{"id":29,"date":"2022-04-27T16:38:11","date_gmt":"2022-04-27T16:38:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/looserounds.com\/?page_id=29"},"modified":"2022-04-28T13:32:04","modified_gmt":"2022-04-28T13:32:04","slug":"556timeline","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/looserounds.com\/556timeline\/","title":{"rendered":"The 5.56 X 45mm \u201cTimeline\u201d – A Chronology of Development by Daniel E. Watters"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Prologue<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Author\u2019s Note<\/strong>: This chronology was inspired by the constant confusion on Rec.Guns regarding the intellectual and materiel origins of the .223 Remington (5.56x45mm) cartridge. Admittedly, Remington\u2019s prolific release of .224 caliber cartridges in the 1950s and \u201960s does not help. In order to provide a backstop for one of Dean Speir\u2019s newsgroup posts, I developed the following timeline. It remains a work in progress, and the reader is encouraged to read the suggested texts for more in-depth analysis.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alone, the saga of the .223 Remington and AR-15\/M16 is a long tale of \u201cNIH\u201d (not invented here) skulduggery, panicked R&D<\/a> fixes, all-out marketing efforts, old boys network flesh-pressing, inter-service rivalry, procurement end-runs, and Congressional witch-hunts. However, the saga becomes almost epic when you consider the related weapon systems (both competitors and accessories) along with the intellectual heirs of the SCHV<\/a> and SALVO concepts, including the various micro-caliber rifle experiments and the current PDW<\/a> craze. A careful reader will note that many ideas, solutions, and yes, even problems keep popping up again and again as the years pass.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prologue: 1882 – 1956<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

1882<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Maynard Arms Company introduces the .22-10-45 Maynard. It is one of the first, if not the first, centerfire .22 caliber rifle cartridges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1885<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Winchester introduces the .22 Winchester Center Fire (WCF<\/a>). It is also known as the .22-13-45 WCF<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1888-1890<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Gunsmith Adolph O. Niedner experiments with obtaining higher velocities from the .22 WCF<\/a> and .22-10-45 Maynard cases. These experiments fail due to the limitations of the gunpowders then available.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1890<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Swiss experimenter Professor Friedrich Wilhelm Hebler develops a 5.3x64mm cartridge. (In the previous decade, research by Professor Hebler and Swiss Army officer Eduard Rubin had been influential in coaxing European armies away from large bore rifle cartridges to .30-.32 caliber cartridges.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1891<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Professor Hebler develops a 5.5x50mmR cartridge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1892<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Gunsmith Reuben Harwood begins development of a wildcat .22 high velocity cartridge using the .25-20 Single Shot case (not to be confused with the shorter and fatter .25-20 WCF<\/a>). It is dubbed the .22-20-55.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1894<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In Mexico, the Mondragon M1894 repeating rifle is introduced with a 5x68mm cartridge. The cartridge was developed by Swiss Army officer Eduard Rubin. Rubin experiments with additional 5mm cartridges with case lengths up to ~73mm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The US Army\u2019s Chief of Ordnance, Brigadier General Daniel W. Flagler, orders the construction of experimental cartridges to determine the military suitability of calibers smaller than 0.30\u2033. Eight barrels are made, divided evenly between .22 and .20 caliber, with rifling twists of 1 in 6\u2033 and 1 in 5.5\u2033 respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In an article, the founder and editor of Shooting and Fishing magazine, Arthur C. Gould, dubs Reuben Harwood\u2019s .22-20-55, the \u201cHornet\u201d. The nickname sticks, and it is hereafter advertised as Harwood\u2019s Hornet. (It should not be confused with the later Winchester .22 Hornet.) J. Stevens Arms & Tool Co. even announces its intent to chamber rifles for it. (However, it is believed that Stevens never made it a production line item.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August<\/strong>:
Gunsmith William V. Lowe advertises his own version of the .22-20-55 Hornet. It uses a different shape than Harwood\u2019s version.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1895<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Brig. Gen. Flagler instructs Frankford Arsenal to fabricate 250 .22 cartridge cases and 300 bullets. 250 of the bullets are 118 grain, while the remainder is split evenly between 112 grain and 120 grain bullets. Based on data developed by Springfield Armory\u2019s Lt. Tracy C. Dickson, the cartridges are tested in modified Krag rifles. Performance of the .22 cartridge is 2,600 feet per second with the 120 grain bullet. (It is not known whether the proposed .20 caliber cartridge was ever fabricated or tested.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1896<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

J. Stevens Arms & Tool Co. introduces the .22-15-60 Stevens. The cartridge is designed by Charles H. Herrick.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1905<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Late<\/strong>:
Experimenter Charles Newton experiments with a .25-25 Stevens case tapered down to .22 caliber. This is followed by experiments with the .28-30 Stevens case tapered down, and later, necked down to .22 caliber.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1907<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Adolph O. Niedner builds a rifle for a wildcat cartridge based on the .32-40 Ballard case necked down to .22 caliber.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
In a letter, experimenter Dr. Franklin W. Mann announces his intent to rechamber a Winchester Lee rifle to a wildcat cartridge based on necking down the 6mm Lee Navy case for .226\u2033 bullets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1908<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

October<\/strong>:
Dr. Franklin W. Mann finally receives a barrel suitable for his wildcat .22\/6mm Lee cartridge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

December<\/strong>:
In a letter, Dr. Franklin W. Mann announces that he has tested his wildcat .22\/6mm Lee cartridge. He reveals that he cannot exceed 3,000 fps<\/a> without blowing primers and overly stretching cases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1910<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
In a letter to gunwriter Major Ned H. Roberts, Adolph O. Niedner reveals that he has completed a chambering tool for Charles Newton for a new wildcat cartridge. It is based on necking down a 6mm Lee Navy case to .22 caliber.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1911<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Fall<\/strong>:
Savage introduces the .22 Imp (later known as the .22 Hi-Power). Work had begun using Charles Newton\u2019s wildcat based on the .28-30 Stevens case necked down for .228\u2033 projectiles. At Savage\u2019s request, Newton later switched to the .32-40 Ballard case based on the experiments of Adolph O. Niedner and Dr. Franklin W. Mann. In the end, Savage ultimately decided to use the .25-35 WCF<\/a> case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1912<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Encouraged by Dr. Franklin W. Mann, Charles Newton begin experiments with the .30-40 Krag case necked down to .22 caliber.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1914<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

DuPont introduces the first of its Improved Military Rifle (IMR) powder line. IMR<\/a> is intended to replace its earlier Military Rifle (MR) powder line, which includes the former standard powder for the .30\u201906: Pyro DG. However, US military use of IMR<\/a> does not begin in earnest until 1925 with the standardization of the new .30 M1 Ball cartridge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Charles Newton develops the .22 Newton, based on the 7x57mm Mauser case necked down for .228\u2033 projectiles. This follows experimental work based on necking down the 6mm Lee Navy and .30\u201906 cases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1919<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Now a rifle manufacturer, Charles Newton presents gunsmith Jerry E. Gebby a sample of a wildcat using the .250-3000 Savage case necked down for .226\u2033 bullets. Newton has abandoned work on the cartridge due to excessive pressures with existing gunpowders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1920<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Gunsmith Hervey Lovell begins importing 5.6x35mmR Vierling cartridges and cases from Germany. It is essentially the .22 WCF<\/a> loaded with metal-jacketed bullets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1925<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Adolph O. Neider designs the .22 Neider Magnum, in both rimmed and rimless versions. These use shortened .22 Hi-Power and .25 Remington cases respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1929<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Captain Grosvenor L. Wotkyns begins work on an improved smokeless-powder variant of the .22 WCF<\/a> cartridge. The test bed combines a BSA<\/a> No. 12 action with a rechambered Springfield .22 LR<\/a> barrel. Because of the smaller diameter bore used in rimfire .22 caliber rifles, Wotkyns uses bullets smaller in diameter than the original 0.226\u2033 projectiles of the .22 WCF<\/a> and the 5.6x35mmR Vierling. Springfield Armory employees Captain George A. Woody and Albert L. Woodworth conduct their own experiments, working on a conversion of the Springfield Model 1922M1 training rifle. Commercial interest grows after a visit to Winchester by Colonel Townsend Whelen and Capt. Woody.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
Dr. Fredrich Olsen of Picatinny Arsenal files a pair of patent applications related to the purification of nitrocellulose. This involves the removal of excess nitric and sulphuric acids left over from the nitrating process. Dr. Olsen developed this process while experimenting with methods to prolong the life of gunpowder, and possibly reclaim surplus cannon powders, all of which deteriorate due to these excess acids. On the basis of these developments, Dr. Olsen is hired by the Western Cartridge Company.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1930<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
Aberdeen Proving Ground\u2019s Robert H. Kent publishes \u201cThe Theory Of The Motion Of A Bullet About Its Center Of Gravity In Dense Media, With Applications To Bullet Design.\u201d It is shown that the size of a bullet\u2019s yaw in test medium is approximately independent of the striking velocity and the rifling twist. Giving examples for .30, .25, and .20 caliber projectiles, Kent notes that bullets with light noses are prone to early yaw, and suggests that lightweight, high velocity, small caliber bullets will cause more damage than heavier, slower, large caliber counterparts. Kent then argues the other benefits of SCHV<\/a> rounds such as flat trajectories and low recoil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1931<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

February<\/strong>:
The American Rifleman magazine carries an advertisement from the United States Cartridge Company (USCC) announcing that it is commercially manufacturing Wotkyns\u2019 .22 Express wildcat as the \u201c.22 WCF<\/a> Improved.\u201d (USCC is owned by Winchester.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
Dr. Fredrich Olsen receives US Patent #1,798,270 titled \u201cPurification of Cellulose Esters.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
Franklin W. Olin begins negotiations to purchase Winchester. Winchester has been in Federal receivership since January.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

December<\/strong>:
The Olin family purchases Winchester. Olin\u2019s Western Cartridge Company is to take over Winchester\u2019s operations on January 1, 1932.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1932<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Winchester introduces commercial ammunition for the .22 WCF<\/a> Improved as the \u201c.22 Hornet.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen, Gordon C. Tibbitts, and Edward B.W. Kerone file a patent application related to the manufacture of Ball Powder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

June<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen, Gordon C. Tibbitts, and Edward B.W. Kerone file another patent application related to the manufacture of Ball Powder, specifically concentrating on the reclamation of nitrocellulose from deteriorating cannon powders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1933<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Western Cartridge Company commercially introduces its trademarked \u201cBall Powder,\u201d based on the developments of Dr. Fredrich Olsen. (Over the years, the trademark has been carried by WCC<\/a>\u2018s owners, Olin. In 1996, the \u201cBall Powder\u201d trademark was passed along when Olin\u2019s Ordnance division was spun off as Primex Technologies. General Dynamics purchased Primex in 2000, and \u201cBall Powder\u201d production continues by St. Marks Powder.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
Dr. Fredrich Olsen receives US Patent #1,893,677 titled \u201cPurification of Nitrocellulose.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Late<\/strong>:
Capt. Wotkyns asks gunsmith Adolph Lukes to assemble a Springfield M1903 rifle chambered for a wildcat using the .250-3000 Savage case necked down for 0.224\u2033 bullets. (There are claims that Wotkyns and J.B. Sweany had worked with a version using 0.222-0.223\u2033 bullets as early as the mid\/late 1920s.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1934<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Capt. Wotkyns approaches Western Cartridge Company with test data regarding his .22\/250 wildcat, dubbed the .220 Swift. After testing the wildcat, Western passes the information along to its subsidiary Winchester, who begins its own testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jerry E. Gebby begins work on modernizing the .22 Newton by altering the case profile. The resulting cartridge is named the .22 Gebby. (After the introduction of the .22 Varminter, Gebby renames the longer cartridge the .22 Senior Varminter.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

May<\/strong>:
Hervey Lovell announces the wildcat .22\/3000 Lovell in an article for The American Rifleman magazine. It is based on the .25-20 Single Shot case, necked down to .22 caliber. While similar in concept to Reuben Harwood\u2019s .22-20-55, Lovell uses the smaller diameter bullets of Winchester\u2019s .22 Hornet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
Fred C. Ness, an editor for The American Rifleman magazine, sends a Springfield rifle action and barrel to J.B. Sweany to be chambered for Wotkyns\u2019 .220 Swift. At some point in the future, Sweany convinces Ness to allow the rifle to be chambered for a new wildcat cartridge of Sweany\u2019s own design, the .22\u00d755. The wildcat is the result of experiments with necked down 7x57mm and .30\u201906 cases shortened to 62mm, 60mm, 55mm, and 48.5mm. As the designation indicates, the 55mm case length proves the most successful. Sweany claims that this cartridge will be superior to the forthcoming factory .220 Swift.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen files yet another patent application related to the manufacture of Ball Powder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1935<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Following previous work with the .22 Niedner Magnum, Experimenter Harvey A. Donaldson begins experiments with .25 Remington cases necked down to .22 caliber, both full-length and shortened. The shortened case ultimately proves more successful, and becomes known as .220 Donaldson Wasp.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
In correspondence to firearms editors and writers, Capt. Wotkyns announces that Winchester intends to release his .22\/250 wildcat as the .220 Swift. Upon learning of Wotkyns\u2019 pronouncement, Winchester contacts various gunwriters asking them to refrain from publishing any additional data on the forthcoming .220 Swift as changes are being made in its configuration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

April<\/strong>:
Fred C. Ness publishes an article in The American Rifleman discussing high velocity .22 caliber cartridge developments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Winchester finalizes its specifications and drawings of the .220 Swift. Instead of the .250-3000 Savage, the cartridge is based on a modified 6mm Lee Navy case with an added semi-rim. This change leads to the original Wotkyns design being nicknamed the .22 WOS (Wotkyns\u2019 Original Swift).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

May<\/strong>:
Fred C. Ness publishes an additional article in The American Rifleman showing Capt. Wotkyns\u2019 version of the .220 Swift and discussing Ness\u2019 decision to allow J.B. Sweany to chamber his rifle for the .22\u00d755.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

June<\/strong>:
Fred C. Ness publishes another article in The American Rifleman discussing his testing of J.B. Sweany\u2019s .22\u00d755 wildcat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen files an additional patent application related to the manufacture of Ball Powder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Summer<\/strong>:
Custom gunmaker Reginald F. Sedgley introduces the .22\/4000 Sedgley. The cartridge was developed by J. George Schnerring, the former Proof House Foreman of Frankford Arsenal. It is based on the 7x57mm Mauser case necked down for .224\u2033 bullets. The .22\/4000 Sedgley is later withdrawn from the market when it is discovered that the smaller .220 Swift can be chambered and fired in the larger Sedgley chamber with deleterious results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen, Gordon C. Tibbitts, and Edward B.W. Kerone file a patent application related to the reclamation of nitrocellulose from deteriorating cannon powders, emphasizing the use of Calcium Carbonate to neutralize acids.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August<\/strong>:
Fred C. Ness publishes yet another article in The American Rifleman discussing high-velocity .22 caliber experiments by Reginald F. Sedgley, Harvey A. Donaldson, Capt. Wotkyns, and Jerry E. Gebby.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

September<\/strong>:
The American Rifleman magazine publishes a Winchester press release announcing that rifles and ammunition are now available for the .220 Swift. The press release includes the claim that the cartridge is suitable for wild game as large as deer. The cartridge is the first commercial offering to break the 4,000 fps<\/a> barrier. It quickly gains a reputation in certain circles of being a spectacular killer of game, including large animals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While stationed in Corregidor (Philippine Islands) during 1935 and 1936, Major Frank T. Chamberlin (US Army Medical Corps) later conducts a series of lethality tests, pitting the .220 Swift against Army mules in a variety of scenarios. (The mules were already slated to be destroyed, so Chamberlin had a fairly free rein to do as he pleased.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The American Rifleman magazine also publishes a press release announcing that J.B. Sweany is ready to modify existing rifles to chamber the .220 Swift and Sweany\u2019s own .22-4000 wildcat, based on a modified .303 British case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1936<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Springfield Armory issues the report \u201cTest of \u2018Swift\u2019 Rifle, Cal. .220, and Ammunitions for Same, Manufactured by Winchester Repeating Arms Co.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adolph O. Niedner develops an improved .22 Niedner Magnum. Instead of using the .22 Hi-Power case, Niedner reverts to the .25-35 WCF<\/a> case and alters the case profile.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen, Gordon C. Tibbitts, and Edward B.W. Kerone receive US Patent #2,027,114 titled \u201cManufacture of Smokeless Powders.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen, Gordon C. Tibbitts, and Edward B.W. Kerone file another patent application related to the manufacture of Ball Powder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Harold F. Schaefer files an additional patent application related to the manufacture of Ball Powder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

April<\/strong>:
In order to improve accuracy, Winchester changes the rate of twist of .220 Swift barrels from 1 in 16\u2033 to 1 in 14\u2033.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1937<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Jerry E. Gebby and J. Bushnell Smith introduce their own .22 caliber wildcats based on the .250-3000 Savage case. Due to Gebby\u2019s trademark of the name \u201c.22 Varminter,\u201d most refer to the resulting wildcat as the .22-250. Harvey A. Donaldson claims to have worked with a version using .228\u2033 bullets as early as 1916, and that he had designed a .224\u2033 version in 1934 and submitted it to Savage in 1935.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

German gunmaker E.A. Vom Hofe introduces the 5.6x61mm Vom Hofe Super Express. Both rimmed and rimless versions are produced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Canadian gunsmith G.B. Crandall introduces the .22-303 Varmint-R. It is based on a shortened .303 British case. Cases intended for machine gun use were reportedly preferred over commercial cases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

May<\/strong>:
Winchester introduces the .219 Zipper. It is based on the .25-35 WCF<\/a> case necked down for .224\u2033 projectiles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Harvey A. Donaldson later begins development of what becomes the .219 Donaldson Wasp using modified .219 Zipper cases, both full-length and shortened. As before, Donaldson has greater success with the shorter case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1938<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Soviet designers, including Federov and Simonov, reportedly experiment with various .22 caliber rifle cartridges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gunsmith Parker O. Ackley introduces the .219 Improved Zipper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Custom loading die maker L.E. Wilson contacts Capt. Wotkyns regarding ideas on improving Winchester\u2019s .220 Swift. Wotkyns suggest keeping the existing case profile with the exception of changing the shoulder angle. The resulting cartridge becomes known as the .220 Wotkyns-Wilson Arrow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

April<\/strong>:
Winchester announces the .218 Bee to gun magazine editors. It is based on the .25-20 WCF<\/a> case necked down. Under development for nearly two years, it borrows from existing wildcats such as Emil Koshollek\u2019s .22 Kosholleck and its more famous derivative, Adolph O. Niedner\u2019s .22 Baby Hi-Power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

May<\/strong>:
Winchester commercially releases the .218 Bee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In The American Rifleman magazine, an improved version of the .22\/3000 Lovell is introduced as the 2R Lovell (AKA: 2-R, R2, or R-2). The name derives from the design representing the second chamber reamer profile produced by M.S. Risley. Harvey A. Donaldson takes credit for the change in case profile. (Some suggest that the case profile is close to that of William V. Lowe\u2019s .22-20-55 of 1894.) Hervey Lovell continues to alter to the .22\/3000 case\u2019s shape at least four more times within the next ten years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

December<\/strong>:
The Research Division of Aberdeen Proving Ground is renamed the Ballistic Research Laboratory (BRL<\/a>). Robert H. Kent is named an Associate Director of the BRL<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1939<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

May<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Harold F. Schaefer receives US Patent #2,160,626 titled \u201cExplosive.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

October<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen, Gordon C. Tibbitts, and Edward B.W. Kerone receive US Patent #2,175,212 titled \u201cManufacture of Smokeless Powder.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1940<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Gunsmith Lysle D. Kilbourn develops an improved version of the .22 Hornet, dubbed the .22 K-Hornet. This was reportedly developed in cooperation with G.B. Crandall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gunsmith A.E. Mashburn develops an improved version of the .218 Bee, dubbed the .218 Mashburn Bee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gunsmith Leslie Lindahl develops the .22 Lindahl Chucker in both rimmed and rimless versions. These are based on shortened .219 Zipper and .25 Remington cases respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen, Gordon C. Tibbitts, and Edward B.W. Kerone receive US Patent #2,206,916 titled \u201cManufacture of Smokeless Powders.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

September<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen, Gordon C. Tibbitts, and Edward B.W. Kerone receive US Patent #2,213,255 titled \u201cExplosive.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1941<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
On behalf of Western Cartridge Company, Dr. Fredrich Olsen receives US Patent #2,235,298 titled \u201cManufacture of Smokeless Powder.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1943<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

After unsatisfactory experimentation with the .257 Roberts, .30\u201906, and .300 Holland & Holland Magnum cases necked down to .22 caliber, custom gunmaker Roy Weatherby develops an improved .220 Swift dubbed the .220 Weatherby Rocket. Weatherby later experiments with a shortened .300 H&H<\/a> Magnum case necked down to .228\u2033. The development becomes known as the .228 Weatherby Magnum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1945<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Summer<\/strong>:
Leslie Lindahl develops longer versions of the .22 Lindahl Chucker in both rimmed and rimless versions. These are dubbed the .22 Super Chucker.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1948<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

June<\/strong>:
The US Army\u2019s General Staff creates the civilian General Research Office (GRO). Its mission is to supply the Army with scientific advice on conducting operations in an age of nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

September<\/strong>:
The General Research Office begins operations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

December<\/strong>:
The General Research Office is renamed the Operations Research Office (ORO).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1950<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Roy Weatherby develops what will become known as the .224 Weatherby Magnum. He shelves it in wait for a suitable rifle action. In the mean time, he abandons commercial sales of the .220 Rocket and .228 Weatherby Magnum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
Remington commercially introduces the .222 Remington as a varmint cartridge. Filling a \u201cmarket gap\u201d between the .22 Hornet and the .220 Swift, the \u201cTriple Deuce\u201d also gains quick acceptance in the benchrest community then dominated by the wildcat .219 Donaldson Wasp. Development of the .222 Remington is reportedly the end product of several Remington experimental cartridges, originally intended as a means to exploit existing cup blanks intended for the production of .30 Carbine cartridge cases. However, these experimental cartridges were considered too short to reliably feed in Remington\u2019s Model 722 rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Summer-Fall<\/strong>:
The ORO<\/a>\u2018s research mandate quickly spreads out to conventional weapons, especially when the US enters the Korean \u201cpolice action\u201d. One of the first projects for the \u201cInfantry\u201d division of the ORO<\/a> is Project ALCLAD: the development of improved body armor. The head of the division, Norman A. Hitchman, reasons that in order to improve body armor, one has to know how wounds are created and where they are received. A mathematical analysis of three million casualty reports from both World Wars are entered into the ORO<\/a>\u2018s computers, along with on-the-spot analysis from ORO<\/a> staffers in Korea. This leads to the creation of Project BALANCE, a study of infantry rifle use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To Colonel Ren\u00e9 R. Studler, US Army Ordnance\u2019s Chief of Small Arms Research and Development, this sounds as though the ORO<\/a> is infringing on his turf. Between his distrust of ORO<\/a>\u2018s civilians and the increasing pressure applied by the British for adoption of a mid-range cartridge, Studler attempts to buttress his position supporting a \u201cfull-power\u201d cartridge. Studler requests that the Aberdeen Proving Grounds\u2019 Ballistics Research Laboratory (BRL) prepare its own report on the effectiveness of the infantry combat rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August<\/strong>:
On behalf of Olin, Dwight A. Alderson, Ralph V. Wakefield, and Emerald P. Reichardt file a patent application for reclaiming single base gunpowders possessing high percentages of modifying agents such as dinitrotoluene and dibutylphthalate. These include surplus cannon powders and small arms gunpowder. (DuPont IMR<\/a> is given as a specific example.) The inventors claim that recycling these powders using Dr. Olsen\u2019s patents result in a dirtier gunpowder due to the modifying agents causing incomplete burning of powder grains when fired.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
Donald L. Hall of the Aberdeen BRL<\/a> begins the before-mentioned study of rifle effectiveness. Much of the two year study is theoretical, building on earlier research by the BRL<\/a>\u2018s Robert H. Kent, but Hall also experiments with a .220 Swift firing a 60 grain bullet roughly homologous to that of the issue .30 M2 ball. The test firings are performed by William C. Davis, Jr. and Gerald A. Gustafson of Aberdeen\u2019s Small Arms and Aircraft Weapons Section. (Remember those names\u2026.)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The crux of Hall\u2019s experiment is that a smaller caliber could equal (or even exceed) the performance of a larger bore. Moreover, a smaller bore weapon might have superior hit probabilities at shorter ranges. Thus, combined with the additional cartridges carried per unit weight, a soldier carrying the smaller caliber weapon would be able to inflict more casualties upon the enemy than another soldier with a larger caliber weapon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1951<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

February<\/strong>:
Irwin R. Barr, Chief Ordnance Engineer and co-founder of Aircraft Armaments Inc. (AAI), publishes the proposal \u201cStudy of Ammunition Improvements.\u201d Barr promotes the use of a shotshell loaded with 37 \u201cice pick projectiles,\u201d properly known as fl\u00e9chette. He also proposes a saboted fl\u00e9chette cartridge fired from smoothbore rifles.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

August<\/strong>:
The ORO<\/a> publishes the \u201cALCLAD Final Report\u201d written by Hitchman, John H. Gardner, and Robert J. Best.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

December<\/strong>:
Edgewood Arsenal publishes the report \u201cWound Ballistics of a .22 Caliber Brass Scale Model of the .30 Caliber M2 Rifle Ball.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1952<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
Hall\u2019s study, \u201cAn Effectiveness Study of the Infantry Rifle,\u201d is published.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

April<\/strong>:
Thomas F. Colleran, the Director of Development and Proof Services (D&PS), and COL J. D. Armitage, the Chief of the Arms and Ammunition Division at Aberdeen, grant verbal approval to a project proposed by Gustafson to investigate the merit of \u201csmall-caliber, high-velocity\u201d (SCHV) cartridges for use in rifles and carbines. COL Studler also gives oral approval to the preliminary investigation with the understanding that a program will be authorized by his office if the cartridges prove promising in early tests. However for now, Gustafson is instructed to proceed in such manner as to not interfere with the course of assigned development testing under the direction of the Office of the Chief of Ordnance (OCO).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

June<\/strong>:
The ORO<\/a> publishes Hitchman\u2019s report: \u201cOperational Requirements for an Infantry Hand Weapon.\u201d Hitchman finds that the majority of combat rifle use does not exceed 300 yards, and that marksmanship is severely degraded by terrain and visibility at ranges beyond 100 yards. In fact, the chance of being struck by a rifle bullet is seen as being nearly as random as being struck by a fragment from a high explosive shell. The time and amount of target exposure had more bearing on whether a target was hit versus marksmanship skills. Given such, an infantry weapon designed to provide controllable \u201cpattern-dispersion\u201d within a 300 yd range might be preferable to a weapon that provides precise single shots at longer distances. Furthermore, at the shorter ranges, a smaller caliber weapon might give acceptable \u201cwounding effects\u201d and allow for controllable \u201csalvo or volley automatic\u201d fire. The key to effectiveness is control; an uncontrollable automatic weapon is seen to be no more advantageous than a semi-auto counterpart. Hitchman projects that a four round salvo with a predictable 20\u2033 spread might provide double the hit probability at 300 yards over a single shot fired from a M1 rifle. A lighter, smaller caliber cartridge would have the side benefit of allowing enough ammunition to be carried for an equivalent number of fired salvos to the individual cartridge capacity of the current rifle. Hitchman even references Hall\u2019s earlier findings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Appended to Hitchman\u2019s report is \u201cAnalysis and Application of Results of Rifle-Range Tests\u201d written by Scott E. Forbush and George J. Blakemore, Jr.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July<\/strong>:
The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cThe Effects of Terrain on Battlefield Visibility\u201d written by D.F. Bayly Pike and Charles Gopel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
After considerable delay in obtaining appropriate barrels and chamber reamer stock, Gustafson begins a SCHV<\/a> modification of a M2 Carbine on a \u201cspare-time\u201d basis. A .224\u2033 barrel is fitted and is chambered for a cartridge based on the .222 Remington case shortened to 1.32.\u201d (This is not to be confused with the many .22 wildcats of the .30 Carbine case<\/a>, such as the 5.7mm Johnson\/.22 Spitfire.) The ballistics of the .22 Gustafson Carbine (.22 APG\/.22 SCHV<\/a>) are approximately 3,000 fps<\/a> with a 41 grain bullet. Case and chamber drawings are also prepared for a cartridge based on the .30 Light Rifle case necked down to .224\u2033.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hitchman\u2019s concept of controlled \u201cvolley\/burst\u201d fire leads to the creation of the multi-agency Project SALVO. The BRL<\/a> offers the most conventional design: Gustafson\u2019s modified M2 Carbine. The Office of Naval Research, in cooperation with Aircraft Armaments Inc. (AAI), creates 12 gauge shotgun shells loaded with 32 steel fl\u00e9chette. In contrast, the ORO<\/a>\u2018s favored platform is a single barrel rifle using duplex or triplex loads (2 or 3 bullets in one case). Taking the opposite approach, Springfield Armory and Winchester both create multi-barreled weapons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1953<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

As part of the SALVO program, Winchester introduces the \u201cHomologous Series\u201d of cartridges. This are based on the .30 Light Rifle case necked down to .18, .22, .25, and .27 caliber. Both simplex and duplex version are made of each, except for the .18 caliber, which is loaded only with single projectiles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Springfield Armory designs and tests a five-barrel .22 caliber test fixture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fabrique Nationale (FN<\/a>) experiments with the .280\/30 case necked down to 4.5mm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

June<\/strong>:
The OCO<\/a> approves moving SCHV<\/a> research at D&PS<\/a> from a \u201cnot-to-interfere\u201d status to an assigned project to be continued at an accelerated pace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On behalf of Olin, Dwight A. Alderson, Ralph V. Wakefield, and Emerald P. Reichardt receive US Patent #2,642,350 titled \u201cMethod of Reclaiming Single Base Smokeless Powder.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August<\/strong>:
The Chief of Small Arms R&D<\/a> COL Studler retires from the US Army. The former Chief of Small Arms Ammunition R&D<\/a>, Dr. Frederick H. Carten, replaces Studler on an interim basis. (It appears that the position of Chief of Small Arms R&D<\/a> was normally held by active duty Army officers and not civilians. While Dr. Carten would ultimately be bumped back to Assistant Chief of Small Arms R&D<\/a>, he continued to wield a great deal of power over the process, so much so, that most authors assume he that remained Chief.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

September<\/strong>:
Gustafson publishes his findings in the report \u201cDesign and Fabricate a High-Velocity Caliber .22 Cartridge, Modify a Standard M2 Carbine to Fire the Cartridge, and Evaluate the Weapon-Ammunition Combination.\u201d Gustafson concludes that the .22 APG cartridge and carbine is superior to the .30 caliber M2 Carbine and may prove to be a worthy successor to even the .45 ACP submachinegun. However, Gustafson probably pushes his luck too far when he states that the modified carbine \u201ccompares favorably with the M1 rifle\u201d against targets out to 300 yards. Gustafson recommends that five converted carbines and 20,000 rounds of ammunition be procured and tested at Aberdeen, in the presence of members of Army Field Forces Board No. 3 (AKA: the Infantry Board).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The US Army Medical Laboratory publishes \u201cWound Ballistics Tests of .22-Caliber Bullets for the M4 Air Force Survival Gun.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cThe Causative Agents of Battle Casualties World War II.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1954<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
AAI conducts independent trials of a saboted fl\u00e9chette rifle cartridge.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

April<\/strong>:
Davis and Gustafson submit a new report discussing the theoretical advantages of SCHV<\/a> cartridges. They outline their preliminary testing of additional experimental SCHV<\/a> cartridges made from modified commercial and military cartridges, including the modification of existing weapons, including an automatic rifle. They propose designing a bullet and cartridge combination with suitable military characteristics. Gustafson and Davis already have a design in mind: a .224\u2033 68 grain homologue to the long-range .30 M1 ball projectile. The projectile is intended for a cartridge based on the .30 Light Rifle (7.62mm NATO<\/a>) case necked down to .224\u2033. After approval is received for further research, the proposed bullet design is procured from the Sierra Bullet Company. The ballistics for the .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>\u201d are 3,400 fps<\/a> with the 68 grain projectile.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Ordnance Corps embraces the commodity command concept. The various product specialties will become individual commands. Responsibility for weapons development and production is tasked to the Ordnance Weapons Command (OWC), ammunition production to the Ordnance Ammunition Command (OAC), and so forth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July<\/strong>:
AAI applies for patents for its saboted fl\u00e9chette cartridge designs and sabot stripper muzzle devices.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

October<\/strong>:
Fairchild Engine & Airplane Corporation creates its ArmaLite Division. George Sullivan is named president of the division. Charles Dorchester and Eugene Stoner are hired as plant manager and chief engineer, respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
Davis begins formal development and testing of the .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Psychological Research Associates publishes \u201cThe Assessment and Prediction of Rifle Squad Effectiveness.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

December<\/strong>:
The OCO<\/a> publishes the report \u201cDevelopment of Weapons for the Defeat of Personnel.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The US Army Medical Laboratory publishes \u201cWound Ballistics Assessment of the .30-Caliber Ball, Carbine, M1, and an Experimental .22-Caliber Ball, Carbine.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1955<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Olin designs and tests a double-barrel .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>\u201d test fixture. They discover that the recoil of two rounds being fired simultaneously is 25 percent greater than that of the M1 rifle. No further consideration is given to building double-barrel SALVO weapons in larger calibers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
Ordnance Weapons Command officially begins operations at Rock Island Arsenal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. Carten approves Davis\u2019 request for further testing of the Sierra bullet with the .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>,\u201d along with testing of the wound ballistics of the combination by the Army Chemical Center.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cA Provisional Criterion for Incapacitation by a Dart.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

February<\/strong>:
The US Army Field Forces are renamed US Continental Army Command (CONARC<\/a>). With this change, Field Forces Board No. 3 is now known as CONARC<\/a> Board No. 3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
Liberty Powder Defense Corporation\u2019s Robert R. Buell files a patent application for reclaiming the nitrocellulose and other components of double base gunpowders. (Liberty Powder Defense Corporation is owned by Olin Industries.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

April<\/strong>:
Davis forwards the request for wound ballistics testing of the .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>\u201d to the Army Chemical Center. Davis specifically requests that the report be prepared in a similar fashion to their December 1954 report on the .22 Carbine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The US Army Medical Laboratory publishes \u201cWound Ballistics of an Homologous Series of Bullets in Gelatin Tissue Models.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

June<\/strong>:
The US Army Medical Laboratory publishes \u201cWound Ballistics of an Homologous Series of Bullets \u2013 Animal Studies.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August<\/strong>:
The BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cA Provisional Criterion for Incapacitation by a Dart \u2013 II.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

September<\/strong>:
Davis completes testing of the .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Springfield Armory begins work on a three-barrel, semi-automatic .222 Remington test fixture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
CONARC<\/a> Board No. 3 publishes \u201cEvaluation of M2 Carbine Modified to Fire High Velocity Caliber .22 Cartridges.\u201d The report recommends that the SCHV<\/a> concept be given a high priority status, with the goal of developing a SCHV<\/a> rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The US Army Medical Laboratory publishes \u201cWound Ballistics Assessment of an Experimental .22-Caliber Lead Core High Velocity Rifle Ball: Comparison With the 7.62-mm NATO<\/a> (.30-Caliber) Rifle Ball.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At Springfield, David C. Fletcher completes drawings of a .222 three-barrel SALVO rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Late<\/strong>:
Springfield Armory nears completion of the .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>\u201d T48 conversions (the FN<\/a><\/em> FAL, manufactured in the US by Harrington & Richardson for the US Army\u2019s rifle trials).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

December<\/strong>:
Davis publishes his findings on the .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>\u201d in the report \u201cAn Investigation of an Experimental Caliber .22 High Velocity Bullet for Rifles.\u201d Davis requests that additional weapons and ammunition be acquired for further testing. Gustafson and Davis are ultimately denied funding for additional SCHV<\/a>\/SALVO designs and experiments. They have proposed the development of yet another .224\u2033 cartridge, intermediate to the .22 SCHV<\/a> and the .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>\u201c. The new cartridge would have launched a 55 grain boattail projectile at 3,300 fps<\/a>. (Remember those numbers\u2026.)<\/em> In his denial for funding, Dr. Carten insists that Aberdeen is in the business of testing<\/em> weapons and ammunition, not creating them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cRifle, Carbine and Pistol Aiming Error as a Function of Target Exposure Time.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1956<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Colonel Henry Neilson becomes the new leader of CONARC<\/a> Board No. 3. Neilson is an outspoken advocate of the SCHV<\/a> concept.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Springfield Armory ships 12 converted T48 (.22 \u201cNATO<\/a>\u201c) to Fort Benning for SALVO tests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The BRL<\/a>\u2018s Donald L. Hall and Ed S. Smith publish \u201cEvaluation of a Salvo Rifle.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gunsmith Jim Harvey introduces the .224 Kay-Chuk, based on a shortened .22 K-Hornet. Harvey converts Smith & Wesson revolvers for the cartridge.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

February<\/strong>:
Gene Stoner files a patent application for the aluminum magazine design later used in the AR-10 and AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Winchester begins contractual work on a double-barreled SALVO rifle. Chambered for the .22 \u201cNATO\u201d Duplex (long-neck), Stefan Janson\u2019s design appears to be a pair of FN<\/a> FAL grafted side by side with a single trigger and gas piston. (Janson is better known as the inventor of the British EM2 bullpup rifle.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cThe Probability of Incapacitation by a Steel Sphere or by Darts When Portions of the Body Are Rendered Vulnerable.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
Psychological Research Associates publishes \u201cA Study of the Infantry Squad TOE<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

May<\/strong>:
CONARC<\/a> Board No. 3 publishes \u201cEvaluation of Light Weight Rifles.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In support of an Army contract, AAI continues to develop its saboted fl\u00e9chette rifle cartridge designs. The stated goal is to achieve a velocity of 4,000 fps<\/a>. AAI creates three separate designs, each using a .22\u2033 sabot with a 10 grain fl\u00e9chette. The differences lay in the exact sabot attachment method.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ordnance Technical Intelligence publishes \u201cFiring Test: Soviet 7.62mm Assault Rifle Kalashnikov (AK).\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

June<\/strong>:
The BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cRelative Effectiveness of Conventional Rifles and an Experimental \u2018Salvo\u2019 Weapon in Area Fire.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stefan Janson files a patent application for the design of Winchester\u2019s double-barreled SALVO rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Summer<\/strong>:
The first comparative test firings of SALVO concept weapons are performed. Included are the Gustafson .22 Carbine and the modified .22 \u201cNATO<\/a>\u201d T48 rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July<\/strong>:
Robert H. Kent retires from the BRL<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August<\/strong>:
Gene Stoner files a patent application for the gas system and bolt carrier design later used in the AR-10 and AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

September<\/strong>:
At Springfield Armory, Charles F. Packard submits \u201cFeasibility Study of Caliber 0.222 SALVO Type Shoulder Rifle.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

October<\/strong>:
The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cPreliminary Report on SALVO.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Springfield constructs a prototype triple-barreled SALVO rifle in .222 Remington.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
On behalf of the US Army, David C. Fletcher files two patent applications for the design of the .222 three barrel Salvo rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Late<\/strong>:
A copy of Gustafson and Davis\u2019 1955 denied funding request \u201csomehow\u201d makes it to General Willard G. Wyman, Commanding General of CONARC<\/a>. With the urging of Colonel Neilson, Wyman recommends that CONARC<\/a> Board No. 3 submit a formal request for a SCHV<\/a> rifle based around the Gustafson and Davis cartridge parameters. Furthermore, Wyman \u201chints\u201d to ArmaLite\u2019s Eugene Stoner that a scaled-down version of Stoner\u2019s 7.62mm AR-10 rifle prototypes might fit the Infantry Board\u2019s forthcoming SCHV<\/a> request.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Year 1957<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cSALVO Rifle Experiment: Preliminary Results.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The BRL<\/a> reprints \u201cThe Theory Of The Motion Of A Bullet About Its Center Of Gravity In Dense Media, With Applications To Bullet Design.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

CONARC<\/a> Board No. 3 is officially renamed the Infantry Board.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

February<\/strong>:
Fairchild\/ArmaLite officials receive their first official briefing on the 1956 SALVO trails.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
CONARC<\/a> HQ sends a letter to the Infantry Board titled \u201cStudy of Military Characteristics for a Rifle of High Velocity and Small Caliber.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The BRL<\/a>\u2018s Donald L. Hall and Billy S. Campbell publish \u201cUpon Selecting an Optimum Rifle Round.\u201d The study indicates that a projectile which tends to yaw soon after target impact also tends to result in greater kill probabilities. As a conclusion to this study, it is shown that a .22 caliber projectile weighing 50 grains could be made to result in good wound ballistic performance if the transverse moment of inertia is sufficiently low to encourage yawing immediately after impact. This results in the recommendation of a .22 caliber, 50 grain lead core projectile.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AAI files \u201cFinal Report \u2013 Small Arms Cartridge\u201d concerning its fl\u00e9chette development efforts. The report claims that a high velocity 10 grain fl\u00e9chette is equally lethal as the .30 M2 rifle bullet out to 600 yards. Yet in terms of cartridge weight, five rounds of the saboted fl\u00e9chette cartridge could be fired for each individual .30\u201906 cartridge. However, even at this early date, the issues of cartridge cost and individual accuracy are noted as potential problems.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fairchild President Richard Boutelle goes on an African safari with US Air Force Strategic Air Command (SAC) commander General Curtis E. LeMay, radio and television personality Arthur Godfrey, and James Shepley, the head of Time-Life\u2019s Washington bureau.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Spring<\/strong>:
The Infantry Board extends the original 300 yard \u201cideal\u201d to 400 yards in order to pacify certain CONARC<\/a> members, and once again to 500 yards, to insure acceptance at the Pentagon. The finalized request calls for a 6 pound, select-fire .22 caliber rifle with a conventional stock and a 20 round magazine. The proposed chambering has to penetrate the issue steel helmet, body armor, and a 0.135\u2033 steel plate at 500 yards, while maintaining the trajectory and accuracy of M2 ball from a M1 rifle, and equaling or exceeding the \u201cwounding\u201d ability of the .30 Carbine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At ArmaLite, Stoner is more interested in developing 7.62mm NATO<\/a> weapons, and is already working on the design of what was to become the AR-12 rifle (the father of the AR-16 and grandfather of the 5.56x45mm AR-18). Sources disagree as to who designed ArmaLite\u2019s first SCHV<\/a> prototype, the AR-11 (AKA: The \u201cStopette\u201d). Essentially a scaled down version of Stoner\u2019s 7.62mm AR-3 rifle chambered for the commercial .222 Remington, the AR-11 is  credited to \u2018Doc\u2019 Wilson. The AR-11 proves to be too light, which combined with a high cyclic rate and the requested conventional stock, leads to difficulty in controlling automatic fire. Ultimately, the AR-11 prototype is wrecked when its barrel extension fails during testing. It is later claimed that the barrel extension was scaled down too far, weakening it. Remembering General Wyman\u2019s favorable bent toward the AR-10 design, ArmaLite had also begun work on a scaled down version of the rifle. But this design, credited to John Peck, also uses the same small barrel extension as the AR-11. After the failure of the AR-11\u2019s barrel extension in testing, work is discontinued on Peck\u2019s design. Robert Fremont and L. James Sullivan are eventually tasked with starting from scratch in scaling down the AR-10 to .222 Remington.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Concurrently, Earle Harvey of Springfield Armory designs a lengthened .222 Remington case to meet the new 500 yard requirement. Remington loads 10,000 unheadstamped .224 Springfield cartridges: 9,500 with 55 grain projectiles and 500 with the 68 grain \u201cM1 ball homologue.\u201d Albert J. Lizza designs a rifle around the cartridge, using the best features of Harvey\u2019s 7.62mm NATO<\/a> T25 and T47 rifle prototypes, along with items inspired by the T22 (a full-auto variant of the M1 Rifle) and the T44 (pre-M14). It also appears that a T25 may have been converted to chamber the cartridge. Once Dr. Carten learns of Harvey and Lizza\u2019s development, all further work on the .224 Springfield is ordered to cease. Ironically, Dr. Carten cannot claim that Springfield Armory is not in the weapon building business as he did two years earlier with Aberdeen. However, Carten is busy shepherding the T44 rifle into what is now known as the M14. No competition for resources (or attention) could be brooked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

April<\/strong>:
George Sullivan files a patent application for the use of aluminum receivers in the design of a firearm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

May<\/strong>:
Stoner provides a brief live-fire demonstration of the prototype AR-15 for General Wyman. CONARC<\/a> formally requests the purchase of 10 test rifles for the Infantry Board (five days after the 7.62mm NATO<\/a> M14\u2019s official adoption is announced).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After a visit to Fort Benning, Stoner begins to tweak the .222 Remington round to fit the Infantry Board\u2019s penetration requirements. First, Stoner and Sierra\u2019s Frank Snow modify the .224\u2033 68 grain \u201cM1 ball homologue\u201d to 55 grains by shortening the bearing length and the boattail, while maintaining the original 7-caliber ogive and 9-degree boattail. The new projectile is also produced by Sierra. Robert Hutton uses Speer\u2019s Ballistic Calculator to estimate the muzzle velocity need to provide the desired performance at 500 yards. The results indicate a muzzle velocity of 3,300 fps<\/a> with the 55 grain bullet will be required. Hutton begins load development with IMR<\/a> 4198, IMR<\/a> 3031, and an unnamed Olin ball powder. Using a Remington Model 722 with a 22\u2033 Apex bull barrel and a Lyman 25x scope, Hutton successfully perforates US helmets at 500 yards during a public demonstration. However, testing also indicates that the .222 Remington cannot achieve the required velocity without excessive chamber pressure. Stoner contacts Winchester and Remington about increasing the case capacity; Remington accepts the request. (This refusal is hardly surprising since Winchester had their own SCHV<\/a> rifle and cartridge in the works.) The resulting cartridge is designated the .222 Special.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

George Sullivan files a patent application for the forearm assembly used on the early AR-10 and AR-15 prototypes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The T44E4 and T44E5 rifles are adopted as \u201cUS Rifles, 7.62mm M14 and M15.\u201d (None of the heavy barrel M15 will ever be produced for issue prior to the M15 being declared obsolete in December 1959.) The USAF is the only service to decline use of the M14, and instead retains the M2 Carbine.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

June<\/strong>:
Springfield Armory publishes the report \u201cChromium Plating of Caliber .22 Barrel Bores.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Springfield fabricates barrels for .22\u201906 simplex and duplex cartridges. These cartridges are based on the .30\u201906 case necked down to .22 caliber. The barrels are fitted to M1 rifles.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Psychological Research Associates publishes \u201cPsychological Effects of Small Arms Fire on Combat Experienced and Non-Experienced Infantrymen\u201d and \u201cPsychological Effects of Platoon Weapons \u2013 A Questionnaire Study.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Summer<\/strong>:
CONARC<\/a> invites Winchester to develop and submit a competing SCHV<\/a> rifle. Ralph Clarkson, a member of Winchester\u2019s in-house design team which developed the M1 Carbine, takes the assignment. Clarkson borrows heavily from David \u201cCarbine\u201d Williams\u2019 shelved .30 Carbine design (completed two months after the adoption of the M1 Carbine). Working with David Mathewson, of the Mathewson Tool Company, Clarkson is able to complete the first firing prototype of the rifle in less than two months.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July<\/strong>:
The Infantry Board forwards a letter to CONARC<\/a> titled \u201cDraft Military Characteristics for a Rifle of High Velocity and Small Caliber.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Psychological Research Associates publishes \u201cPsychological Effects of Patterns of Small Arms Fire.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

September<\/strong>:
Laurence F. Moore of Aberdeen D&PS\u2019<\/a> Infantry and Aircraft Weapons Division publishes the report \u201cA Test of SALVO Rifle Materiel.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

October<\/strong>:
Clarkson\u2019s design, the Winchester .224 Light Weight Military Rifle (LWMR) is demonstrated at CONARC<\/a> headquarters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cPenetration of an Experimental .22 Cal. Bullet in Gelatin.\u201d The study involves a 50gr bullet fired at ~3,950 fps<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November<\/strong>:
The US Army Chemical Warfare Laboratory (CWL<\/a>) publishes \u201cWounding by Salvo Bullets.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

November-December<\/strong>:
The LWMR<\/a> is demonstrated to the Infantry Board at Fort Benning. The success of this demonstration leads the Ordnance Weapons Command and CONARC to order fifteen LWMR<\/a> for further testing. However, it soon becomes clear that the new .224 Winchester cartridge will not meet the Infantry Board\u2019s updated penetration requirements. Like its competitors, the .224E1 Winchester uses a lengthened .222 Remington case; however, the cartridge has a fairly short overall length (OAL). The stubby 53 grain projectile simply cannot retain enough velocity at longer ranges. As Stoner and Hutton had experienced before, Clarkson finds that he cannot load his .224E1 cartridge to a high enough velocity without encountering dangerously high chamber pressures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Around the same period of time, the Infantry Board decides that Winchester and ArmaLite should cooperate to make certain that their ammunition will interchange between the competing rifles for future testing. The .224E1 Winchester\u2019s case neck is lengthened to provide extra volume, and Winchester even chooses the same DuPont IMR<\/a> 4475 powder used in the .222 Special. (At the time, DuPont owned a majority interest in Remington, while Olin owned Winchester.) However, the resulting .224E2 Winchester cartridge retains the same short OAL from the .224E1 in order to feed in Clarkson\u2019s LWMR<\/a>. Despite the fact that the .224E2 Win\u2019s case is slightly longer than the .222 Special, ArmaLite is able to chamber their updated AR-15 to feed and function with both cartridges. In contrast, the Winchester entry can only feed their .224E2 cartridge. Subsequent trials are thus run using the Winchester cartridge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

December<\/strong>:
SALVO II trials begin at Fort Benning. Among the weapons and cartridges tested are modified M1 rifles chambered for .22\u201906 simplex and duplex cartridges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The CWL<\/a> publishes \u201cIncapacitation Criteria for Salvo Bullets.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On behalf of the US Army, Albert J. Lizza files a patent application for the stock and action clamp of the Springfield .224 rifle.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Winchester ends contractual work on the double-barreled SALVO rifle.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Author\u2019s Note<\/strong>
This article was originally published at The Gun Zone \u2014 The Gunperson\u2019s Authoritative Internet Information Resource. My friend and mentor Dean Speir has graciously hosted my articles at TGZ for nearly 16 years. These articles would likely have never appeared online without his constant encouragement and assistance.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

With TGZ\u2019s closure in early 2017, Dean encouraged me to find a new home for my scholarship so it wouldn\u2019t be lost in the dustbin of the Internet. Loose Rounds<\/a> has welcomed me with open arms. In the future, I intend to expand my legacy TGZ articles and add new contributions here at Loose Rounds.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

1958<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

January<\/strong>:
General Wyman sends a letter to General Maxwell D. Taylor, Chief of Staff of the US Army, recommending caution in overselling the M14 rifle to Congress during the Fiscal Year (FY<\/a>) 1959 budget hearings. The letter indicates General Wyman\u2019s support of the small caliber rifle:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cAs you know, in April 1958 we will receive two types of small caliber rifles, an Armalite and a Winchester, for evaluation at the USA Infantry Board. Should these rifles be found superior to the M14, as I am almost certain they will be, it would be most unfortunate if the Army had committed itself before Congress to irrevocable support of the M14 rifle. Disregard of the potential presented by the small caliber rifle at this time might well preclude Army exploitation of a superior rifle system which could conceivably appear on the developmental scene at an early date.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

On behalf of the US Army, Albert J. Lizza files a patent application for the operating system of the Springfield .224 rifle.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

February<\/strong>:
Earle Harvey\u2019s .224 Springfield is introduced commercially as the .222 Remington Magnum. (Robert Hutton has claimed in print that this was the first time he and Gene Stoner were made aware of the cartridge.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CONARC<\/a> sends the directive \u201cEvaluation of Small Caliber High Velocity Rifles.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Infantry Board submits their test plan for evaluation of the SCHV<\/a> rifles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Springfield fabricates a Mann accuracy test barrel for one of the .224 experimental cartridges. It is fitted to a Remington M1903A3 action.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Department of Defense directive 5105.15 is signed, establishing the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). The directive gives ARPA the responsibility \u201cfor the direction or performance of such advanced projects in the field of research and development as the Secretary of Defense shall, from time to time, designate by individual project or by category.\u201d It is originally intended for research and engineering projects regarding spacecraft, ballistic missiles, and nuclear weapons. However, it will come into play later in conventional warfare research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ordnance Technical Intelligence publishes \u201cA Test of Gun, Light Machine, 7.62mm Model RPD, Soviet and Gun, Light Machine, 7.62mm Mod 52 Czech.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

March<\/strong>:
Ten AR-15 rifles chambered in .222 Special are delivered to Fort Benning for the Infantry Board field trials. Due to the changes required for the new .224E2 Winchester cartridge, the Winchester LWMR<\/a> is not ready. However, a number of new T44E4 (pre-production M14) rifles are included as a control. Stoner is allowed to participate since no instruction manuals are yet available for the AR-15. Embarrassingly, the T44E4 rifles turn in a malfunction rate of 16 per 1000rds. In contrast, the AR-15 displays a malfunction rate of 6.1\/1000. Oddly, after all of the trouble to coordinate the development of the competing cartridges, the .224E2 Winchester still fails the 500 yard helmet penetration requirement. The tests are re-run with the .222 Special, which succeeds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Engineering tests for the SCHV<\/a> candidates are assigned to Aberdeen despite efforts by Dr. Carten to have them performed at Springfield Armory. Laurence F. Moore of the D&PS<\/a> is assigned to conduct the tests, and William C. Davis volunteers to participate in firing testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition, examples of the candidate rifles are sent to Fort Greely, Alaska for Arctic testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cSALVO II Rifle Experiment: Preliminary Results.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

April<\/strong>:
Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> publishes the report \u201cA Comparison of Proposed Small Arms Weapon Systems,\u201d concerning SALVO and SCHV<\/a> developments. The authors conclude that a lightweight .22 caliber rifle with a 50 grain projectile will result in a considerably greater effectiveness than the other weapon systems compared.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The BRL<\/a> also publishes the report \u201cRetardation and Velocity Histories of an 8-Grain Fl\u00e9chette.\u201d The report is intended primarily to cover issues related to multiple fl\u00e9chette canister cartridges.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

May<\/strong>:
The Infantry Board publishes the report \u201cEvaluation of Small Caliber High Velocity Rifles \u2013 ArmaLite (AR-15).\u201d The Infantry Board concludes that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. The AR-15 is a potential replacement for the M14 rifle;<\/li>
  2. The AR-15 equipped with a bipod and hinged butt plate should be a potential replacement for the M15 rifle; and<\/li>
  3. The penetrating capability of the .222 Special and .224E2 Win are significantly less than that of the 7.62mm NATO<\/a> and should be improved.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    The Infantry Board recommends that eight AR-15 modified to correct the deficiencies reported (three of these rifles to be equipped with hinged butt plate and bipod) be furnished for service testing. Development should be expedited to provide a round for the AR-15 that has greater resistance to bullet disintegration and better penetrating characteristics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    June<\/strong>:
    The Infantry Board sends the memo \u201cEstimated Requirements for Service Test of ArmaLite Rifle.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Chief of Ordnance, MG<\/a> John H. Hinrichs, informs General Wyman that during rain tests at Aberdeen, two AR-15 experienced burst barrels. The combination of water in the bore and the heavily fluted barrels used by the rifles prove too much. (Later, the same occurs with the Winchester LWMR<\/a>, but with less fanfare. Both manufacturers respond by providing unfluted barrels for subsequent prototypes.) CONARC<\/a> orders the Infantry Board to conduct duplicate rain tests with the AR-15 to see if the same results occur. The Infantry Board subsequently duplicates the problem. Seizing upon the issue, Dr. Carten begins a campaign to support development of an alternate .258 SCHV<\/a> cartridge. (The eventual pair of 6.35mm alternates are based on the .25 Remington case.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    CDEC<\/a> publishes \u201cArmalite Experiment Summary Report.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Winchester experiments with a 38 grain steel projectile for their .224E2 cartridge. The velocity is credited as 3,618 fps<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    July<\/strong>:
    The Infantry Board informs     CONARC<\/a> of the results of their duplicate rain tests. CONARC<\/a> orders the Infantry Board to prepare a supplemental report, in coordination with the Infantry School, which will re-evaluate the AR-15 rifle in light of the results of the rain test.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Winchester finally delivers their LWMR<\/a> to Fort Benning for testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Infantry Board publishes the report \u201cEvaluation of Small Caliber High Velocity Rifles \u2013 Winchester.\u201d One of the authors is Captain Herbert P. Underwood. The Infantry Board concludes that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. The Winchester rifle is a potential replacement for the M14 rifle;<\/li>
    2. The Winchester rifle equipped with a bipod and hinged butt plate should be a potential replacement for the M15 rifle; and<\/li>
    3. The penetrating capability of the .224E2 Win is significantly less than that of the 7.62mm NATO<\/a> and should be improved.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      The Infantry Board recommends that eight Winchester rifles modified to correct the deficiencies reported be furnished for service testing. Three of these rifles are to be equipped with hinged butt plate and bipod. Development should be expedited to provide a round for the Winchester rifle that has greater resistance to bullet disintegration and better penetrating characteristics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Trading is suspended briefly for Fairchild common stock on the New York Stock Exchange. The price of the stock plummeted after Fairchild President Richard S. Boutelle revealed that the company would have a first-half loss of about $5 million. The losses are in part due to the high costs of tooling up for production of the F-27 aircraft and slow sales.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Liberty Powder Defense Corporation\u2019s Robert R. Buell receives US Patent #2,843,584 titled \u201cMethod of Reclaiming the Constituents from Double Base Smokeless Powder.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      August<\/strong>:
      The results of the Infantry Board\u2019s supplemental testing of the AR-15 are discussed in an additional report titled \u201cEvaluation of Small Caliber High Velocity Rifles \u2013 ArmaLite (AR-15).\u201d The Infantry Board concludes that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      1. Surface tension and capillary attraction will retain sufficient quantities of water in the barrel of a fully loaded AR-15 to cause excessive overpressure when the weapon is fired;<\/li>
      2. The retention of the water in the barrel of an AR-15 is a major deficiency. However, because of its other favorable characteristics, the AR-15 remains a potential replacement for the M14 and M15 rifles;<\/li>
      3. The effect of the deficiency of the AR-15 may be avoided by taking proper precautionary measures such as partially extracting the cartridge from the chamber when draining;<\/li>
      4. Retention of water in the barrel due to surface tension and capillary attraction is not peculiar to the AR-15; and<\/li>
      5. Weapons of approximately .25 caliber or larger do not retain water in their barrels due to surface tension or capillary attraction when the rifles are fully loaded.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

        The Infantry Board recommends that SCHV<\/a> rifle research continue and that the procurement of additional AR-15 be made for service tests. The rifles should be modified to eliminate the possibility of burst barrels. However, if this cannot be done, training should be modified to deal with possible water retention, and research should be conducted to determine the minimum caliber at which water is no longer retained in the barrel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        CONARC<\/a> sends the letter \u201cDirective for an Experiment with the Rifle Squad Armed with a Lightweight, High-Velocity Rifle (LWVR).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        General Wyman retires.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The CWL<\/a> publishes the report \u201cWounding By Flechettes.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        September<\/strong>:
        CONARC<\/a> issues their final judgment regarding the Infantry Board\u2019s tests in the report \u201cEvaluation of Small Caliber High Velocity (SCHV) Rifles.\u201d Both SCHV<\/a> rifles are judged to be superior to the M14 in terms of lightness and ease of handling. It is noted that for the same weight, a soldier with one of the SCHV<\/a> rifles could carry ~650 rounds of ammunition versus ~220 with the M14. The AR-15 is judged to be superior to the M14 and the Winchester LWMR<\/a> in terms of reliability and ease of assembly\/reassembly. However, both SCHV<\/a> candidates are faulted on their burst barrels during rain testing. This said, CONARC<\/a> notes that contrary to the Infantry Board\u2019s proclamation, even rifles of .25 caliber or greater may also suffer burst barrels when retaining water. The .222 Special and .224E2 Win are judged to be inferior to the 7.62mm NATO<\/a> in terms of their penetration and position disclosing characteristics. CONARC<\/a> concludes that the SCHV<\/a> candidates are not acceptable for Army use at this time. Still, the report recommends that both manufacturers be allowed to submit 16 improved rifles and 96,000 rounds each for further testing by the Infantry Board and the Arctic Test Board.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Winchester chooses to decline further development of the LWMR<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Deputy Commanding General of CONARC<\/a>, General Herbert B. Powell assembles a general board to investigate the Army\u2019s various rifle research and production programs. (Sources disagree as to whether this was ordered by General Wyman as his last act prior to his retirement, or by his successor, General Bruce C. Clarke.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Meanwhile, Cooper-Macdonald, Inc, the sale representatives for ArmaLite, Colt, and Remington in Southeast Asia, encourages a manufacturing license agreement between ArmaLite\u2019s parent company Fairchild Engine & Airplane Corporation and Colt for the latter to manufacture the AR-10 and AR-15 rifles. Fairchild has been unwilling to allow ArmaLite to start their own production line, and is more than happy to pass future development risks on to Colt. Confident of pending success, Robert W. Macdonald cuts an individual deal with Colt providing for Colt to pay Cooper-Macdonald one dollar on every AR-10 and AR-15 rifle and two percent for spare parts produced by Colt for a period of 20 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        October<\/strong>:
        Fred A. Roff, Jr., Colt\u2019s Vice President and Director of Sales, sends Robert Macdonald a signed copy of the previous month\u2019s agreement between Cooper-Macdonald and Colt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        November<\/strong>:
        The         ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cMultiple Flechettes for Small Arms.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Fairchild President Boutelle reports an operating loss of $9,211,000.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        December<\/strong>:
        Stoner is asked to deliver replacement parts to the Arctic Test Board trials at Fort Greely. To his surprise, Stoner finds that many of the rifles have had parts substituted. In particular, the front sight assemblies have been removed from the barrels, and when reassembled, some of the tapered pins have been inserted in reverse while others have been replaced by pieces of welding rod. The upshot of this tinkering is that the front sight assemblies are very loose, and do not quite line up with the barrel\u2019s gas port.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Stoner is subsequently requested to give a presentation on the AR-15 before the Powell Board. At the presentation, Powell inquires about the Arctic tests. Believing that the testing had only just begun, Stoner refers to minor problems that have been rectified. However, the Powell Board already has possession of an Arctic Test Board report critical of the AR-15\u2019s cold weather accuracy and reliability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Meanwhile, the US Army\u2019s Combat Development Experimentation Center (CDEC) begins mock combat trials of the AR-15, Winchester LWMR<\/a>, and the M14. Conducted at Fort Ord, California, the tests cover the effects of the new weapons on squad tactics and organization. More than 500 firing runs are made on two attack ranges and one defense range. Different fire techniques and combinations of techniques are studied, and four different squad sizes are examined to accumulate data bearing on the appropriate size for squads using these weapons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Fairchild President Boutelle is fired. Fairchild\u2019s losses have been compounded by the recent cancellation of US Air Force contracts for the Goose missile and its J83 engine. Concurrently, Boutelle is elected Vice Chairman of Fairchild\u2019s Board of Directors. He quits just over a month later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Watertown Arsenal publishes the report \u201cTerminal Ballistic Study of Fl\u00e9chettes.\u201d While inspired by research supporting multiple fl\u00e9chette canister cartridges, the armor penetration characteristics should be applicable to individual fl\u00e9chette cartridges.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        1959<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
        \n\n\n\n

        Fearing the confusion of so many \u201cTriple Deuce\u201d nomenclatures, the
        .222 Special is renamed the .223 Remington.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        AAI receives two additional Ordnance contracts for fl\u00e9chette cartridge R&D<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Picatinny Arsenal, which conducts ammunition R&D<\/a>, is merged to the existing Ordnance Ammunition Command to create the Ordnance Special Weapons Ammunition Command (OSWAC).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Word leaks of Remington and Smith & Wesson\u2019s joint development of a SCHV<\/a> revolver cartridge.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Winter<\/strong>:
        Colonel Neilson retires.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Robert Fremont leaves ArmaLite to join Colt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        January<\/strong>:
        The Powell Board concludes its investigation and issues its report prior to the release of final reports from the Aberdeen engineering tests and the         CDEC<\/a> trials (which are not yet complete). The board approves of the SCHV<\/a> concept, and recommends that 750 AR-15 rifles be purchased for extended trials. However, no further consideration should be given to the .223 round as a potential replacement for the 7.62mm NATO<\/a>. Instead, the board recommends development of an AR-15 type of weapon, chambered for a .258 caliber cartridge, be expedited to replace the M14 in the rifle role. However, the M14 rifle should be retained for the automatic rifle role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Upon review of the Powell Board\u2019s report and urging by the OCO<\/a>, General Taylor rules that production of the M14 will continue as scheduled. Furthermore, any additional Army purchases of the AR-15 should be canceled. The 7.62mm NATO<\/a> will remain the standard cartridge, and all further product improvements will retain the caliber unless a new concept offers a very significant improvement. Finally, the development of the All-Purpose Hand-Held Weapon (APHHW) is approved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        ArmaLite protests General Taylor\u2019s decision to Senator W. Stuart Symington (D-MO). Symington enters the protest in the Congressional Record but declines to push the issue any further.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Within days of Taylor\u2019s decision, Colt and Fairchild finalize their licensing agreement. Colt pays a $75,000 lump sum, plus a 4.5 percent royalty on future production of the AR-10 and AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        AAI submits \u201cProposal for Special Type Small Arms Ammunition, Continuation of Development.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        February<\/strong>:
        The final report \u201cA Test of Rifle, Caliber .22, AR-15; Rifle, Lightweight Military, Caliber .224; and Pertinent Ammunition\u201d from the Aberdeen engineering tests is finally released. Laurence F. Moore\u2019s recommendations and conclusions are missing, reportedly excised on the order of Dr. Carten.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Fred A Roff, Jr., now Colt\u2019s President, sends Cooper-Macdonald an advance payment of $5,000 to begin promoting the AR-10 and AR-15. During the following \u201cworld\u201d tour (primarily Asia), Robert Macdonald finds that there is very tepid interest in the AR-10. In contrast, the smaller AR-15 is an immediate hit. Small orders for the AR-15 come in from Malaya, India, Australia, Burma, and Singapore. However, some interested buyers, such as the Philippines, are ham-strung by their military assistance pacts with the US. While the AR-15 is an American rifle, it isn\u2019t a US military issue<\/em> rifle; thus, US military aid funds cannot be used to purchase the new rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        March<\/strong>:
        CDEC<\/a> ends its comparative trials of the AR-15, the Winchester LWMR<\/a>, and the M14.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        AAI files \u201cProposal for the Development of a .22 Caliber Fin-Stabilized Armor Piercing Round.\u201d AAI proposes an armor piercing fl\u00e9chette made of tungsten carbide.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Spring<\/strong>:
        AAI proposes the construction of a \u201cburst simulator\u201d comprised of five single-shot fixtures bundled into a Gatling-type assembly. The individual fixtures are triggered electronically in a short sequence to simulate a high-cyclic rate burst from a single barrel rifle. This is intended to provide experimental data on optimum burst spread until AAI can construct an automatic weapon for its fl\u00e9chette cartridges.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        April<\/strong>:
        The Arctic Test Board publishes \u201cEvaluation of Small Caliber High Velocity Rifles.\u201d Oddly, in one phase involving the firing of 40 cartridges, the AR-15 is charged with 48 malfunctions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cDesign of Experiment for Effects of Weapon Configuration, Weight, Sights and Recoil on Rifle Accuracy\u201d and \u201cRange Estimation for Infantry Squad Weapons.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Ordnance Technical Intelligence publishes \u201cWound Ballistics Tests of the Soviet 7.62mm Bullet.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        May<\/strong>:
        CDEC<\/a> publishes \u201cLightweight High Velocity Rifle Experiment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The final report of the CDEC<\/a> trials, \u201cRifle Squad Armed with a Lightweight High-Velocity Rifle,\u201d is released. It projects that a 5-7 man squad armed with AR-15 rifles would have a higher number of hits and kills than the then current 11 man squad armed with M14 rifles. The report particularly praises the reliability of the tested AR-15 rifles, and suggests that a SCHV<\/a> design such as the AR-15 or LWMR<\/a> should be further developed as a replacement for the M14.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The ORO<\/a> publishes the papers \u201cOptimum Duplex Spread\u201d and \u201cOptimum Dispersion for Gaussian Salvo.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        At Springfield Armory, David C. Fletcher and Herman F. Hawthorne publish the report \u201cFeasibility Study of a Caliber .222, Salvo Type Shoulder Rifle.\u201d The rifle under study has three fixed barrels and uses a rotary feeding mechanism. Without muzzle brakes, the rifle will have twice the recoil of a M1 rifle. Muzzle brakes will reduce recoil to less than that of the M1 rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        June<\/strong>:
        The         ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cSALVO I Rifle Field Experiment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Springfield Armory publishes the report \u201cWater Drainage Characteristics of Caliber .22\/06 and 7.62mm Barrels.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        General Taylor retires at the end of the month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        July<\/strong>:
        Springfield Armory approves AAI\u2019s \u201cburst simulator\u201d design and grants a contract for the manufacture of two units.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        While operations manager for the Dardick Corporation, Melvin M. Johnson, Jr. completes an outline of various weapon concepts using the Tround principle. These include a Tround-firing Gatling (the \u201cDispenser\u201d) and military rifles, all using a \u201csuper-velocity\u201d .224 caliber cartridge.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        September<\/strong>:
        The US State Department\u2019s Office of Munitions Control approves of the sale of 25 AR-15 to Malaya.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Gene Stoner receives US Patent #2,903,809 titled \u201cCartridge Magazine of Aluminum or Magnesium.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The new Army Chief of Staff General Lyman L. Lemnitzer reaffirms General Taylor\u2019s earlier position in regard to the small arms situation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        October<\/strong>:
        CONARC<\/a> HQ sends the Infantry Board a directive titled \u201cEvaluation of Single Fl\u00e9chette.\u201d The Infantry Board is to conduct testing to determine whether the single fl\u00e9chette has sufficient military value under temperate weather conditions to warrant further development. A similar directive is sent to the Arctic Test Board.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The USAIB<\/a> publishes \u201cDraft Military Characteristics for All-Purpose Hand-Held Weapon.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The Combat Operations Research Group publishes \u201cInfantry Small Arms Weapons. Technique for Evaluation and Application to the All-Purpose Hand-Held Weapon.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        November<\/strong>:
        The         OCO<\/a> sends the Office Chief of Research and Development (OCRD) \u201cDevelopment of All-Purpose Hand-Held Weapon.\u201d The Chief of Ordnance LTG<\/a> Hinrichs proposes to the Chief of Research and Development (CRD) LTG<\/a> Arthur G. Trudeau that development of the APHHW<\/a> system be initiated, using single fl\u00e9chette ammunition in the direct fire role.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The Infantry Board receives AAI single fl\u00e9chette ammunition for testing.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        On behalf of the US Army, Albert J. Lizza receives US Patent #2,912,781 titled \u201cStock and Action Clamp.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        December<\/strong>:
        The US State Department\u2019s Office of Munitions Control approves of the sale of 23 AR-15 to India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Gene Stoner files a patent application for the trigger mechanism of the AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        AAI publishes the report \u201cFinal Report \u2013 Research and Development Activities on Fl\u00e9chette Ammunition Test Rifles.\u201d For the purposes of testing, ten Winchester Model 70R bolt-action rifles had been modified to fire individual fl\u00e9chette cartridges.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The Infantry Board concludes testing of the AAI single fl\u00e9chette ammunition. The Board sends a preliminary report to CONARC<\/a> HQ, concluding that single fl\u00e9chette ammunition has the potential for fulfilling the requirements of the direct fire ammunition for the APHHW<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        1960<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
        \n\n\n\n

        L. James Sullivan leaves ArmaLite.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        January<\/strong>:
        On behalf of the US Army, Albert J. Lizza receives US Patent #2,920,538 titled \u201cBolt Mechanism for Firearms.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        CONARC<\/a> issues \u201cApproved Utility Characteristics for All-Purpose, Hand-Held Weapons.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        February<\/strong>:
        AAI\u2019s first firing \u201cburst simulator\u201d is shipped to Aberdeen\u2019s         BRL<\/a>. After initial adjustments, the device could simulate a cyclic rate of 2,300rpm<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cProvisional Estimate of the Wounding Potential of Fl\u00e9chettes.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The CWL<\/a> publishes the report \u201cStudies in Wound Ballistics \u2013 Temporary Cavities and Permanent Tracts Produced by High-Velocity Projectiles in Gelatin.\u201d In these experiments, .30-06 M2 AP<\/a> and M2 Ball, 45 grain .22 Hornet FMJ<\/a> and JSP bullets, .30 caliber fragment simulators, and 1\/4-inch steel spheres were fired into cylinders of 20 percent gelatin. Of note, energy absorption and momentum transfer in 20 percent gelatin are determined to be independent of temporary-cavity formation.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        March<\/strong>:
        The US State Department\u2019s Office of Munitions Control approves of the sale of 1,250 AR-15 to Indonesia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The USAIB<\/a> publishes the report \u201cEvaluation of Single Fl\u00e9chette.\u201d The report covers testing of AAI\u2019s \u201cArrow\u201d fl\u00e9chette cartridge using the modified Winchester rifles. For comparison purposes, both the short and long variants of the 6.35mm Simplex cartridges and 7.62mm NATO<\/a> M59 Ball are also tested. Poor base accuracy, which deteriorated even further during use, is noted for the fl\u00e9chette rifles, along with excessive muzzle flash and poor penetration against wood and sand. Comments are also made concerning the downrange hazard presented by the discarding sabot to friendly troops. The fl\u00e9chette cartridges were found to be so lightly constructed that the case walls could be bent during handling. The cartridges had to be hand chambered individually, lest they be deformed during feeding from a magazine. On the positive side, the flat trajectory of the cartridge would require no sight setting changes out to 400 meters. Moreover, the future APHHW<\/a> is projected to weigh roughly 3.5 pounds and possess a cyclic rate of 2,000rpm<\/a>. Based on the projected characteristics, the fl\u00e9chette is deemed to have a greater potential than the 6.35mm and 7.62mm NATO<\/a> cartridges.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The OCRD<\/a> reports back to the OCO<\/a> \u201cApproval of MCs for APHHW<\/a>.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Gene Stoner files a patent application for a magazine design utilizing a constant force spring.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        April<\/strong>:
        CONARC<\/a> forwards the Infantry Board\u2019s report on fl\u00e9chette cartridge testing to Army CRD<\/a> LTG<\/a> Trudeau. CONARC<\/a> concurs with the Infantry Board\u2019s conclusions, and recommends that development of single fl\u00e9chette ammunition be continued and directed toward, but not limited to, the correction of deficiencies listed in the report. Moreover, the improved ammunition should be submitted to the Infantry Board for further testing.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        May<\/strong>:
        The US Army Arctic Test Board publishes the report \u201cEvaluation of Single Fl\u00e9chette and 6.35-MM Simplex and Duplex Ammunition.\u201d In these follow-up tests, AAI\u2019s \u201cArrow\u201d fl\u00e9chette cartridge, now designated the 5.6x53mm XM110, has been pitted against duplex and simplex versions of the short 6.35x48mm cartridge, 7.62mm         NATO<\/a> M59 and M80 Ball, and even the defunct .224 Springfield (.222 Rem Mag). (Additional details concerning the latter were excised.) The duplex 6.35mm cartridge is dismissed as having insufficient military value, and while the same complaints noted by the USAIB<\/a> are repeated, the XM110 cartridge is deemed to be the superior choice for future development.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        AAI\u2019s second \u201cburst simulator\u201d is shipped to Springfield Armory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        On behalf of Winchester, Stefan Janson receives US Patent #2,935,915 titled \u201cGas-Operated Automatic Rifle Having a Plurality of Barrels.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        June<\/strong>:
        Colt requests new Ordnance testing of their improved AR-15 rifle. Dr. Carten refuses the request, citing the lack of military requirement for such a rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Colt President Roff sends Cooper-Macdonald copies of the wire message from Dr. Carten denying Colt\u2019s request for testing, a letter from Charles Dorchester outlining potential arguments for getting Carten\u2019s decision overturned, a Congressional report with helpful statements made by Army CRD<\/a> LTG<\/a> Trudeau, and an Aberdeen test report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Gene Stoner files a patent application for the triangle pattern forearm assembly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cBattle Sight Setting.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The Infantry Board publishes \u201cEvaluation of 6.35MM Simplex and Duplex Ammunition.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        AAI publishes the report \u201cFinal Summary Report \u2013 Small Caliber Demonstration Guns.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        July<\/strong>:
        In hopes of generating interest (and royalties) in the AR-15, Macdonald invites General Curtis E. LeMay, then Vice Chief of Staff of the US Air Force, to a combination 4th of July celebration\/birthday party for former Fairchild president Richard Boutelle. Boutelle and LeMay are long-time friends and fellow firearms-enthusiasts. In fact, LeMay had previously attempted to have ArmaLite\u2019s AR-5 survival rifle adopted for the         USAF<\/a>. At the party, LeMay is conveniently given an opportunity to shoot a new Colt-production AR-15 at a trio of watermelons. After bursting the first two melons at 50 yards and 150 yards, LeMay is suitably impressed with the terminal results. (Note: The third melon is spared the firing squad and is subsequently eaten.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        LeMay offers to recommend the AR-15 as a replacement for the USAF<\/a>\u2018s aging stock of M2 Carbines, and it is arranged for three Colt AR-15 to be sent to the Air Force Marksmanship School at Lackland AFB<\/a> for testing. LeMay also holds a meeting with the Army CRD<\/a> LTG<\/a> Trudeau, and representatives of Cooper-Macdonald. As a result, the OCO<\/a> is asked to complete additional tests of the AR-15 rifle for the USAF<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Colt President Roff writes Cooper-Macdonald confirming Colt\u2019s authorization for Cooper-Macdonald to represent Colt in attempts to get the AR-15 tested and approved by the US Government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        August<\/strong>:
        At the first of the month, the         USAF<\/a> Marksmanship School receives an additional five AR-15. Testing is conducted with Lackland Military Training Center\u2019s commander General Robert M. Stillman, his Staff Officers, and Air Police personnel in attendance. Testing is conducted with both Remington and Norma ammunition. Accuracy testing is conducted using a mounted scope; however, there are problem with a loose scope mount. The AR-15\u2019s ability to launch rifle grenades (both anti-personnel and anti-tank) is demonstrated. Gene Stoner and Charles Dorchester participate in the testing, and an AR-10 is demonstrated for comparison purposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        A week later, Major Burton T. Miller of the USAF<\/a> Marksmanship School sends the memo \u201cEvaluation of AR-15.\u201d Within, Miller notes that 10 AR-15 are now on-hand and that 5,000 rounds are scheduled for delivery. However, he anticipates that a total of 50,000 rounds will be needed, and wonders who is going place the order for additional ammunition and who will pay for it. Approval is requested to work out a test evaluation program with the Air Police School and the 3720th Basic Military Training School wherein a representative number of trainees will utilize the AR-15, firing the exact courses currently required for M2 carbine training. However, given the limited number of rifles, the AR-15 will need to be shuttled between the trainees and the range test staff conducting penetration, accuracy, and function testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        During a staff meeting late in the month, General LeMay notes that a requirement exists for a better small arm for Air Force security forces to replace the M2 carbine. LeMay orders that an all-command survey be taken to validate the requirement and to determine the exact number of replacement rifles needed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Fairchild Secretary Paul S. Cleveland writes Cooper-Macdonald laying out the relationship between the two companies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        1. Cooper-Macdonald will attempt to secure an order and possibly a manufacturing license for ArmaLite weapons from India;<\/em><\/li>
        2. Cooper-Macdonald will also attempt to secure approval from the US Government for sale of ArmaLite weapons to Military Assistance Fund (MAF<\/a>) clients;<\/em><\/li>
        3. In return, Cooper-Macdonald will receive 10 percent of any down payments and royalties from Indian licensing, and 10 percent of royalties from sales to the US Government and MAF<\/a> clients; and<\/em><\/li>
        4. The same terms as India\u2019s will apply to any other foreign licensing deals made via Cooper-Macdonald\u2019s efforts.<\/em><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

          September<\/strong>:
          The           USAF<\/a> Marksmanship School publishes \u201cEvaluation Report of the Colt-Armalite AR-15 Automatic, Caliber .223.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          General LeMay is briefed on the latest small arms development programs of the Department of the Army.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Dr. Carten is ordered to provide testing of the Colt AR-15 for the USAF<\/a>. Ironically, the testing is requested to coincide with Ordnance testing of Dutch-production AR-10 rifles. Moreover, General LeMay, Army CRD<\/a> LTG<\/a> Trudeau, and other representatives from the USAF<\/a> and Army will be in attendance for part of the testing. Mr. Sloan, a representative from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), also attends. Among the other observers are Gene Stoner, Robert Macdonald, and Gerald Gustafson, representing his current employer, the USAF<\/a> Armament Laboratory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Gene Stoner receives US Patent #2,951,424 titled \u201cGas Operated Bolt and Carrier System.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          November<\/strong>:
          Ordnance releases the Aberdeen           D&PS<\/a> test results on the AR-10 and AR-15 in separate reports. Once again, Laurence F. Moore\u2019s recommendations and conclusions are missing. However, the remaining data is encouraging. For instance, the Colt AR-15 displays a malfunction rate of 2.5\/1000 rounds (less than half of the 1958 Fort Benning tests).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          In a report to the OCRD<\/a>, Dr. Carten summarizes the AR-15 results as \u201creasonably satisfactory.\u201d Thus, the Colt AR-15 is approved for USAF<\/a> trials.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Colt Chairman Sidney A. Stewart writes Cooper-Macdonald to propose the following commissions to be paid on AR-15 rifles sold to the US Government:<\/p>\n\n\n\n


          Rifles Sold<\/strong><\/td>
          Royalty Per Rifle<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
          1-25,000<\/td>$1<\/td><\/tr>
          25,001-50,000<\/td>$1.50<\/td><\/tr>
          50,001-100,000<\/td>$1.75<\/td><\/tr>
          Over 100,000<\/td>$2.00<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

          The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cRifle Accuracies and Hit Probabilities in Combat.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          December<\/strong>:
          Ten AR-15 are sent to Lackland           AFB<\/a> for additional testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          George Sullivan receives US Patent #2,965,994 titled \u201cGun Forearm.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The US Army Chemical Research and Development Laboratory (CRDL<\/a>) publishes \u201cWound Ballistics Assessment of Winchester-Western Caliber .25 Salvo Ammunition.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          1961<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
          \n\n\n\n

          USAF<\/a> testing at Lackland AFB<\/a> continues, pitting the Colt AR-15 versus the M2 Carbine and the M14 rifle. 43 percent of the AR-15 users score \u201cExpert\u201d in marksmanship qualifications versus 22 percent of the M14 users.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Using the AAI \u201cburst simulator,\u201d Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> estimates that the proposed APHHW<\/a> could produce three times the enemy casualties versus the M14 per engagement. Based on equal rounds expended, the APHHW<\/a> could be up to seven times more effective than the M14.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          First Half 1961<\/strong>:
          Springfield begins design of two weapon concepts to fire the XM144 fl\u00e9chette cartridge.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          January<\/strong>:
          Aberdeen\u2019s           D&PS<\/a> publishes another report titled \u201cA Test of Rifle Caliber .223, AR-15.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Colt Chairman Stewart writes Cooper-Macdonald to confirm increase in commission from $1 to $1.25 on all AR-15 sold to the USAF<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cDispersions for Effective Automatic Small Arms Fire and a Comparison of the M14 Rifle with a Weapon Yielding Effective Automatic Fire.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          February<\/strong>:
          Fairchild allows ArmaLite to split off into a separate company. ArmaLite\u2019s management team purchases the right and titles to all of the ArmaLite designs with the exception of the AR-10 and AR-15. Around the same time, Gene Stoner leaves ArmaLite.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cAn Investigation of the Wounding Potential of Fl\u00e9chette Rounds When Fired from a Multi-Barreled Test Gun.\u201d Experimental firings were conducted with the five-barreled test gun firing single fl\u00e9chette cartridges in single shots and in bursts at a rate of 2,680 rounds per minute. Observations from the targets and photography indicate that most fl\u00e9chette yaw in flight regardless of how they are fired. Those fired in salvos yaw much more than those fired in single shots. Yaw may be induced by transverse forces set up by the motion of the gun tubes, blast from adjacent muzzles, shock waves from other fl\u00e9chette, and interference from the sabots.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Frankford Arsenal publishes \u201cAn Effectiveness Analysis of Spin-Stabilized Rifle Systems, Based on a Caliber .17 Projectile.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          March<\/strong>:
          General LeMay sends a letter to the           OCO<\/a> requesting cost and availability figures for both the M14 and AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          General LeMay is briefed on the Air Staff recommendations on selection and procurement of a new weapon for the USAF<\/a>. Following the briefing, LeMay directs that the Air Staff select the weapon, and that the Air Force Materiel Command be directed to procure the weapon at the rate of 19,000 a year. LeMay further states that he felt that the AR-15 rifle is the weapon that should be procured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cCasualty Probabilities of Gaussian Salvos.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          On behalf of the US Army, David C. Fletcher receives US Patent #2,976,770 titled \u201cOperating Mechanism for a Plural Barrel Rifle with a Feeding Rotor.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The .22 Remington Jet is officially introduced by Remington and Smith & Wesson. The final cartridge is based on a necked down .357 Magnum case.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Spring<\/strong>:
          ARPA<\/a>\u2018s mission is reoriented to include research regarding the conduct of counter-insurgency warfare. Project AGILE is approved to further this new mission. Combat Development Test Centers are thus opened in Bangkok and Saigon, the respective capitals of Thailand and South Vietnam.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Project AGILE member, Colonel Richard Hallock (US Army), is lobbied by Robert Macdonald regarding the virtues of the AR-15 rifle in the hands of small-statured troops.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          April<\/strong>:
          The           OCRD<\/a> responds to General LeMay\u2019s request in a memo titled \u201cReplacement of .30 Caliber Carbine for USAF<\/a>.\u201d The memo points out the logistical difficulties which will ensue if a new rifle and cartridge are introduced. Instead, it recommends that the USAF<\/a> consider the folding-stock M14E1, examples of which could be available for testing as early as June 1961.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          ArmaLite\u2019s George C. Sullivan files another patent application for design principles for using aluminum in a firearm\u2019s receiver.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          On behalf of the US Army, David C. Fletcher receives US Patent #2,981,156 titled \u201cFiring Mechanism for a Salvo Gun.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The CRDL<\/a> issues the report \u201cWound Ballistics of the 7.2 Grain Steel Fl\u00e9chette.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          May<\/strong>:
          The           USAF<\/a> validates the quantitative requirement for procurement of the AR-15 and its ammunition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Colt President Roff writes Cooper-Macdonald to confirm increase in commission from $1 to $1.25 on all AR-15 sold to the US Government, not just the USAF<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The ORO<\/a> publishes \u201cSALVO II Rifle Field Experiment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          May-June<\/strong>:
          CDEC<\/a> conducts field experiments in support of the study \u201cOptimum Composition of the Rifle Squad and Platoon.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          June<\/strong>:
          General LeMay is appointed Chief of Staff of the Air Force.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The ORO<\/a>\u2018s administrative organization, Johns Hopkins University, and the Army mutually agree to terminate the contract funding the ORO<\/a>. This change is made so the Army can fire the ORO<\/a>\u2018s director, Dr. Ellis A. Johnson. Dr. Johnson had long fought to keep the ORO<\/a>\u2018s research from being a mere intellectual rubber stamp for existing Army orthodoxy. Despite Army pressure, Johns Hopkins was not willing to remove Johnson without cause.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Second Half 1961<\/strong>:
          Springfield supplies Aberdeen and Frankford Arsenal with test weapons and ammunition to enable continuation of feasibility and development studies of micro-caliber weapon systems proposed at Springfield. Micro-caliber cartridges are considered a back-up to the XM110\/XM144 fl\u00e9chette cartridges. Terminal ballistic tests at the           BRL<\/a> confirm the feasibility of micro-caliber systems as indicated initially by lethality tests at the Chemical Center\u2019s Wound Ballistics Laboratory.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Springfield completes the design and fabrication of one of its two weapon concepts to fire XM144 ammunition.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          AAI continues the development of small arms mechanisms to fire XM110 ammunition. In addition to increasing mechanism reliability and development of a high capacity magazine, AAI directs development efforts toward reduction of automatic fire dispersion.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Winchester, under contract to Springfield, designs, fabricates, and develops a small arms mechanism incorporating an unique \u201csoft recoil\u201d mechanism. A request is made for funding of an additional contract to conduct additional dispersion and accuracy tests.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          A contract is also negotiated with Winchester to modify the .224 LWMR<\/a> to fire XM144 ammunition.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Summer<\/strong>:
          General LeMay requests 19,000 AR-15 rifles in the           USAF<\/a>\u2018s budget proposal for the upcoming fiscal year, with the ultimate goal of procuring a total of 80,000 in successive years. Initially, funds for procurement of the AR-15 rifle are withheld by the Department of Defense (DOD). The reasons given are that: 1) introduction of another rifle of different caliber and characteristics into DOD<\/a> inventories is not desirable; 2) adoption of a .223 caliber rifle for the USAF<\/a> is not consistent with NATO<\/a> standardization objectives; and 3) Army and USAF<\/a> depots hold large quantities of M1 and M2 carbines, which are still usable despite their age.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          July<\/strong>:
          General LeMay is informed that the Offices of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (          DDR&E<\/a>) and the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Installations & Logistics) \u2013 ASD(I&L) had not agreed to USAF<\/a> procurement of the AR-15. Within days, LeMay confers with the executives of these offices. It is agreed that a study should be made of the entire matter to serve as the basis for a decision by the Secretary of Defense. By the end of the month, the study is complete. It recommends that the USAF<\/a> be allowed to procure the AR-15 rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          ARPA<\/a> selects the AR-15 as the weapon with the most potential for being compatible with small statured South Vietnamese soldiers. ARPA<\/a> purchases ten AR-15 rifles out of their available funds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          August<\/strong>:
          After several exchanges between the           USAF<\/a> and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD<\/a>), a meeting is held to discuss the procurement of the AR-15. Deputy Secretary of Defense Roswell L. Gilpatric chairs the meeting. DDR&E<\/a> Harold Brown and ASD(I&L)<\/a> Thomas D. Morris support the USAF<\/a> position. However, Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Charles J. Hitch opposes the procurement of the rifle. The results of this meeting are contained in a memorandum to Secretary of the Air Force Eugene M. Zuckert, stating that the request for procurement of the AR-15 rifle is not approved. The prime reason given is the problem of justifying to the Bureau of the Budget or to Congress a proposal to procure another new weapon in view of the Army\u2019s rifle program.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          General LeMay continues to hold conferences with the Deputy Secretary Gilpatric to determine the best course to follow to obtain the rifles. From these and other meetings within the OSD<\/a>, it is concluded that procurement of the new weapon depends on how the House Appropriations Committee feels about the matter. At the first approach, Representative George H. Mahon (D-TX), chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, is not sympathetic with the proposal, and this information is presented to the LeMay along with the recommendation that the whole matter be dropped.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          A week later, LeMay again broaches the topic of AR-15 procurement in an OSD<\/a> staff meeting. It is suggested that the request be resubmitted on the basis of a need for new weapons for special warfare. Upon presentation of the new approach to Rep. Mahon, Mahon suggests that there should be no Congressional objections to procurement of the AR-15 for special warfare purposes. The Air Staff is instructed to submit a new request for a lower number of AR-15 rifles for use by Composite Air Strike Forces and other USAF<\/a> personnel assigned duty in Southeast Asia. Oddly, while the idea was originally suggested by OSD<\/a> staff, some in the OSD<\/a> now voice objections to the approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Following successful demonstrations of the AR-15 rifle in South Vietnam, ARPA<\/a> requests 4,300 AR-15 for testing with South Vietnamese troops (ARVN<\/a>). This request is denied on the grounds that M2 Carbines were available from surplus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          September<\/strong>:
          Upon review of the           USAF<\/a>\u2018s latest request for only 8,500 AR-15 rifles and 8.5 million rounds of ammunition for test, training, and unconventional warfare, Deputy Secretary Gilpatric authorizes funding the same day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          A few days later, the Chief of the Military Assistance Advisory Group in Vietnam, LTG<\/a> Lionel C. McGarr, requests 4,300 AR-15 rifles for combat testing by the South Vietnamese. The request suggests three alternatives involving approximately 1,000, 2,500, or 4,300 rifles, and cites the political and psychological advantages of providing advanced weaponry for use by the small statured Vietnamese in their counterinsurgency war. DDR&E<\/a> Brown and other members of the OSD<\/a> staff brief Rep. Mahon on the entire effort in Vietnam. Mahon promises his support in the procurement of the rifles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Deputy Secretary Gilpatric sends a letter to Congress supporting the USAF<\/a>\u2018s procurement of the AR-15:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \u201cSubsequent to Congressional action on the Defense Department budget, the Air Force introduced an urgent requirement for equipping a portion of its forces with the AR-15 Rifle.<\/p>

          The Department of Defense has investigated thoroughly and concurs with the need for the rifle. The necessity for it has been personally justified to me by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

          Rep. Mahon allows only seven minutes for discussion of the AR-15 proposal before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. Funding is withheld pending consideration of additional data. Days later, Mahon writes Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara stating that the Subcommittee has voted to deny funding for the USAF<\/a>\u2018s AR-15 purchase. However, they are willing to give the matter further consideration when Congress reconvenes in January 1962, if requested to do so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The Army establishes a new research organization called the Research Analysis Corporation (RAC<\/a>). The RAC<\/a> takes over the ORO<\/a>\u2018s pre-existing projects, property, and most of its former staff. One wag jokes that RAC<\/a> is short for \u201cRelax and Cooperate.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          October<\/strong>:
          President John F. Kennedy reportedly tells General LeMay to quit badgering the Army about the AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          After conducting a limited test in Saigon with their 10 AR-15, ARPA<\/a> resubmits their request for AR-15 rifles with the additional data. They further note that the requested rifles will be evaluated only in terms of their usefulness for ARVN<\/a> units and their US advisors, not for general US military issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> publishes the report \u201cAn Interim Report on the Study of Parameters that Affect the Accuracy of Automatic Rifles.\u201d This report is a brief summary of the work being done for the All-Purpose Hand-Held Weapon (APHHW<\/a>). It gives some ideas of the present trends of thought and some indications of ways to improve the accuracy of automatic fire.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The CRDL<\/a> issues the report \u201cWound Ballistics of High-Velocity Flechettes for Hand Held Weapons.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Mel Johnson, with assistance from MBAssociates, designs a rocket-propelled fl\u00e9chette weapon. Johnson converts a Smith & Wesson Model 29 revolver to serve as the test bed. Later dubbed the \u201cDischarger,\u201d it fires three rocket fl\u00e9chette from each cartridge fed by belt through an open chamber \u201cstar-wheel.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          November<\/strong>:
          CDEC<\/a> publishes \u201cOptimum Composition of the Rifle Squad and Platoon. Final Report of Experiment.\u201d The findings indicate that all members of a squad, except machinegunners, should carry the APHHW<\/a>. While AAI had finally built APHHW<\/a> prototypes, a burst control device had not yet been designed or incorporated. Burst length had been simulated by loading only the required number of rounds for a given \u201cburst\u201d into the magazine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Late<\/strong>:
          Springfield performs preliminary investigations concerning the effect of water in the bore of small caliber rifles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          December<\/strong>:
          Fairchild sells Colt an exclusive license to the patent rights related to the AR-15 rifle. The license will last up to the expiration date of the last-to-expire patent. The agreement includes the right to grant sub-licenses, but does not cover the right to reassign the patents or the agreement. The purchase price is based primarily on subsequent sales by Colt of AR-15 weapons and parts incorporating the above mentioned patent rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The Director of ARPA<\/a>, Jack P. Ruina, sends a memo to McNamara titled \u201cAR-15 Armalite Rifles for Test in Southeast Asia\u201d recommending approval of the request for 1,000 AR-15, necessary spare parts, and ammunition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          General LeMay makes a personal appeal for the USAF<\/a>\u2018s rifles in a meeting with President Kennedy. Again, the request is denied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          McNamara approves the ARPA<\/a> request, allowing for the purchase of 1,000 AR-15 rifles, accessories, and ammunition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The USAF<\/a> classifies the status of the .223 Remington cartridge as developmental.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The US Army Chief of Staff\u2019s Office (OCSA<\/a>) receives a fact sheet titled \u201cArmaLite Rifle (AR-15).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS<\/a>) Chairman General Lemnitzer sends President Kennedy a memo titled \u201cArmaLite (AR-15) Rifle.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The chiefs of the Technical Services are formally briefed as to McNamara\u2019s planned reorganization of the Army. McNamara himself even appears for a time to take questions. While some like MG<\/a> Frank S. Besson, Jr., the Chief of Transportation, embrace the plan, others such as the Chief of Ordnance LTG<\/a> Hinrichs, and the Chief Chemical Officer MG<\/a> Marshall Stubbs are vehemently opposed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cEffectiveness of Proposed Small Arms for Special and Guerilla Warfare.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          1962<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
          \n\n\n\n

          Gene Stoner joins Cadillac Cage to begin work on the 7.62mm NATO<\/a> Stoner 62 system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          At the World Shooting Championships in Cairo, the Russian \u201cRunning Deer Match\u201d team uses the 5.6x39mm cartridge. It is based on the 7.62x39mm M43 cartridge case necked down to .22\u2033. World Records are tied and broken for individual and team scores respectively in the two-shot event. (One source claims that the cartridge dates back to at least 1957, but the earliest found examples bear 1961 headstamps.)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Remington begins development of a bolt-action pistol chambered for a SCHV<\/a> cartridge. Wanye Leek heads up the development team. Initial efforts center on the .222 Remington, but it is discovered that the cartridge is not as efficient as desired in a 10\u2033 barrel. Experimentation then begins with shortened .222 Remington cases.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          First Half 1962<\/strong>:
          Springfield continues to supply Aberdeen and Frankford Arsenal with various small arms mechanisms for lethality, accuracy, and dispersion tests. These include multiple and single-barrel test mechanisms to fire micro-caliber, and the XM110 and XM144 fl\u00e9chette cartridges.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Springfield completes the design and fabrication of both of its SPIW<\/a> mechanism concepts. The function and development testing of these mechanisms are seriously delayed because of XM144 ammunition development problems, which remain to be resolved. The design, fabrication, and initial testing of a three shot, pump action grenade launcher are also completed.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Springfield completes its preliminary investigations regarding the effects of water in the bore of small caliber rifles, and a report is written. These tests have been conducted with the XM110 ammunition. Preparations for more extensive water-in-bore tests are also completed. Three commercial rifles are modified to fire XM144 ammunition. Each are fitted with three barrels of different wall thickness for the water-in-bore tests. Testing is scheduled to begin in mid-July and awaits a sufficient supply of XM144 ammunition, along with FY<\/a> 1963 funding.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          AAI continues development of small arms mechanisms to fire XM110 ammunition. The major portion of AAI\u2019s work is devoted to decreasing the dispersion of short burst fire in preparation for a series of dispersion tests at Aberdeen. The results of these tests are quite favorable and are indicative of the feasibility of the single-barrel, serially fired approach.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Winchester completes the development of its first \u201csoft recoil\u201d mechanism prototype. While excessive clearances between the barrel-receiver group and the mechanism frame produce wide dispersions, the test results are encouraging regarding dispersion pattern and total recoil distance of barrel-receiver group.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Winchester also completes modification of five LWMR<\/a> to fire Frankford Arsenal XM144 (FA-XM144) ammunition. (Sometime in FY<\/a> 1963, Winchester will receive another contract to modify one of the five LWMR<\/a> rechambered for FA-XM144 to accept Winchester\u2019s own XM144-WE4 ammunition. At the completion of the contract, the modified rifle is then loaned back to Winchester to support a Frankford Arsenal contract.)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Winter<\/strong>:
          Rep. Mahon and the Deputy Secretary Gilpatric are guests at the           USAF<\/a> firepower demonstration at Eglin Air Force Base. Both are impressed by a demonstration of the AR-15 rifle. A similar demonstration is later arranged for President Kennedy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          January<\/strong>:
          Secretary of Defense McNamara abolishes the statutory positions of the Technical Service chiefs, transferring them to the Secretary of the Army subject to Congressional approval of his sweeping reorganization plan for the Army. McNamara proposes the creation of an Army Materiel Command and a Combat Developments Command (CDC). The new commands will be raised to the same level as           CONARC<\/a>. The responsibilities and subordinate commands of the formerly independent Technical Services (Ordnance, Chemical, Quartermaster, Transportation, and Signal Corps) will be divided among the three major commands. The Technical Services will lose their materiel functions to the Army Materiel Command, their training functions to CONARC<\/a>, and their doctrine formulation functions to the CDC<\/a>. The Offices of the Chief of Ordnance and the Chemical Warfare Services will be abolished, and their staff functions will be transferred to the office of the Army\u2019s Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics (DCSLOG). The Corps of Engineers and the Surgeon General remain for the most part untouched.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          When Congress reconvenes, Air Force Secretary Zuckert visits Rep. Mahon, and one of the items discussed is the AR-15 rifle. Mahon advises that unless the USAF<\/a> AR-15 rifles are in the budget, it will be better not to bring the matter to the attention of Congress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The USAF<\/a> classifies the AR-15 as a standard weapon for its inventory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          ARPA<\/a> receives the first shipment of their 1,000-rifle order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          In the letter \u201cSPIW<\/a> \u2013 Initiation of Project and Recording of Approved Military Characteristics,\u201d the OCO<\/a> approves formal specifications for the new Special Purpose Individual Weapon (SPIW). The SPIW<\/a> combines the point-fire capabilities of the APHHW<\/a> with the area-fire capabilities of the 40x46mm grenade launcher.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The CRDL<\/a> issues the report \u201cWound Ballistics of the 1.7 Grain Steel Fl\u00e9chette.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Mel Johnson and Jack Fitzgerald, representing Advanced Developments Inc (ADInc.), meet with ARPA<\/a> Director of R&D, Dr. William H. Godel and other ARPA<\/a> staff to discuss ADInc. projects. These concentrate on the rocket fl\u00e9chette \u201cDischarger\u201d and a .22-caliber \u201cQuick Fix\u201d conversion for the M1\/M2 Carbine. On its own, ADInc. obtains two M1 carbines for conversion, plus additional 15 and 30 round magazines. A third carbine is later ordered along with spare barrels and 1,000 rounds of .30 Carbine ammunition.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          February<\/strong>:
          Project AGILE begins operational testing of the AR-15 in Vietnam.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Hill AFB<\/a> conducts testing to determine whether the .223 Remington cartridge is of sufficient quality to justify complete testing and development for USAF<\/a> use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Congress approves McNamara\u2019s reorganization plans for the Army. Carrying out the reorganization is the responsibility of the Department of the Army Reorganization Project Office (DARPO<\/a>). MG<\/a> Besson is chairman of DARPO<\/a>\u2018s planning group for the Army Materiel Command, then tentatively called Materiel, Development, and Logistics Command (MDLC).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          US Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV<\/a>) is formed. General Paul D. Harkins is its first commander.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Mel Johnson completes an outline of an ARPA<\/a> proposal titled \u201cAdvanced Light Guerilla Cal. .224 Sub-Rifle System for Short Lead-Time, Lost Cost and Advanced Performance.\u201d Johnson estimates a budget of $200,000 for prototype fabrication and testing. In addition, Johnson asks for a $18,000 fee to be paid to ADInc. Weeks later, ARPA<\/a> Director of Special Projects COL Thomas W. Brundage (USMC<\/a>) declines support for Johnson\u2019s Sub-Rifle and Discharger proposals.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          March<\/strong>:
          McNamara orders Secretary of the Army Elvis J. Stahr, Jr. to accelerate the Army\u2019s reorganization so that the new Army Materiel Command will be in full operation by 1 July 1962, nine months ahead of the previously proposed schedule. Secretary Stahr protests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Macdonald calls to report that he has information indicating that the House Appropriations Committee is ready to approve the USAF<\/a> request for the AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The OCO<\/a> approves the development timeline for the SPIW<\/a>. Type classification of a SPIW<\/a> as \u201cStandard A\u201d is projected for June 1966.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          On behalf of the US Army, Herman F. Hawthorne files a patent application for a triple-bore Tround, which will be used later by the H&R<\/a> SPIW<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Spring<\/strong>:
          Remington submits the specifications of the .223 Remington to the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers\u2019 Institute (SAAMI).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Mel Johnson finalizes plans for the commercial development of the \u201cJohnson Semiautomatic Sub-Rifle\u201d (JSSR<\/a>).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          April<\/strong>:
          George Sullivan receives US Patent #3,027,672 titled \u201cFirearm with Aluminum Alloy Receiver.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The OCSA<\/a> receives a fact sheet titled \u201cArmaLite Rifle, AR-15, Cal. .223.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          McNamara approves a plan by MG<\/a> Besson to establish early operations of the Army Materiel Command. Upon approval of Besson\u2019s plan, the activation of the Army Materiel Command is pushed back to August.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          ADInc. and Interarmco make arrangements for Interarmco to represent ADInc. products overseas, particularly the Sub-Rifle\/Guerilla Gun. Interarmco provides two additional M1 carbines for conversion to .224.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Aberdeen\u2019s D&PS<\/a> publishes the report \u201cTest of Rifle, Assault, 7.62mm, Model 1958, Czech.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          May<\/strong>:
          The American Rifleman publishes an article on the AR-15. From their limited testing during the winter, the authors allege that the rifle\/cartridge combination is unreliable and inaccurate. This is primarily attributed to the stability of the bullet under cold weather conditions. They suggest that the rifling twist be changed from 1-in-14\u2033 to 1-in-12\u2033.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The USAF<\/a> resubmits its request for the procurement of 8,500 AR-15 rifles and 8.5 million rounds of ammunition. During Congressional hearings, the USAF<\/a> is asked to rebut the American Rifleman article. Members of the Appropriations Committee are suitably impressed with the quality of the USAF<\/a>\u2018s arguments, and within days, the funding is approved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The US Navy orders a small quantity of AR-15 rifles for service testing by its SEAL<\/a> teams. Ultimately, 172 rifles are ordered for team use. (One source claims that SEAL<\/a> Team Two\u2019s Lt. Ray Boehm used the open purchase system to procure 136 rifles straight from Colt, with 66 going to SEAL<\/a> Team Two and the remainder to SEAL<\/a> Team One.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Secretary of the Army Stahr tenders his resignation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The Department of the Army officially establishes the Army Materiel Command (AMC<\/a>) as a major field command.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          MG<\/a> Nelson M. Lynde, Jr. is appointed commander of the US Army Ordnance Weapons Command (OWC<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The Johnson \u201cGuerilla Gun\u201d is publicly demonstrated for the first time at the American Ordnance Association meeting at Aberdeen. Mel Johnson leaves one converted carbine behind for testing by the Limited Warfare Laboratory (LWL<\/a>).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          June<\/strong>:
          Demonstrations of the AR-15 are held for           OSD<\/a> staff. Those in attendance include Systems Analyst Alain C. Enthoven and Comptroller Charles J. Hitch. Attendees are allowed to test fire the AR-15 along with the M14 and AK-47.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The BRL<\/a> publishes \u201cEstimated Incapacitation Probabilities of Caliber .14 Bullets.\u201d Tests had been ordered on behalf of Springfield Armory, who had developed manufacturing techniques for micro-caliber barrels. The cartridge, based on a necked down .222 Remington, launched a 17 grain projectile at 4,400 fps<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Winchester is awarded a new contract to design, fabricate and test an improved \u201csoft recoil\u201d mechanism to fire short bursts of FA-XM144 ammunition.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Second Half 1962<\/strong>:
          AAI continues development of its small arms mechanisms to fire XM110 ammunition. The contract is extended from August to October, and then to December when it is cancelled. During this period, AAI completes fabrication and limited testing of its Model #4 firing mechanism.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Winchester\u2019s improved \u201csoft recoil\u201d prototype mechanism contract is extended from mid-December 1962 to mid-February 1963. Functional difficulties are experienced.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          July<\/strong>:
          ARPA<\/a>\u2018s operational testing of the AR-15 in Vietnam ends. Later in the month, ARPA<\/a> releases the report \u201cTest of ArmaLite Rifle, AR-15.\u201d The report concludes that the AR-15 is superior to the M2 Carbine, and better suited for Vietnamese soldiers than the M1 rifle, the M1918 BAR<\/a>, and the Thompson SMG<\/a>. Vietnamese troops and their US advisors reportedly considered the AR-15 \u201cthe best \u201call around<\/em>\u201d shoulder weapon\u201d then in use. ARPA<\/a> notes that there were no part breakages in nearly 80,000 rounds fired, and only two parts were replaced. The report also includes graphic details of the .223 Remington\u2019s terminal effects. The results are typically described as \u201cexplosive.\u201d ARPA<\/a> recommends that the AR-15 be adopted as the basic weapon for all South Vietnamese forces. No deficiencies are noted, and only two minor changes are recommended. One is to roughen the texture of the upper surfaces of the handguard for a more secure grip when a soldier\u2019s hands are wet. The second is to add an additional section to the cleaning rod along with a T-shaped handle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Ordnance Weapons Command is renamed US Army Weapons Command (USAWC or WECOM). Ordnance Special Weapons Ammunition Command is renamed US Army Munitions Command (MUCOM). The Office of the Chief of Ordnance is officially abolished at the end of the month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          On behalf of Comptroller Hitch, the Systems Analysis Directorate of the OSD<\/a> begins a study of rifle procurement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Gene Stoner receives US Patent #3,045,555 titled \u201cAutomatic Trigger Mechanism with Three Sears and a Rotatable Control Member.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Department of Defense General Counsel Cyrus R. Vance becomes Secretary of the Army.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Mel Johnson prepares a detailed cost analysis for JSSR<\/a> conversions. Johnson also prepares a press package on the JSSR<\/a> and MMJ 5.7mm for firearm and hunting magazines.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          August<\/strong>:
          The           USAF<\/a> officially awards Colt the contract for 8,500 AR-15 and ammunition. Following the procurement of the initial quantity of weapons, the USAF<\/a> includes 19,000 new AR-15 rifles in its FY<\/a> 1963 budget.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The AMC<\/a> is activated with LTG Frank S. Besson, Jr. as its first commander. AMC is organized initially into five commodity major subordinate commands (MSCs); Electronics Command, Missile Command, Munitions Command, Mobility Command, and Weapons Command; and two functional MSCs; Supply and Maintenance Command (SMC) and Test and Evaluation Command (TECOM). Dr. Carten is reassigned as the Technical Coordinator of the Weapons Development Branch of the AMC<\/a>\u2018s Research, Development, & Equipment Directorate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          ARPA<\/a> sends to the White House a brief titled \u201cAR-15 Armalite Rifle, Test Completion and Adoption for Vietnamese Armed Forces.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          General Harkins, the commander of MACV<\/a>, requests a $4.6 million add-on to the FY<\/a> 1963 Military Assistance Program (MAP<\/a>) budget. This funding will be used to acquire 20,530 AR-15 rifles for implementation of the Project AGILE recommendations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The CRDL<\/a> issues the report \u201cWound Ballistics of the 15.2 Grain Steel Fl\u00e9chette.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          September<\/strong>:
          Secretary Vance requests that the Army reassess the M14 program, taking into account the capabilities of the AR-15 and the           SPIW<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Admiral Harry D. Felt, the Commander in Chief, Pacific Command (CINCPAC<\/a>), denies MACV<\/a>\u2018s request for AR-15 rifles. While the AR-15 is considered to be an excellent weapon, the decision is made on the basis of the cost of introducing the new rifle into the MAP<\/a>. Moreover, these funds are needed for other projects with higher priority. The issue of funding is critical as Secretary McNamara had already reduced the FY<\/a> 1963 MAP<\/a> budget.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The Systems Analysis Directorate of the OSD<\/a> finishes the report on rifle procurement requested by Comptroller Hitch. Titled \u201cA Comparison of AR-15 and M14 Rifles,\u201d known hereafter as the Hitch Report, it details the history of intermediate service rifle cartridges and related theory from the .276 Pedersen up to the current AR-15. The study concludes that the AR-15 is superior to the M14 and AK-47. AR-15 equipped squads are theoretically credited with the potential to inflict up to five times more enemy causalities to those issued the M14. The AR-15 is also credited with being more reliable and durable than the M14. The report further suggests that the M14 is inferior to the AK-47 and even the M1 rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Two days after the Hitch Report is released, the OCSA<\/a> replies to Secretary Vance\u2019s query in a memo titled \u201cRifle Procurement Program.\u201d The memo criticizes the AR-15 on several points. First and foremost is logistics and NATO<\/a> standardization. It is alleged that it would take 27 months for AR-15 production to meet the current rate of M14 production (300,000 per year). It is considered undesirable to have Colt as the sole source of production. The American Rifleman<\/strong> article is cited for the AR-15\u2019s inaccuracy in cold weather, yet changing the rifling twist would likely decrease the rifle\u2019s lethality. Furthermore, the M14 is claimed to already be superior in penetration and lethality to the AR-15. It concludes that \u201cThe AR-15 is not now acceptable for the Army for universal use.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          WECOM<\/a> HQ announces the possibility of an accelerated schedule for SPIW<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Fall<\/strong>:
          Mel Johnson finishes work on his MMJ 5.7mm wildcat cartridge and \u201cSpitfire\u201d carbine conversion. Based on a necked down .30 Carbine case, the wildcat was designed in conjunction with Lysle Kilbourn (father of the wildcat .22 K-Hornet) and with assistance from H.P. White Laboratory and the Lyman Gun Sight Company.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          October<\/strong>:
          After receiving a briefing on the Hitch Report, McNamara sends a memo to Secretary Vance asking why the \u201cdefinitely inferior\u201d M14 was being procured when the \u201cmarkedly superior\u201d AR-15 was available? Vance passes the question on to the newly appointed Army Chief of Staff General Earle G. Wheeler.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          In response to McNamara and Vance\u2019s requests, General Wheeler orders a series of tactical and technical tests of the relative merits of the M14, AR-15, and AK-47. Testing is to be performed at bases in the US, Europe, the Caribbean, and the Arctic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Department of the Army representatives contact General Harkins indicting that they are now willing to support MACV<\/a>\u2018s request for AR-15. Furthermore, they recommend suspending the supply of all M1 rifles and carbines in the Vietnam FY<\/a> 1963 MAP<\/a> pending the approval of the AR-15. General Harkins resubmits his request. Admiral Felt again refuses to approve the proposal, stating that the AR-15 has already been considered and turned down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Representatives from the AMC<\/a>, Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> and D&PS<\/a>, TECOM<\/a>, and the USAIB<\/a> meet at AMC<\/a> headquarters for an informal planning conference regarding the ordered rifle evaluations. A memorandum from the Infantry Board representative states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \u201cTHE US ARMY INFANTRY BOARD WILL CONDUCT ONLY THOSE TESTS THAT WILL REFLECT ADVERSELY ON THE AR-15\u2026\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

          The US Army orders 300 AR-15 and 600,000 rounds of ammunition for test and evaluation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          President Kennedy is briefed on the Hitch Report by science advisor Jerome Weisner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The Ogden Air Materiel Area sends a letter titled \u201cProduction of Cartridge, 5.64 mm, H.V. Ball,\u201d which outlines the USAF<\/a>\u2018s additional requirement for ammunition above that already on order. A partial technical data package is sent to Picatinny Arsenal, asking if the Army had any interest. (5.64mm converts to .222\u2033 in reference to the designation .222 Remington Special.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          WECOM<\/a> briefs forty-six companies on the SPIW<\/a> program. Emboldened by the positive industry response, the anticipated type classification date is moved to June 1965.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Springfield is told that it must eliminate one of its two SPIW<\/a> designs.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          November<\/strong>:
          With President Kennedy\u2019s interest peaked after the Hitch Report briefing, McNamara demands that General Wheeler provide his conclusions on the rifle issue by January 31, 1963.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Secretary Vance sends a memo to General Wheeler titled \u201cEvaluation of the AR-15 Rifle.\u201d Vance urges that \u201cthe CDC<\/a> test plan be expanded or modified in a manner which will afford further evaluation of the conclusions reached in the\u2026(1959) CDEC<\/a> report.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          A meeting is held at Frankford Arsenal with representatives from the USAF<\/a>. Frankford Arsenal agrees that they will prepare an initial technical data package for a one-time Air Force purchase of commercial cartridges for use in the AR-15 rifle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          LTG<\/a> Besson approves adding 38 AR-15 to the existing order for 300 rifles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The OSD<\/a> submits a budget reprogramming action for the procurement of 19 million rounds of .223 ammunition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Frankford Arsenal creates a small quantity of duplex .223 loads. This consists of a forward bullet of 33 grains followed by a trailing slug of 34 grains. The velocity is quoted as 2,760 fps<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Springfield reviews the SPIW<\/a> program requirements, formulates a development plan, and down-selects its favored SPIW<\/a> design for further development. The development plan includes the placement of contracts for support in the design, development, and fabrication of a large capacity magazine, a grenade launcher, and a muzzle device.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          At the request of WECOM<\/a>, contract negotiations with AAI are initiated for the fabrication of three of the Model #4 firing mechanisms. In addition to fabrication, the contract calls for additional development of the mechanism to improve functional reliability.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          December<\/strong>:
          Aberdeen\u2019s           D&PS<\/a> publishes the report \u201cComparative Evaluation of AR-15 and M14 Rifles.\u201d During testing, the AR-15 produces groups less than half the size of the M14 in full-automatic fire. However, the water in the bore issue raises its head once again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The US Army Arctic Test Board publishes \u201cComparative Evaluation of AR-15, M14, and AK-47 rifles and M79 Grenade Launcher.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The CDC<\/a>\u2018s Infantry Combat Developments Agency files the report \u201cRifle Evaluation Study.\u201d The objectives of the study were: to evaluate the employment of small arms to determine the desired military characteristics of a rifle; to assess the M14, M14 (USAIB<\/a>), AR-15, AK-47, and SPIW<\/a> to determine the preferable weapon in meeting the desired military characteristics; and to make recommendations on retention of the M14, adoption of the AR-15, and development of the AK-47 type and SPIW<\/a>. The authors conclude that increased emphasis be put on the SPIW<\/a> program to speed up its development. In the interim, M14 (USAIB<\/a>) conversion kits should be put into production and be issued as soon as possible to field units. Full or partial adoption of the AK-47 or AR-15 would be unacceptable as they do not meet the requirements for an Infantry squad weapon. The number of malfunctions by the AR-15 indicates that the AR-15 is not now sufficiently reliable for issue to combat units. However, considerations should be made for its possible use by Special Forces units.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          CDCEC<\/a> publishes \u201cComparative Evaluation of Rifles.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The CDC<\/a> publishes its own report also titled \u201cRifle Evaluation Study.\u201d The author concludes that the AR-15 is the best choice for world-wide use, but the rifle is not yet ready for deployment. The report recommends:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          1. Continue use of the M14 by US Army Forces in Europe and equip all units earmarked for deployment to Europe with the M14, except airborne and Special Forces units.<\/em><\/li>
          2. Correct the AR-15\u2019s deficiencies in reliability and night firing capabilities.<\/em><\/li>
          3. Equip the following with the AR-15 in priority shown:<\/em>
            1. Air Assault units;<\/li>
            2. Airborne units;<\/li>
            3. Special Forces units.<\/li><\/ol><\/li>
            4. Slow conversion from M1 to M14 in other areas. Final decision with respect to these units can be based on the experience of the units equipped with the AR-15.<\/em><\/li>
            5. In units armed with the M14, replace the M14 with a version of the M14 (USAIB<\/a>) for automatic riflemen only.<\/em><\/li>
            6. Continue the SPIW<\/a> program looking toward a long-range marked improvement over all other weapons considered.<\/em><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

              The USAIB<\/a> issues the reports \u201cRifle Evaluation\u201d and \u201cComparative Evaluation of AR-15 (Armalite) and M14 Rifles.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              The US Army Infantry School (USAIS<\/a>) publishes the report \u201cEvaluation Exercise 3 Dec \u2013 20 Dec 62\u201d covering their evaluation of the AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              The CDC<\/a> also publishes the report \u201cComparative Evaluation AR-15 and M14 Rifles.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              TECOM<\/a> issues the report \u201cComparative Evaluation of U.S. Army Rifle 7.62mm, M14; Armalite Rifle Caliber .223, AR-15; Soviet Assault Rifle AK-47.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Laurence F. Moore, at the Army Research Office, publishes the report \u201cStudies of Rifle Effectiveness.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Secretary Vance orders US Army Inspector General MG<\/a> Edward H. McDaniel to review the Army\u2019s conduct of the comparative rifle testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> issues the report \u201cComparative Effectiveness Evaluation of the M14 and Other Rifle Concepts.\u201d The study indicates that, in automatic fire, the number of hits per trigger pull for a fl\u00e9chette-firing weapon will be from 10 percent to 270 percent higher than for the M14 rifle, at ranges between 50 and 300 meters and in bursts of from 3 to 5 rounds. In semiautomatic fire, the fl\u00e9chette-firing weapon will produce about three times as many casualties as the M14 rifle. Although the incapacitating probabilities per trigger pull are about the same for the two weapons, the fl\u00e9chette-firing weapon will produce 20 percent more casualties in the same period of time. The hit probability per trigger pull for the fl\u00e9chette-firing weapon in semiautomatic fire at ranges of from 100 to 300 meters will be between 12 percent and 18 percent higher than for the M14; in automatic fire, the fl\u00e9chette-firing weapon will be about twice as effective as the M14. On the basis of effectiveness per round of ammunition fired, therefore, the fl\u00e9chette-firing weapon will be about seven times as effective as the M14.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Ten companies provide formal written SPIW<\/a> proposals.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

              1963<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
              \n\n\n\n

              \u201cBuild a Better Mouse Gun, and the World Will Beat a Path to Your Door<\/strong>.\u201d ArmaLite project engineer Arthur Miller scales down Gene Stoner\u2019s 7.62mm NATO<\/a> AR-16 design into the 5.56mm AR-18. Enticed by Stoner to join him at Cadillac Gage, L. James Sullivan and Robert Fremont scale down the 7.62mm NATO<\/a> Stoner 62 into the 5.56mm Stoner 63. Beretta and SIG<\/a> join forces for a 5.56mm rifle project. At Heckler & Koch, Tilo M\u00f6ller begins development of a scaled down 7.62mm NATO<\/a> G3 into the 5.56mm HK<\/a> 33.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Remington commercially introduces the .221 Remington Fireball, a shortened .222 Remington, along with the XP-100 bolt-action pistol.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Weatherby commercially introduces the .224 Weatherby Magnum. While supposedly under development for nearly a decade, the cartridge is roughly an improved .219 Zipper with a belt and Weatherby\u2019s radiused shoulder contour.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Valtion Patruunatehdas of Lapua, Finland begins loading the Russian 5.6x39mm Running Deer cartridge. Later, the cartridge and case are commercially manufactured by Sako as the .220 Russian.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

              January<\/strong>:
              The Army\u2019s Deputy Chief of Staff for Military Operations (DCSOPS)               LTG<\/a> Theodore W. Parker publishes the study \u201cRifle Evaluation: A Comparative Evaluation of the U.S. Army Rifle M14, the Armalite AR-15, and the Soviet Rifle AK-47.\u201d The study recommends \u201conly the M14 is acceptable for general use in the U.S. Army.\u201d The study states that the AR-15 is less reliable, has poor pointing and night firing characteristics, has only \u201cmarginally satisfactory\u201d penetration, and its adoption would violate NATO<\/a> standardization agreements. Three alternative courses of action are proposed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              1. Continue M14 production until a radically improved weapon can be procured, such as the SPIW<\/a> or its equivalent;<\/em><\/li>
              2. Terminate M14 production at the end of FY<\/a> 1963 procurement. Rapidly procure a militarized AR-15 to complete inventory objectives. Reorient the research and development program to provide a weapon meeting or exceeding the SPIW<\/a>\u2018s characteristics in the future; or<\/em><\/li>
              3. Continue M14 production. Procure a militarized AR-15 in FY<\/a> 1964 to equip air assault, airborne, and Special Forces units. Continue SPIW<\/a> development to support procurement in FY<\/a> 1967.<\/em><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                Not surprisingly, LTG<\/a> Parker recommends the first course of action, with development of the SPIW<\/a> projected for an initial procurement in FY<\/a> 1965.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                In a memo to Secretary Vance titled \u201cComparative Evaluation of the M14, AR-15, and Soviet AK-47 Rifles,\u201d General Wheeler reports \u201cThe AR-15 is not now acceptable for the Army for universal use.\u201d Supporting arguments included that adoption of the .223 Remington cartridge would violate NATO<\/a> standardization, that the M14 was superior at ranges over 400m, and that the AR-15 design was not completely debugged or reliable. In the trials, the AR-15 suffered a malfunction rate eight times higher than that of the control M14 rifles. In addition, testing at Aberdeen and Edgewood Arsenal could not duplicate the terminal results reported by ARPA<\/a>\u2018s Project AGILE.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                General Wheeler recommends:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                1. In FY<\/a> 1964, procure between 50,000 and 100,000 AR-15 rifles and use them to equip Air Assault, Special Forces, and Airborne units;<\/em><\/li>
                2. In FY<\/a> 1964, procure a sufficient number of the M14(M) rifles to provide an automatic rifle capability to all infantry squads armed with the M14 rifle;<\/em><\/li>
                3. Reduce the FY<\/a> 1964 M14 program by a number sufficient to accommodate recommendations 1 and 2 above; and<\/em><\/li>
                4. Continue the current SPIW<\/a> program and undertake expedited improvement of the AR-15 to determine which of these weapons will best meet the requirement for a follow-on rifle.<\/em><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                  Some questionable decisions and outright skullduggery surface in the Inspector General\u2019s investigation. For instance, the AR-15 was judged against M1 rifle-era requirements such as aimed fire out to 800m. The AR-15 rifles were required to fire full automatic, while the M14 rifles were allowed to remain on semi-auto. For comparison testing, the Infantry Board even brought out prototype match rifles and squad automatic versions of the M14 such as the M14(USAIB<\/a>) (AKA: the M14E2 or M14A1). A representative from the Office of the Chief of Research and Development telephoned TECOM<\/a> suggesting that Aberdeen\u2019s D&PS<\/a> use a specific form of rain test to induce failures in the AR-15. The M14 was not subjected to the same test. Aberdeen\u2019s BRL<\/a> switched out a M14 being used for accuracy testing when it showed signs of inaccuracy. Accusations were also made of the use of handpicked lots of match grade ammunition for M14 accuracy testing. Negative aspects of the M14\u2019s testing were downplayed or even omitted from reports, while the AR-15 was consistently portrayed in a negative fashion even when the test results indicated otherwise. All attendees of the October 1962 planning conference were interrogated. They denied under oath that they had planned to fix the rifle evaluations against the AR-15. The USAIB<\/a> representative, an Army Colonel, explained that his infamous memorandum was not what he meant to express, and blamed its wording on administrative error. Admittedly, some of the AR-15\u2019s problems in testing were real, the result of rushed production of the rifles and their ammunition for the rifle trials. The biggest problem experienced was primers blown out of the case upon firing. (Robert Macdonald was so upset that he sent individual letters to Colt and Remington, accusing both companies of sabotaging the tests.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  In a report to the OSD<\/a>, Secretary Vance recommends the following: 1) Procure enough rifles converted to the M14(USAIB<\/a>) standard for issue as automatic rifles to all infantry squads; 2) Procure 50,000-100,000 AR-15 for issue to Air Assault, Airborne, and Special Forces units; 3) Production of standard M14 rifles is to be reduced; and 4) The SPIW<\/a> program will be scheduled to provide a \u201cfollow-on\u201d replacement for the M14 by the end of FY<\/a> 1965. In response, McNamara announces the cancellation of M14 production once FY<\/a> 1963 contracts are completed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The Department of Defense also accepts the USAF<\/a>\u2018s plan to procure a total of 80,000 AR-15 rifles during a five-year period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The ODCSLOG<\/a> submits a staff study of the Army\u2019s AR-15 rifle requirements. Procurement and distribution is proposed as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Purpose<\/strong><\/td>Air Assault<\/strong><\/td>Special Forces<\/strong><\/td>Airborne<\/strong><\/td>Total<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
                  Initial Issue<\/strong><\/td>13,000<\/td>6,665<\/td>34,352<\/td>54,017<\/td><\/tr>
                  Maintenance Float<\/strong><\/td>630<\/td>333<\/td>1,718<\/td>2,701<\/td><\/tr>
                  Combat Support (6 months)<\/strong><\/td>5,070<\/td>2,598<\/td>13,386<\/td>21,054<\/td><\/tr>
                  Pipeline (2 months)<\/strong><\/td>1,690<\/td>366<\/td>4,462<\/td>7,018<\/td><\/tr>
                  Total<\/em><\/strong><\/td>20,410<\/em><\/strong><\/td>10,462<\/em><\/strong><\/td>53,913<\/em><\/strong><\/td>84,790<\/em><\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                  In the end, the Army proposes a \u201cone-time\u201d purchase of 85,000 AR-15 rifles. It is intended as a stopgap measure until the SPIW<\/a> is ready for fielding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  CDCRE-E sends a letter to LTG<\/a> Besson titled \u201cAR-15 Rifle Deficiencies.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The USAF<\/a> type-classifies the .223 Remington under the designation \u201cCartridge, 5.64 Millimeter Ball MLU-26\/P.\u201d The military specifications for the ammunition is published as MIL-C-9963. The USAF<\/a> also releases the report \u201cExterior Ballistics of the AR-15 Rifle.\u201d The results of cold chamber testing at Eglin Air Force Base indicate that the ammunition cannot meet accuracy requirements in subzero temperatures. A change in the rate of twist from 1-in-14\u2033 to 1-in-12\u2033 is noted as solving the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  A meeting is held at Lake City Army Ammunition Plant between Army and USAF<\/a> representatives. The purpose of this meeting is to develop practical drawings and specifications based on the previous experience of the USAF<\/a> with Remington cartridges. The USAF<\/a> points out that the performance of the Remington cartridges have not been satisfactory because of four principal deficiencies: keyholing, stripping of the bullet jacket, packaging, and a light powder charge. The MUCOM<\/a> representative stresses the importance of having a military specification for the rifle, since any variation in the design of the rifle could require a change in design of the ammunition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The USAF<\/a> receives the final AR-15 of its original 8,500 rifle order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Aberdeen\u2019s Human Engineering Laboratory (HEL) releases the report \u201cSummary of Studies Conducted with the AR-15.\u201d The report contains a summary of firings conducted with the AR-15 using several muzzle brake deflectors and other means to reduce automatic fire dispersion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The HEL<\/a> also publishes \u201cMeasurement of Peak Sound-Pressure Levels Developed by AR-15 and M14 Rifle Bullets in Flight.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  WECOM<\/a> begins contract negotiations for prototype SPIW<\/a> construction.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Springfield submits Request for Proposals to various facilities for support in the design, development, and fabrication of a large capacity magazine, a grenade launcher, and a muzzle device for Springfield\u2019s own SPIW<\/a> candidate. After receiving and evaluating the proposals, Springfield requests the award of contracts. However, the development of the muzzle device is cancelled.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  WECOM<\/a> notifies Springfield that the accelerated program for the SPIW<\/a> has been approved. Springfield begins major retrofitting of parts to its prototype, and initiates the fabrication of four test weapons.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  February<\/strong>:
                  USMC<\/a> Commandant General David M. Shoup convenes a board at the Marine Corps Landing Force Development Center to conduct comparative evaluation of the AR-15. BG<\/a> Lewis W. Walt is appointed board chairman. The board\u2019s findings are later evaluated by an informal board of officers at HQMC<\/a>. They conclude that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  1. The M14 and AR-15 are essentially equal and adequate with respect to training reliability, and combat effectiveness. However, the AR-15 is easier to handle, requires less mechanical training time, and is predominately lower in system weight. As such, the AR-15 would be a more effective combat rifle for the USMC<\/a>.<\/em><\/li>
                  2. However, there is no comparable .223 machinegun to replace the M60.<\/em><\/li>
                  3. Until a .223 machinegun can be developed, no .223 rifle should be adopted by the USMC<\/a>.<\/em><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                    In a memo titled \u201cRifle Procurement Program,\u201d the JCS<\/a> recommends procurement of the AR-15. A day later, in another memo of the same title, McNamara officially approves the procurement of the AR-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    LTG<\/a> Besson writes MG<\/a> Lynde directing WECOM<\/a> and MUCOM<\/a> to take necessary action to identify problems in weapon and ammunition compatibility, and to begin corrective action. Specific problems cited in the letter are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n