forces and by special operations forces.
Caliber: 12 gauge, accepts 23/4″ and 3″ standard and magnum loads.
Length: 39.8″ w/stock extended, 34.9″ collapsed.
Weight: 8.44 lbs. empty.
Safety: Ambidextrous manual cross bolt.
Magazine Capacity: Six 3″ shells seven 23/4″, plus one chambered round can be unloaded without cycling through the action.
Trigger Pull: 5.5 to 7.28 lbs.
Buttstock: Modular telescopic with removable pistol grip.
Sights: Adjustable aperture rear and fixed post front, radius 23.7″
Maximum Effective Range: 40 yards with 00 buckshot and in excess of 100 yards with the rifled slug.
MP-5 Sub-Machine Gun
The MP5-N fires from a closed and locked bolt in either the automatic or semiautomatic modes. This gun is recoil operated and has a unique delayed roller locked bolt system, a retractable butt stock, a removable suppressor, and illuminating flashlight integral to the forward hand guard. The flashlight is operated by a pressure switch custom fitted to the pistol grip. This is the same basic weapon used by the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team and other world-class counter-terrorist organizations.
The present inventory includes both suppressed and non-suppressed versions of the MP5. The basic configuration of this weapon makes for an ideal size, weight,and capable (accuracy, lethality, reliability, etc.) close quarters battle weapon system.
This weapon is manufactured by Heckler and Koch and is presently fielded to Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance Companies and Marine Security Force Battalions, and Special Operations Units, such as Army Rangers, Delta Force, and Navy SEALS.. It is currently considered the main weapon in the close quarters battle (CQB) environment.
Length:
Collapsed stock: 19.29 inches (49 centimeters)
Extended stock: 25.98 inches (66 centimeters)
Weight: 7.44 pounds (3.38 kilograms) (w/30 round magazine)
Bore diameter: 9mm (.355 inches)
Maximum effective range: 328.1 feet (100 meters)
Rate of fire: 800 rounds per minute
Unit Replacement Cost: $894
Hand Grenades
Hand grenades are nothing more than small bombs,containing explosives or chemicals, that can be thrown by hand or rigged as booby traps. Their origin has been traced back many centuries, and it is generally agreed that the Chinese, whom we credit with the invention of gunpowder, were first to use them. However, it was not until World War I that they were sufficiently developed to be effective and safe. By World War II, the grenade inventory expanded to include smoke grenades for signaling and screening, phosphorus and fragmentation grenades to produce casualties, and gas grenades for both casualty and riot control effects. The grenades being used today are in many respects representative of the entire history of the development of grenades.
There are several varieties of hand grenades designed for many purposes. All of these grenades can be broadly classified into six general types: fragmentation, illumination, chemical, incendiary, smoke, and practice and training grenades.
The M67 fragmentation grenade is the standard grenade used by the U.S. Military. It has a smooth, sheet-metal body and is shaped like a ball. Its outer case is lined on the inside with a serrated wire recoil. It is filled with 6.5 ounces of an explosive, known as Composition B, and uses a detonating type of fuze. When the detonator causes Composition B to explode,fragments of the body and fuze assembly are hurled in all directions. The M67 weighs 14 ounces and the average man can throw it 40 meters. The effective casualty-producing radius is 15 meters.
Small Missiles and Mortars
Sometimes you just need a bigger gun. There are times when infantry units need a little more firepower in the way of lightweight mortars or ground-to-air missiles to get rid of those bothersome enemy aircraft or tanks, or to punch through fortified buildings. Here are the main small ground-to-air missile systems and light mortars that are used by our “ground-pounders.”
FIM-9 Stinger Missile
The Stinger weapon system is a man portable (34.5 pounds), shoulder-fired, supersonic missile system designed to counter high speed, low-level, ground attack aircraft. The Stinger is effective against helicopters, unmanned aerial vehicles, and observation and transport aircraft. Once fired, the Stinger uses proportional navigation algorithms to guide the missile to a predicted intercept point. The Stinger missile can be used as a man portable air defense system (MANPAD) when the weapon is fired from the gunner’s shoulder, mounted aboard the Avenger weapons system, or mounted in the light armored vehicle-air defense variant (LAV-AD).
The Stinger is a true “fire and forget” missile, requiring no inputs from the gunner once the weapon is fired. This allows the gunner to take cover, move to an alternate position, or engage additional targets. The Stinger also possesses an integral identification, friend or foe (IFF) subsystem to assist the gunner in identifying friendly aircraft.
The launch motor ejects the missile from the launch tube. The missile coasts a safe distance (about 9 meters) from the gunner before the dual thrust flight motor ignites and provides a sustained 22 gravity acceleration that arms the missile. After the gunner arms the missile, a sustained flight phase maintains missile velocity until the propellant is consumed. Then the missile enters a free flight period in which the motor has burned out, but the missile maintains a degree of maneuverability prior to interception or self destruction.
The warhead consists of a fuze assembly and the equivalent of one pound of high explosives encased in a pyrophoric titanium cylinder. The fuze is extremely safe and makes the missile exempt from any hazards of electromagnetic radiation to ordnance conditions. The warhead can be detonated by penetrating the target, impacting the target, or self-destruction. Self-destruction occurs 15 to 19 seconds after launch.
Type: Short range air-defense missile
Entered Army service: 1981
Propulsion: Dual thrust solid fuel rocket motor
Length: 5 feet (1.5 meters)
Width: 5.5 inches (13.96 centimeters)
Weight: 12.5 pounds (5.68 kilograms)
Weight fully armed: 34.5 pounds (15.66 kg)
Range: 1 to 8 kilometers
Ceiling 10,000 feet (3.046 kilometers)
Speed: Supersonic in flight
Crew: 2 enlisted
Guidance system: Fire-and-forget passive infrared seeker
Warheads: High explosive
Rate of fire: 1 missile every 3 to 7 seconds
Sensors: Passive infrared
Unit Replacement Cost $38,000
Inventory: About 13,400 missiles available in the Army and Marine Corps
M-252 Mortar
The M252 81mm Medium Extended Range Mortar is a crew-served, medium weight mortar which is highly accurate and provides for a greater range (4,500 meters to 5,650 meters) and lethality than the previous 81mm mortar. The cannon has a crew-removable breech plug and firing pin. The muzzle end has a short tapered lead-in which acts as a blast attenuator device. The breech end is finned for better cooling. This mortar also uses the standard M64 mortar sight of the M-224 60mm mortar.
The M252 is an adaptation of the standard British 81mm mortar developed in the 1970s. It is mostly commonly found in the mortar platoon of an Army or Marine Corps infantry battalion.
The M252 is ideally suited to support airborne, air assault, mountain and light infantry units. The M-252 Mortar is used by the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps.
Type: 81mm mortar
Entered service: 1987
Caliber: 81mm
Barrel length:4 ft 6 in
Weight: 91 lbs
Range: 5,600 meters
Rate of fire: 15 rounds/min sustained
M-224 Lightweight Mortar
The M224 60mm Lightweight Mortar is a smooth bore, muzzle loading, high-angle-of-fire weapon. The cannon assembly is composed of the barrel, combination base cap, and firing mechanism. The mount consists of a bipod and a base plate which is provided with screw type elevating and traversing mechanisms to elevate/traverse the mortar. The M64 sight unit is attached to the bipod mount via a standard dovetail. An additional short range sight is attached to the base of the cannon tube for firing the mortar on the move and during assaults. It has a spring-type shock absorber to absorb the shock of recoil in firing.
The M224 replaced the older (WWII era) M2 and M19, 60mm Mortars. These weapons only possessed 2,200 yards of effective range. The M224 was designed to fire all types of the older ammunition, but its primary rounds are of the newer, longer-range type. The weapon is used primary by the U.S. Marine Corps.
Length: 40 inches (101.6 centimeters)
Weight: 46.5 pounds (21.11 kilograms)
Bore diameter: 60mm
Maximum effective range: 2.17 miles (3490 meters)
Rates of fire:
Maximum: 30 rounds/minute
Sustained: 20 rounds/minute
Unit Replacement Cost: $10,658
AT4 Anti-Armor Weapon
The M136 AT4 is the Army and Marine Corps’s primary light anti-tank weapon. The M136 AT4 is a recoilless rifle used primarily by Infantry Forces for engagement and defeat of light armor. The recoilless rifle design permits accurate delivery of an 84mm High Explosive Anti-Armor warhead, with negligible recoil.
The M136 AT4 is a lightweight, self-contained, anti armor weapon consisting of a free-flight, fin-stabilized, rocket-type cartridge packed in an expendable, one-piece, fiberglass-wrapped tube. The M136 AT4 is man-portable and is fired from the right shoulder only. The launcher is watertight for ease of transportation and storage.
Though the M136 AT4 can be employed in limited visibility, the firer must be able to see and identify the target and estimate the range to it. Subsequent to the initial fielding of the weapon, a reusable night sight bracket was developed and fielded. It permits utilization of standard night vision equipment. The system’s tactical engagement range is 250 meters and has been used in multiple combat situations. The round of ammunition is self-contained in a disposable launch tube. The system weighs 15 pounds and can be utilized effectively with minimal training.
Primary function: Light anti-armor weapon
Manufacturer: FFV Ordnance, Sweden and Alliant Techsystems
Length: 40 inches (101.6 centimeters)
Weight: 14.75 pounds (6.7 kilograms)
Bore diameter: 84mm
Maximum effective range: 984.3 feet (300 meters)
Penetration: 400 mm of rolled homogenous armor
Time of Flight (to 250 meters): less than 1 second
Muzzle velocity: 950 feet (285 meters) per second
Operating temperature: -104 to +140° F (-40 to +60° C)
Ammunition: Rocket with shaped charge warhead
Unit Replacement Cost: $1,480.64
Multi-Purpose Assault Weapon
The Shoulder-Launched Multi-Purpose Assault Weapon (SMAW) is designed to destroy bunkers and other fortifications during assault operations as well as other designated targets with the dual mode rocket and to destroy main battle tanks with the HEAA rocket.
The SMAW is an 83mm man-portable weapon system consisting of the MK153 Mod 0 launcher, the MK 3 Mod 0 encased HEDP rocket, the MK 6 Mod 0 encased HEAA rocket, and the MK217 Mod 0 spotting rifle cartridge. The launcher consists of a fiberglass launch tube, a 9mm spotting rifle, an electro-mechanical firing mechanism, open battle sights, and a mount for the MK42 Mod 0 optical and AN/PVS-4 night sights. The High Explosive, Dual Purpose (HEDP) rocket is effective against bunkers, masonry and concrete walls, and light armor. The High Explosive Anti-Armor (HEAA) rocket is effective against current tanks without additional armor. The 9mm spotting rounds are ballistically matched to the rockets and increase the gunner’s first round hit probability. Training is accomplished with the MK7 Mod 0 encased common practice rocket and the MK213 Mod 0 noise cartridge.
The SMAW MK153 Mod 0 launcher is based on the Israeli B-300 and consists of the launch tube, the spotting rifle, the firing mechanism, and mounting brackets. The launch tube is fiberglass/epoxy with a gel coat on the bore. The spotting rifle is a British design and is mounted on the right side of the launch tube. The firing mechanism mechanically fires the spotting rifle and uses a magneto to fire the rocket. The mounting brackets connect the components and provide the means for boresighting the weapon. The encased rockets are loaded at the rear of the launcher. The spotting cartridges are stored in a magazine in the cap of the encased rocket.
Originally developed as a unique weapon for the U.S. Marine Corps, during Desert Storm, 150 launchers and 5,000 rockets were provided to the U.S. Army. The Army subsequently added the weapon to its inventory.
Primary function: Portable anti-armor rocket launcher.
Length:
To Carry: 29.9 inches (75.95 centimeters)
Ready-to-Fire: 54 inches (137.16 cm)
Weight:
To Carry: 16.6 pounds (7.54 kg)
Ready-to-Fire (HEDP): 29.5 pounds (13.39 kg)
Ready-to-Fire (HEAA): 30.5 pounds (13.85 kg)
Bore diameter: 83mm
Maximum effective range:
1 x 2 Meter Target: 250 meters
Tank-Sized Target: 500 meters
Introduction date: 1984
Unit Replacement Cost: $13,000
Dragon Weapon System
The Dragon Weapon System is designed to engage and destroy armor and light armored vehicles. The weapon is also effective against hard targets such as bunkers and field fortifications.
The warhead power of Dragon makes it possible for a single Marine or soldier to defeat armored vehicles, fortified bunkers, concrete gun emplacements, or other hard targets. The launcher consists of a smoothbore fiberglass tube, breech/gas generator, tracker and support, bipod, battery, sling, and forward and aft shock absorbers. Non-integral day and night sights are required to utilize the Dragon.
The complete system consists of the launcher, the tracker and the missile, which is installed in the launcher during final assembly and received by the military in a ready to fire condition. The launch tube serves as the storage and carrying case for the missile. The night tracker operates in the thermal energy range.
The first-generation Dragon, a 1000-meter system requiring 11.2 seconds flight-to-target time, was developed for the US Army and fielded in 1970. A product improvement program (PIP) was initiated by the Marine Corps in 1985 and managed by NSWC Dahlgren. The PIP, designated Dragon II, was designed to increase warhead penetration effectiveness by 85%. The Dragon II missile is actually a retrofit of warheads to the first generation missiles already in the Marine Corps and Army inventory.
TOW Missile System
The tube-launched, optically-tracked, wire-guided (TOW) missile is a crew-portable, vehicle-mounted, heavy anti armor weapon system consisting of a launcher and one of five versions of the TOW missile. It is designed to defeat armored vehicles and other targets such as field fortifications from ranges up to 3,750 meters. After firing the missile, the gunner must keep the crosshairs of the sight centered on the target to ensure a hit. The system will operate in all weather conditions in which the gunner can see a target throughout the missile flight by using either a day or night sight.
The TOW system is used on the high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV), the M151 jeep, the armored personnel carrier, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV), COBRA helicopters, the Improved Tow Vehicle (ITV), and the USMC light armored vehicle. Three of the five TOW missile versions—Basic TOW, Improved TOW, and TOW 2—are no longer being produced for U.S. forces. However, these versions are used by 43 allied countries, and Switzerland co-produces the missile system. In the late 1980s, Hughes Aircraft Company, prime contractor for the TOW weapon system, began producing the TOW 2A which gave the system the capability of defeating reactive armor. The TOW 2B provides additional capability against future armored threats.
In May 1972, U.S. soldiers used the TOW in combat during the Vietnam War. This was the very first time that American troops had ever fired an American-made missile under wartime conditions. The system has also seen action in various clashes between Israel and Syria as well as during the Iran/Iraq war. The TOW was one of the earliest missile systems to arrive in Southwest Asia and proved to be highly effective throughout Operation Desert Storm.
Individual Equipment
It’s not all about guns and shooting. Here are some nifty individual equipment items used by our soldiers and Marines.
AN/PVS-14 Night Vision Device
AN/PVS-14 Monocular Night Vision Device (MNVD) is a light-weight, third generation night vision device that gives the soldier the operational advantage to “see at night.” NVDs (known also as Night Vision Goggles) are electro-optical devices that intensify (or amplify) existing light instead of relying on a light source of their own.
The devices are sensitive to a broad spectrum of light, from visible through infrared. An accessory illuminator can increase the light available at the infrared end of the spectrum by casting a beam of light that is not visible to the human eye. When a soldier looks “through” a NVD, an amplified electronic image is seen on a phosphor screen, giving the soldier the ability to operate with little or no illumination from the moon, stars, or other ambient light sources.
The PVS-14 system can be used with the head mount, as shown, or with a Kevlar helmet mount.
Field of View (degrees): 40 degrees
Min Focus Range: 40 cm
Weight (unit): 420 grams
Infrared light emitting diode
Automatic brightness protection
Variable gain control knob
Low battery indicator
Power Source: 2) AA batteries (Alkaline)
Operating temperature: -51 C to + 49 C
Storage temperature: -51 C to + 85 C
Immersion: 1 meter for 30 minutes
SINCGARS RT-1523E Radio
The SINCGARS RT-1523E Advanced System Improvement Program (ASIP) Radio is the primary Combat Net Radio for the US Army, designated primarily for voice command and control for infantry, armor, and artillery units.
The radio is a Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System which incorporates all the features of previous radio systems used with further enhancements to reduce it’s weight and size for the dismounted soldier and optimize its performance in the tactical internet. This is mainly due to the internal redesign of the radio and taking advantage of software based Digital Signal Processing (DSP) architecture.
The ASIP radio is one-half the size and one-third the weight of the full size radio. With battery, handset and antenna, the total man pack weight is less than 9 lbs. The system is used for all inter-platoon communications. SINCGARS is capable of short-range or long-range operation for voice or digital communications. It can be used for single channel operation or in a jam-resistant, frequency-hopping mode that can be changed as needed.
30-88 MHz VHF-FM
2320 Channels
Single Channel and Frequency Hopping
6 FH Presets (including TRANSEC keys)
6 Single-channel Presets Plus Manual and Cue Channels
Enhanced Data Mode (BPS) 1200, 2400, 4800, 9600
Standard Data Mode (BPS) 600, 1200, 2400, 4800, 16,000
Size: 3.4″ high, 5.3″ wide, and 10.15″ deep
33 Hr. Battery Life
Embedded GPS Option
Comprehensive Built-in Test Isolates Fault to Individual Module
Mollie Vest
MOLLE is an Army and Marine Corps item that replaces the aging ALICE (All-purpose, Lightweight, Individual Carrying Equipment) pack and Integrated Individual Fighting System introduced in 1988. One of the main components of the MOLLE system is the nylon mesh vest that has removable pockets to accommodate different carrying needs.
Some of the new technology centers on the MOLLE’s frame. Instead of the tubular aluminum used with the ALICE, a new anatomically-contoured frame made with plastic originally used in automobile bumpers has dramatically increased durability, functioning in temperatures ranging from -40 to 120 degrees F. MOLLE also advances load-carrying ability with its new suspension system. Heavily-padded shoulder straps and waist belt are adjustable for varying torso lengths, eliminating the two sizes of ALICE. More weight is distributed at the shoulders and hips, and during a prolonged road march, soldiers can shift the weight to where it feels more comfortable. Additionally, the Fighting Load Carrier (FLC) replaces the Load Bearing Equipment (LBE) web belt and suspenders of the ALICE.
Soldiers and Marines can significantly increase the amount of ammunition they carry, and weight is evenly distributed across the torso. The vest has no metal clips or hooks that can be awkward and dig into the skin, and it has an H-harness in back to minimize heat buildup. It’s adjustable to all sizes, and because the vest sits high, soldiers can fasten the MOLLE frame waist belt underneath the FLC to distribute some of the load to the hips. Three flap pockets on the FLC each hold two 30-round magazines, two grenade pockets and two canteen pouches.
Flak Vest
Getting shot or hit by shrapnel can ruin your entire day in combat. In October of 2002, the Army and Marine Corps began issuing a new kevlar flak vest that is 35 percent lighter than the previous version. The 16.4-pound Interceptor system consists of a tactical vest and a pair of small arms protective inserts. The Kevlar vest includes detachable neck and groin guards, while the ceramic plates slide into pockets on the front and rear.
By itself, the Interceptor vest insulates a soldier from shrapnel and 9-mm pistol rounds. When the protective inserts are added, the system acts as a ballistic barrier to 7.62-mm rifle ammunition. The previous flak vest only offered protection against fragmentation.
The Interceptor’s inter-changeable components give troops the ability to dress to the level of a particular threat. Applications include combat operations, peace-keeping missions and field-training exercises. Regardless of the situation, Interceptor Body Armor functions as an effective defense against mines, grenades, mortar shells, artillery fire and rifle projectiles.
The Interceptor system allows commanders increased capability in the area’s of survivability and maneuverability. Survivability due to the ability to withstand up to 7.62 mm hits and maneuverability due to the 8.7-pound weight savings of the new system.
Land Warrior
American soldiers and Marines are already among the most deadly in the world, but a system called Land Warrior will soon make them unmatched. While Land Warrior is officially still in the test & development stage, there is no doubt that some units are and will be “testing” the system in real combat environments.
Land Warrior integrates small arms with high-tech equipment enabling ground forces to deploy, fight and win on the battlefields of the 21st century. Land Warrior came about in 1991 when an Army study group recommended the service look at the soldier as a complete weapon system. The first priority in Land Warrior is lethality. The second is survivability and the third, command and control. The program will cost $2 billion when 45,000 sets of the equipment are fielded between 2001-2014. The Marine Corps, Air Force and many foreign countries are interested in the system.
First and foremost, Land Warrior is a fighting system. Land Warrior has several subsystems: the weapon, integrated helmet assembly, protective clothing and individual equipment, computer/radio, and software. The weapon subsystem is built around the M-16/M-4 modular carbine. It has a laser range finder/digital compass, a daylight video camera, a laser aiming light and a thermal sight.
This system allows infantrymen to operate in all types of weather and at night. In conjunction with other components, a soldier can even shoot around corners without exposing himself to enemy fire. The integrated helmet assembly is lighter and more comfortable than today’s helmet. It has a helmet-mounted monocular day display, a night sensor with flat panel display, a laser detection module, ballistic/laser eye protection, a microphone and a headset.
The protective clothing and individual equipment subsystem incorporates modular body armor and upgrade plates that can stop small-arms rounds fired point-blank. It includes an integrated load-bearing frame, chemical/biological protective garments and modular rucksack.
The infantryman attaches the computer/radio subsystem to his load-bearing frame. Over this goes the rucksack for personal gear. The computer processor is fused with radios and a Global Positioning System locator. A hand grip wired to the pack and attached to the soldier’s chest acts as a computer mouse and also allows the wearer to change screens, key on the radio, change frequencies and send digital information.
The subsystem comes in two flavors: The leader version has two radios and a flat panel display/keyboard, and soldiers have one radio. With the equipment, leaders and soldiers can exchange information. Soldiers using their weapon-mounted camera, for example, can send videos to their leaders.
Finally, the software subsystem includes tactical and mission support modules, maps and tactical overlays, and the ability to capture and display video images. The system also contains a power management module. Designers set up the system so it can be updated as technology improves.
One problem the Army must overcome before final fielding is power. Current batteries last about 150 minutes with all systems running. Clearly soldiers won’t have all systems running all the time, but the Army does not consider this acceptable. Other batteries under development by the Army’s Communications- Electronics Command may push the time up to 30 hours.
The first Land Warrior production version will be fielded in fiscal 2004. The Army expects to procure 34,000 sets of the system. That system will be more streamlined then the “test systems” in use today and will contain a multifunction laser. Soldiers will be able to point the laser at a target and the information will go directly to the network. This will allow the soldier to call for artillery fire, for example, without having to voice transmit coordinates.
Apr 15, 2009, post by Artur Nowak
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Since 2003, we provide satellite Internet in Iraq and Afghanistan globally enabling Iraqi and Afghan citizens, businesses and remotely deployed personnel to have broadband Internet access, enterprise connectivity, VoIP and videoconferencing services at affordable costs.
Contact: phone +48 22 630 70 70
www.ts2.pl
|
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
During the 1990s a variety of defence forces from around the globe began to look at the impact of new technologies on combat effectiveness. For the first time the infantry man was studied as a complete combat system, with a view to enhancing his/her mobility, survivability, strike power and communications.
“For the first time, in the 1990s, the infantry man was studied as a complete combat system.”These programmes culminated in September 2000 with the first operational test of Land Warrior system by the American 82nd Airborne Division. The core objective of Land Warrior revolved around the application of commercial technology and its use in conjunction with existing military hardware to provide the infantry man with enhanced situation awareness. Situational awareness was deemed critical, as a more informed soldier was obviously going to be vastly more effective in any combat role.
These Land Warrior systems focused on the incorporation of digital maps, intelligence information and imagery from a weapon-mounted thermal weapon sight (TWS). The visual elements of the system included a video camera, a helmet-mounted display and an M-4 carbine equipped with the TWS enhancements.
Land Warrior-equipped soldiers also benefited from and a laser rangefinder / digital compass and enhanced communications with an integral computer / radio subsystem that provided both voice and wireless data communication capabilities.
It was a comprehensive approach that proved to be very heavy when evaluated in combat (during the first Iraq war). However the system also served as a great proof-of-concept as the basic idea showed sufficient promise to justify a ‘second generation’ development of the technology.
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE BATTLEFIELD OF THE FUTURE
The introduction of these systems has immensely significant tactical implications. The integrated use of wireless communications, GPS receivers and thermal sights allows for the implementation of dispersed yet highly coordinated deployments at night or in adverse conditions.
“The Land Warrior system proved to be very heavy when evaluated in combat.”This ability to coordinate troops with greater sophistication effectively acts as a ‘force multiplier’.
It allows a platoon or company commander to dynamically control the battle-space by providing them with real-time positional data on friendly forces, known enemy forces and the provision for the dissemination of voiceless non line-of-sight communications.
It almost makes controlling the battlefield play out somewhat like a sophisticated real-time strategy computer game, as the real-time input and force movement controls makes it possible to react, anticipate and respond as fluid battlefield dynamics change minute by minute.
Successive live fire trials of the Land Warrior system demonstrated this ability, with Land Warrior-equipped soldiers showing a clear advantage over non-equipped forces.
However arguably the most revolutionary aspect of the Land Warrior was the fact it helped the infantry man operate as a data collection sensor via the Land Warrior Stryker integration kit, which provides for the extension of individual soldier’s personal area network to allow voice and data communication with dismounted Land Warriors, Land Warrior units mounted in other Stryker vehicles and integration into the Army Battle Command System and Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2) Appliqué. (see images one and two on the right).
Though broadly successful, subsequent trials and a recent deployment to Iraq courtesy of the 4th Stryker Brigade Combat Team uncovered a number of shortcomings. The most significant of these is the significant time lag regarding map updating. Other issues such as high unit weight, low battery life, outdated electronics and optics also caused concern. These shortcomings combined with a continued high cost of $30,000 a unit resulted in the abandonment of Land Warrior in February 2007.
Though less than successful in its first generation, as a proof of concept the Land Warrior system demonstrated its potential to act as a force multiplier by radically altering the force projection capabilities and combat effectiveness of the infantry utilising it. Through the use of emerging commercial technologies it is becoming possible to generate effective solutions for all shortcomings identified as a part of the Land Warrior evaluation.
“In trials, Land Warrior-equipped soldiers showing a clear advantage over non-equipped forces.”WORLDWIDE GROWTH
Recognition of this is best demonstrated in the number of countries establishing what can broadly be termed ‘future soldier’ programmes. These programmes include Land 125 (Australia), Félin (France), IdZ (Germany), Combatiente Futuro (Spain), Soldier Modernisation Programme (Netherlands), NORMANS (Norway), Soldado do Futuro (Portugal), IMESS (Switzerland), MARKUS (Sweden), ANOG (Israel), FIST (UK), BEST (Belgium) and Objective Force Warrior (USA).
Arguably the most ambitious of these programmes is the Objective Force Warrior (OFW) programme. Established in 2002 as a replacement for Land Warrior, OFW seeks to implement a holistic solution to equipping, monitoring and communicating with the future infantry man to produce a soldier with 20 times the effectiveness of the current soldier.
Central to the OFW programme is replacing the bulky, fragile and power-hungry systems of Land Warrior with lightweight reliable full-spectrum enhancements with much greater capabilities. These enhancements include better augmented weapon systems, individual armour protection, performance and medical aids, worn power sources, enhanced communications, sensors and modern computer systems.
Within OFW existing sensors and targeting aids have been integrated within the helmet to provide infrared, thermal, day / night video feed and chemical / biological sensor data on a visor approximating two 17in displays in front of the soldiers’ eyes.
Equipment has even been embedded in worn uniforms with the integration of physiological sensors to allow for the command / medical monitoring of life signs. These new technologies are going to make it far easier to aid troops in the field and should have an impact on casualty rates through the early detection of injuries and more efficient response to critical situations.
C4I?
In conjunction with the strategic and tactical benefits that networked infantry are set to provide the future army, the same technology presents a series of significant security challenges.
“The arms race of measure, countermeasure and counter – countermeasure has only just begun.”In light of the old IT adage ‘the only secure computer is one locked in a buried box’ the widespread introduction of C4I (command, control, communications, computer and intelligence) networks looks set to bring to prominence the battle for ‘electromagnetic dominance’ in future conflicts.
These systems themselves could be attacked and any attempt to impinge upon their effectiveness has to be anticipated.
With the increasing reliance on computer networks and the advantages they afford such equipped militaries, the introduction of asymmetric strategies to counter them via the use of hacking, jamming or ‘spoofing’ has become central to the strategic thinking of a number of military organisations.
Increasing indications from within both Russia and China point to a growing realisation that while true technological parity with the US may indeed not be possible the US reliance on computer networks represents its greatest vulnerability.
Additionally the dispersal of the technology to the infantry introduces a new level of vulnerability to military C4I networks. The capture of soldiers or vehicles could present a much greater issue as the enemy would then be able to try and access C4I networks and use this equipment against the force that originally deployed it. While in past conflicts any such captures provided only limited tactical information, future captures provide the potential for enemy forces to access data networks and acquire a wealth of information unthinkable only a decade ago.
Integral to the defence against both network attacks and equipment capture is the introduction of high-level network encryption and the ability of the network to isolate and exclude suspect equipment. At present the primary wireless standards utilised are centred on the IEEE 802.11 standard, with the technology used in vehicular applications, command posts, ad-hoc networking for special forces and the networking of unattended ground sensors for surveillance, force protection and intelligence gathering.
“The introduction of these combat systems has immensely significant tactical implications.”Future applications centre on the enhancement of IEEE 802.11 capabilities not only in terms of range with current modified COTS (commercial, off-the-shelf) technology providing up to 25km² of coverage for omni-directional antenna or 30km for directional (e.g. Elbit MaXess).
But the introduction of high-level encryption to provide secures ad-hoc networking or wireless communications for both a point-to-point and point-to-multipoint connectivity.
The introduction of such measures allow for field users share voice, video and data over a secure network (e.g. SecNet 11 Plus).
However as with all new military technologies the arms race of measure, countermeasure and counter-countermeasure has only just begun.
