Joint Services Ammunition Qualification

Joint Services Ammunition Qualification

Project ManagerManeuver Ammunition Systems

Mr. William Sanville13 Apr 04

5.56 Terminal Ballistics

Standardization

• Analyzing What’s Been Done

• Baselining Where We Are

• Collectively Working To Get Where We Need To Be

Long Range Body Armor Penetration

CQB Light Target

Effectiveness

M855 EFFECTIVENESSM855 EFFECTIVENESS

• After Action Reports from Operation Enduring Freedom, Reports that Effectiveness of M855 is Inadequate Close Quarter Battle Operations (CQB). Multiple Rounds Are Being Required for Adequate Effect

• U.S. Army Infantry Center on 15 Apr 02, Hosted a Meeting to Discuss Issue of “Stopping Power” of 5.56mm M855 Ctg. via In-theater Briefs. Meeting Consensus was that M855 was Performing as it was Intended. However, the Threat Target has Changed, As Well As the Role of Ground Combatant, therefore M855 Was Not Optimized for Current Operations and M4

Paradigm Shift

Joint Service Wound Ballistics Team IPT

A NEW LOOK: CAN WE DO BETTER?A NEW LOOK: CAN WE DO BETTER?

• Currently Testing 29 Bullet/Gun Combinations Using New Standard

• Joint Service Team is Concurrently Developing Torso Simulation & Evaluation Methodology

• Gelatin Data and Torso Simulation will be Combined for First Ever Measure of Effectiveness by Early Summer

THE PLAN AND PATH FORWARDTHE PLAN AND PATH FORWARD

NEW MEDIUM CALIBER ARMAMENT FOR MANY DOD APPLICATIONS

NEW MEDIUM CALIBER ARMAMENT FOR MANY DOD APPLICATIONS

STATEMENT OF PROBLEMSTATEMENT OF PROBLEM

• Multi Service Use of Armament Systems with Service Unique Qualification Requirements

• Redundant Test and Evaluation Wastes Critical Resources

CURRENT SITUATION CURRENT SITUATION

• Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force and Army Will Use the MK44 30mm Gun

• Primary Weapon for FCS ICV• Primary Weapon for EFV• Upgrade for C130• LPD 17 for Navy• CH 60 Helicopter

– Ammunition Requirements Very Similar

• Marine Corps Qualified 16 Rounds for the MK44 30mm Gun

• Why Can’t the Army Use the Marine Corps Qualified Ammunition?

DISCUSSION DISCUSSION

• Army & Navy (USMC) Qualification Test Requirements Are Similar But Differences Exist

• Other Services May Have Unique System Requirements

• Alternatives– Independently Develop Ammunition

• Very Costly Approach

– Create New Approach to Minimize Costs by:• Leveraging Navy/Marine Corps Mk44 and 30mm Knowledge

• Harmonize Future Test Plans Across Services

• Use of NDI Procurement Approach

PM-MAS APPROACH PM-MAS APPROACH

• Created IPT to Work Jointly With Navy/USMC to Minimize Duplication of Effort– Purpose - Can We Accept Marine Corps

Qualification in Lieu of Army Qualification?

ARMY/MARINE CORPS EVALUATIONARMY/MARINE CORPS EVALUATION

• Total Army Requirements Yield 72 Tests – Based on AR70-1 and AR700-142

• PM-MAS Team Evaluated Marine Corps Testing– Accepted All USMC Performance and Safety Data

• Evaluation Reduced 72 Tests to 10 Tests– Five are Specific FCS ICV Platform Integration

QUALIFICATION TESTSQUALIFICATION TESTS

• Army/ICV Specific (5)– Secure Cargo & Rough Handling Sequences

• Environmental (2)– Extreme Temperature Storage

– High Rate Firings at Extreme Temperatures

• Fuze Certification (3)• No Arm at 1 Meter

• Arm/No Arm Distance

• No Arm at ICV Safe Separation

SUMMARYSUMMARY

• Community Working Together Has:– Reduced FCS Program Qualification Burden– Reduced FCS Total Program Costs

• ARMY to Leverage Current Navy/USMC Ammunition Contracts

• Joint Approach will Benefit All Services

CONCLUSION CONCLUSION

With Everyone Working Together With Everyone Working Together There Is A Road TowardsThere Is A Road Towards

Joint QualificationJoint Qualification

We Are Not There YetWe Are Not There Yet

With Everyone Working Together With Everyone Working Together There Is A Road TowardsThere Is A Road Towards

Joint QualificationJoint Qualification

We Are Not There YetWe Are Not There Yet

SAFETY RELATED TESTSSAFETY RELATED TESTS

ARMY SAFETY TEST DESCRIPTION JUSTIFICATION

SECURED CARGO, -51F, 145F MIL-STD 810F Tactical Vib.

PACKAGED 7-FOOT DROP No USMC test data; not their req't

LOOSE CARGO No USMC test data; not their req't

CTG 5-FOOT DROPUSMC tested virgin rounds; no test data after sequential RH

PVAT, TRACE, DISP, F&C TESTS FOLLOWING SC & RH SERIES, 480 rds

Functional firings to verify safe to handle and fire

ENVIRONMENTAL TESTS

EXTREME TEMPERATURE STORAGE, 28 DAYS, 2 boxes or 60 rds.

No USMC test dataFUNCTION AND CASUALTY, VIRGIN CTGS, -65F, 160F, 150 rds

No USMC test data at these extreme temps

FUZE/ HEI CTGS SAFETY TESTS (EXCL. PERFORMANCE)NON-ARMING 1 METER DISTANCE, 60 rds . No USMC tes t data; required for HEPD round for safe

separation

ARM/ NON-ARMING SAFETY DISTANCE, 60 rds . No USMC tes t data; required for HEPD round for safe separation

NON-ARM SAFETY DISTANCE VERIFICATION, 70F, 10 rdsNo USMC test data; safe separation distance verification

USMC did not test to the Army's sequential transportation vibration and rough handling requirements (4 tests + Function & Casualty/PVAT firings)

SECURED CARGO AND ROUGH HANDLING SERIES 16 boxes, 30 rds/bx, 480 rds. Total

Actual firing of ammunition that survives above tests to insure safe to fire. Develop usability guides.

Fire rounds to determine Munition Arming Distance Mechanical Variability)

High rate firings at extreme hot/cold temperature of gun system to assure no cartridge breakup, jamming, or in-

bore malfunction.

Perform simulated long term storage at temperature extremes to assure energetics stability/compatibility,

and safe to fire after long term storage.

Simulates Normal Ground Transportation of ammunition to ASP (palletized)

Simulates acccidental drop of ammunition can when unloading from a truck.

Varifies that the Fuze will not function prior to the Safe Seperation Distance.t

Fire rounds to assure in bore & close impact (1 meter) safety .

Simulates transport of unsecured individual cans from ASP forward. (Can of Ammo in Pick UpTruck).

Simulates accidental drop of bare ammunition

RATIONALE

Standard Army Safety test series to assure safe to transport/handle/fire IAW normal Logistical

Transport modes and accidental drops. Miminimizes the risk of property damage or

personenel injury as a result of explosion or fire.

BACKUP SLIDES

Looking at Available Types of Ammunition and How the Weapon Parameters Affect The

Result

5.56MM ENGINEERING STUDY (BASELINING WHAT’S POSSIBLE)

5.56MM ENGINEERING STUDY (BASELINING WHAT’S POSSIBLE)

FIRST ROUND TESTING1 M855, 5.56x45mmRef Lot 62 grains M16A22 M855, 5.56x45mmRef Lot 62 grains M43 M855, 5.56x45mmRef Lot 62 grains M4 w/10"Brl4 MK262, 5.56x45mm Sierra OTM 77 grains M16A25 MK262, 5.56x45mm Sierra OTM 77 grains M46 MK262, 5.56x45mm Sierra OTM 77 grains M4 w/10"Brl7 M855, 5.56x45mm Lot# pica 62 grains M16A28 M855, 5.56x45mm Lot# crane 62 grains M16A29 M855, 5.56x45mm Green 62 grains M16A210 5.56x45mm, ATK 83-grain 83 grains M16A211 M193, 5.56x45mm 55 grains M16A112 5.56mm, Black Hills 100 grain Match King 100 grains M16A213 5.56x45mm, Barnes 50 grain Copper 50 grains M16A214 5.56x45mm, Winchester 69 grain OTM 69 grains M16A215 M995, 5.56x45mm 52 grains M16A216 7.62x39mm 123 grains AK4717 5.45x39mm 53 grains AK7418 5.56x45mm, Federal Tactical Bonded 62 grains M16A219 5.56x45mm, IMI Special Bullet 62 grains M16A220 6.8x43mm, 110 grain OTM 110 grains 6.8 SPR21 5.56x45mm LML Blended Metal 46 grains M16A222 5.56x45mm Hornady 75 grain OTM 75 grains M16A223 69 Grain Copper projectile, experimental 69 grains M16A224 M855, 5.56x45mm Green OTM 60 grains M16A225 SNC-steelcore 62 grains M16A226 62 grain R2LP (AA17) 62 grains M16A227 NATEC, M855 w/Plastic Case 62 grains M16A228 M80, 7.62x51mm FMJ 150 grains M1429 M118LR, 7.62x51mm OTM 175 grains M1430 M993 128 grains M1431 M72, 7.62 x 63mm FMJ 172 grains M132 7.62 x 63mm, Federal Gold Metal OTM 168 grains M133 45 ACP 230 grains M3A134 M882, 9mm FMJ 124 grains MP535 338 Short Mag 250 grains Test Barrel

TOTAL ANGLE OF ATTACK AT IMPACT (TAOA)

TOTAL ANGLE OF ATTACK AT IMPACT (TAOA)

AOA Explains Why These are Different

1.5m Distance was the Only Difference Between These Two Significantly Different Impacts

1.5m Distance was the Only Difference Between These Two Significantly Different Impacts

In 1987, San Diego police department conducted study to determine if their hand gun ammo was achieving sufficient penetration to reach vital organs and structures. To achieve this objective, they fired shots into gelatin and compared results to those seen in autopsies resulting from officer involved shootings. This was done to assess predictive potential of gelatin. Shots into gelatin showed narrower range of penetration depths than that observed in living human torso; while penetration range in gelatin was 12-14 inches, the same bullet, in torso region, had a range of 10-17 inches. Additionally, average expansion ratio of 9mm 147 grain projectile in gelatin was about 1.2 and in torso it was found to be about 1.15. Given that the human torso contains different organs and structures of varying densities that are capable of some displacement and that gelatin is a homogeneous medium that provides more or less constant resistance, it is not unreasonable to assume that a tissue simulant would have a narrower band of variance

Left shows Federal 9mm 115-grain JHP bullets that were recovered. Right image shows Federal .38 Special +P 125-grain Nyclad projectiles that were recovered after passing through listed medium

Gelatin generally used and accepted as tissue simulant because it is homogenous, presenting same physical characteristics block after block; because it is transparent, so that events inside block can be recorded by high-speed video; its retarding properties and density have been shown to be sufficiently similar to muscle tissue; wound profile in gelatin has been shown to be comparable to penetration, expansion, and fragmentation patterns observed during more expensive animal tests, and properties of the medium and their correlation to ballistics have been rigorously evaluated and independently validated for well over seventy years

WHY WE USE GELATIN…WHY WE USE GELATIN…

THE PLAN AND PATH FORWARDTHE PLAN AND PATH FORWARD

Computer Simulation of

Ballistic Testing

Computer Simulation of

Ballistic Testing

Future Weapon System Development

Future Weapon System Development

Computer Simulation of Human Torso

Impacts

Computer Simulation of Human Torso

Impacts