NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

29 November 2002 DOCUMENT

PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24
PFP(NAAG)D(2002)3
+ DISTR LG/3-WG/1

NATO ARMY ARMAMENTS GROUP

LAND GROUP 3 ON CLOSE COMBAT INFANTRY

Synthesis Report on Future Personal Defence Weapon (PDW) Caliber Assessment

by the Chairman of AC/225 LG/3

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The basic mission of the NAAG is to work towards the objectives of NATO
armaments cooperation. Through its subordinate Groups, NAAG is to promote
standardization and interoperability of Alliance and PFP Armed Forces in the area
of Land Armaments.

At the beginning of the nineties Belgium and France requested AC/225 - Panel III
to consider standardization of a new PDW 5.7 x 28mm ammunition as potential
replacement over time of the NATO 9mm calibre. Some NATO Nations
acknowledged the lack of effectiveness of the 9mm ammunition against increasing
protection levels of soldiers in the field.

Consequently AC/225 Panel III designed operational requirements for the future
Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) and conducted tests of the 5.7mm ammunition.

SG/1 produced then a draft STANAG 5.7 x 28mm and associated Manual of Proof
and Inspection Procedures (MOPI) that were agreed by LG/3.

At the moment the STANAG was ready for distribution in order to be ratified a new
calibre 4.6mm was announced in a developing phase.

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
-1-
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24, MULTI REF

At its meeting in July 97 the NAAG agreed with the view of the NPAG that there
should be no proliferation of small arms calibers but recognised that increasing
protection levels might require the change from one caliber to another one over
time.

In June 1998 the NAAG noted strong support from SHAPE that there should be no
more than three NATO small arms calibers (excepting during a transition phase)
and reaffirmed that this was also the formal NAAG position. Therefore, the NAAG
welcomed the UK offer to open its national calibre evaluation program to allow an
examination of all offered calibers to replace (over time) the 9mm as the NATO
calibre for a PDW. Consequently, the NAAG tasked LG/3 with developing a plan to
exploit this offer and report to the NAAG.

In June 1999 the NAAG approved the TORs and POW of Working Group 1
(WG/1) with the aim to recommend to NATO the ammunition parameters of a new
calibre in replacement of the 9mm.

1.2 AIM

The aim of this report is to present the results of the trials conducted in the
timeframe 2000-2002.

1.3 METHOD OF WORK

Starting from the set up of the NATO PDW Working Group (WG/1) with the aim of
following and monitoring the UK trials and prepare a recommendation for the
future calibre to replace the 9mm, the following steps were completed (a detailed
summary is at annex 1).

1.3.1. UK produced the user requirements as well as the method and technical content
of the linked test program based on :

* AC/225 (LG/3) D/7 dated 12 June 97

* WEAG European Staff Target for PDW dated May 96
* the test program that had been prepared by NATO for the 5,7 ammunition at the
beginning of the 90’s

1.3.2. After agreement of the WG/1 on above requirements and methods, UK launched a
Call for Bids based on UK and NATO specifications.

It is to be mentioned that the trial was geared toward alternative calibers to

5.56mm.

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
-2-
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24, MULTI REF

The companies who supplied complete system are as follows :

* Fabrique Nationale Herstal : 5.7mm P90

* Heckler & Koch : 4.6mm MP7
* Civil Defence Supply : .224” BOZ and three modified Commercial Off the Shelf
weapons consisting of an H&K MP5, Glock and Colt Infinity Strayer
* Sommer and Ockenfuss supplied weapon and ammunition although the
weapon was a modified Thompson Contender. This was supplied as a means
to fire their 0.224”
ammunition

1.3.3. Phase 1 of the trial was conducted in September 00 by the British Defence
Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) at Fort Halstead in UK. The aim of
phase 1 was to review suitable ammunition natures in order to select the round
required for selection of a PDW.

The results of the trial demonstrated that alternative calibers to 5.56mm could be
suitable in a future PDW. The recommendation was that only the P90 (5.7 x
28mm) and the HK (4.6 x 30mm) be retained for further testing.

Results of the tests were published under reference

DERA/LWS/WS4/CR000594/1.0 in November 2000.

1.3.4. Phase 2 of the trial was conducted in 2002 under the lead of the French Directory
for Land Armaments Programs in the test center of BOURGES.

Based on the recommendations resulting from Phase 1 the 5.7 x 28mm (P90) and
the 4.6 x 30mm (PDW HK) ammunitions underwent further evaluation.

The technical results of these tests have been be published under reference
PFP(NAAG-LG/3)D(2002)2 dated 21.11.02.

1.3.5. The evaluation of the tests results took place in November 2002 and led to some
conclusions expressed by the Team of Experts from SG/1 on the incapacitation
performance and by the WG/1 on the overall trial (annexes 2 and 3).

1.3.6. The important thing to point out is that at the end of the final evaluation
process of the tests results a consensus could not be reached within the
WG/1 as to recommend the parameters of the future calibre.

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
-3-
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24, MULTI REF

2. RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THE TWO

RETAINED CALIBRES

2.1. Level of incapacitation performance

2.1.1 Since neither of the two calibre's reach the level of performance as specified in
the document AC/225 (LG/3) D/7 (Revised) these specifications should be
reviewed to make them more realistic.

2.1.2. The ammunition 5.7 x 28mm is slightly superior in the field of terminal ballistic.

2.2. Global level of performance

2.2.1. In spite of having developed different approaches in order to establish the

global level of performance of each of the two calibers in order to designate
which one should be considered as the most suitable future replacement of
the 9mm caliber the WG/1 did not reach a consensus.

The main reasons of such status quo rely on :

* the acknowledgement that both ammunitions performed quite similarly

* the neutralisation of the one ammunition advantage (incapacitation level of
the 5.7mm) by an even equivalent advantage of the other one (penetration
level of the 4.6mm)
* the neutralisation of the advantage of a better terminal ballistics performance
of the 5.7mm by its problems of bad functioning after the ammunition had
been soaked into mineral-oil liquids
* the impossibility to reach consensus on criteria hierarchy and weighting

3. EVALUATION OF LG/3 CHAIRMAN

3.1. The method of work was strictly followed as agreed by the NATO involved
decision levels despite some delays due to unforeseeable circumstances.

3.2. The quality of the technical evaluation undergone in both test centers cannot be
put into questions. They both scored a high standard of technical
professionalism.

3.3. On the ground of a sound evaluation of the global tests results of the trial it should
have been possible to designate the most suitable calibre. The lack of decision
and consequently of the requested recommendation from the panel of experts
(SG/1 and WG/1) finds its foundations in the no man's land between objectivity
and subjectivity. Once national interests are at stake it is no surprise that a
consensus could be difficult to reach knowing the consequences of such an
important choice.

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
-4-
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24, MULTI REF

The lack of decision seems to rely on the defense of national interests to the
prejudice of collective interest.

3.4. WG/1 has successfully completed its tasks if the above mentioned limits are taken
into account. It can now be disbanded.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1. NAAG is requested to take note of this report.

4.2 NAAG is requested to task LG/3 with to review document AC/225 (LG/3) D/7 with the
aim of adjusting PDW specifications to a more realistic standard.

4.3 NAAG is requested to task LG/3 to monitor the national PDW programmes and
evaluate the impact of a no choice situation for the new PDW calibre within Allied and
Partner Nations. A detailed situation should be reported regularly to NAAG.

5. LAST WORDS OF LG/3 CHAIRMAN

Appreciation and gratitude can be expressed to the United Kingdom and to France
for having successfully carried the burden of such trials. A tremendous amount of
work has been put in the preparation, the coordination, the hosting and the fulfillment
of the tests. The compilation of such valuable tests results will be of great value for
the future.

(Signed) Col. J. SANA

Chairman AC/225-LG/3

Annex 1: Chronology
Annex 2: Report of ToE on incapacitation results
Annex 3: Report of WG/1 on global tests results

3 Annexes
Original: English
\\NT13\docum\AC225\Ac225\Documents\PFP\PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24.doc

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
-5-
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

ANNEX 1
PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24
PFP(NAAG)D(2002)3
+ DISTR LG/3-WG/1

Chronology

Date Milestone - Decision Ref. Document

06.97 • NAAG tasking to LG/3 to conduct an analysis on current AC/225-DS/70 dated 11.07.97
situation related to PDW caliber.
04.98 • Report by LG/3 on PDW caliber mentioning some National AC/225-D/1432 dated 04.04.98
interest to replace 9mm with various schedules.
06.98 • NAAG tasking to LG/3 to study feasibility of preparation of AC/225-DS/72 dated 26.06.98
the future PDW caliber based on UK trials.
11.98 • Meeting of LG/3 ad-hoc group to study UK trial PFP(NAAG-LG/3-AHG)CS(98)1
programme. dated 01.10.98
01.99 • NAAG approval of the principle of creating a group to AC/225-DS/73 dated 01.02.99
monitor UK trials and prepare the recommendation.
06.99 • Creation by NAAG of LG/3-WG/1 based on proposed PFP(NAAG)DS(99)2 dated
TORs and POW. 28.06.99
09.99 • Endorsement by CNAD of the creation of WG/1 and AC/225-D/24 dated 27.09.99
publication of TORs and POW.
09.99 • Preparation and approval of the User Requirement and DS/A/LAND(99)480 dated 21.09.99
02.00 System Requirement documents based on UK proposals PFP(NAAG-LG/3-WG/1)DS(2000)1
and NATO reference documents. dated 30.03.00
09.00 • First phase trials in UK for the 4 candidates.
•
st
11.00 Presentation of 1 phase assessmentà two candidates PFP(NAAG-LG/3-WG/1)DS(2000)2
nd
will go for 2 phase dated 23.11.00
•
nd
Announcement by UK of postponement of 2 phase DERA/LWS/WS4/CR000594/1.0
dated 21.11.00
12.00 • Tasking from NAAG to LG/3 to study the FR offer to PFP(NAAG)DS(2000)2 dated
nd
support 2 phase trials for the two candidates selected in 19.12.00
st
1 phase.
02.01 • Creation of Incapacitation TOE to support WG/1 on the PFP(NAAG-LG/3)DS(2001)1 dated
evaluation of this aspect of the evaluation. 16.02.01
06.01 • Preparation and approval of assessment program for PFP(NAAG-LG/3-WG/1)DS(2001)1
4.6mmx30 and 5.7mmx28 ammunitions to be conducted in dated 05.07.01
nd
FR to completed 2 phase trials.
12.01 • Presentation and approval of the final trial programme and PFP(NAAG-LG/3-WG/1)DS(2001)2
dates by FR. dated 21.12.01
PFP(NAAG-LG/3)D(2001)6REV
dated 21.12.01
•
nd
01.02 Execution of 2 phase trials in Bourges (FR) and visit by PFP(NAAG-LG/3)D(2001)6REV
to various National experts. dated 21.12.01
06.02
09.02 • Transmission of trials data for incapacitation simulation in
various models by designated experts of the TOE.
•
nd
10.02 Distribution of 2 phase FR assessment report. PFP(NAAG-LG/3)D(2002)2, dated
21.11.02
11.02 • Synthesis meeting of Incapacitation TOE
•
nd
Final meeting of WG/1 to study the 2 phase report and
prepare final report and future PDW caliber
recommendation.

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
1-1
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

ANNEX 2
PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24, MULTIREF

AGREED CONCLUSIONS OF THE TOE WORKS ON "INCAPACITATION"

Neither of the two calibers reach the level of performance specified in the document
AC/225 (LG.3) D/7 revised date 12/06/97 and in associated STANAG 4513 (Edition 1 date
05/05/97).

The ammunition 5.7 mm x 28 is slightly superior from the terminal ballistics point of view.

The difference in performance as compared to the requirements specified in document D/7

is substantial for both calibers. It might be necessary to compare the results with those
obtained for other calibers ( 9 mm ball bullet or improved) in order to determine the added
value brought about by both tested calibers.

The specifications of document D/7 and Stanag 4513 are not realistic and at the present
time there is no operating procedure to verify them.

The criteria proposed to revise document D/7 could be as follows :

- Ph = 0.6 single shot and burst shot shoulder firing.
- Pi/h = 0.4 on nude or protected gelatine (CRISAT protection)
- range = 50 m
- incapacitation time = 30 s

A synthesis of the main figures enclosed hereafter.

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
2-1
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

ANNEX 2
PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24, MULTIREF

4 sh o ts a t 1 0 0 m
A ve ra g e va lu e (E K E m e th o d o n th e w h o le b o d y so ld ie r) E K E (J) P e n e tra tio n d e p th (m m )
C rite ria P i/h a ssa u lt < 3 0 s P i/h d e fe n ce < 3 0 s P i/h m e a n n u d e g e la tin p ro te cte d g e la tin n u d e g e la tin p ro te cte d g e la tin
n u d e g e la tin p ro te cte d g e la tin (1 ) n u d e g e la tin p ro te cte d g e la tin (1 ) n u d e g e la tin p ro te cte d g e la tin (1 ) m in m ax m in m ax m in m ax m in m ax
4 ,6 m m 0 .3 9 0 .4 6 0 .3 1 0 .3 6 0 .3 6 0 .4 3 54 135 164 186 250 >300 160 200
5 ,7 m m 0 .4 9 0 .4 5 0 .3 9 0 .3 6 0 .4 6 0 .4 2 215 296 117 219 260 270 120 160

C o m p u te rM a n re su lts o n M -R IT ta rg e t (2 )
C rite ria P i/h a ssa u lt < 3 0 s P i/h d e fe n ce < 3 0 s P i/h m e a n
u n p ro te cte d p ro te c te d (3 ) u n p ro te c te d p ro te cte d (3 ) u n p ro te cte d p ro te cte d (3 )
4 ,6 m m 0 .6 4 0 .3 8 0 .4 5 0 .2 8 0 .5 5 0 .3 3
5 ,7 m m 0 .6 8 0 .4 4 0 .4 8 0 .3 2 0 .5 8 0 .3 8

T im b e rw o lf re s u lts P e n e tra tio n d e p th (m m )

C rite ria P i/h a ssa u lt < 3 0 s P i/h d e fe n ce < 3 0 s P i/h m e a n n u d e g e la tin
u n p ro te cte d p ro te cte d u n p ro te c te d p ro te c te d u n p ro te cte d p ro te cte d
4 ,6 m m 0 .6 1 - 0 .2 - 0 .4 1 - 325
5 ,7 m m 0 .7 6 - 0 .2 4 - 0 .5 0 - 235

M IC re su lts o n th e w h o le b o d y so ld ie r (4 )
C rite ria P i/h
u n p ro te cte d p ro te cte d
4 ,6 m m 0 .8 2 -
5 ,7 m m 0 .8 2 -

P h (u sin g w e a p o n s P 9 0 a n d M P 7 ) s in g le sh o t o n R IT T a rg e t P h in m a n n b a rre l o n R IT ta rg e t
C rite ria p ro n e sh o u ld e r firin g s ta n d in g sh o u ld e r firin g h ip firin g C rite ria Ph
50 m 100 m 50 m 100 m 50 m 100 m 50 m 100 m
4 ,6 m m 0 .9 5 0 .6 8 0 .6 8 0 .4 5 0 .0 2 0 4 ,6 m m 1 1
5 ,7 m m 0 .7 7 0 .4 2 0 .7 5 0 .7 2 0 0 5 ,7 m m 1 0 .9 4

P h (u sin g w e a p o n s P 9 0 a n d M P 7 ) b u rst fire o n R IT T a rg e t (5 )

C rite ria p ro n e sh o u ld e r firin g s ta n d in g sh o u ld e r firin g h ip firin g
50 m 100 m 50 m 100 m 50 m 100 m
4 ,6 m m 0 .6 0 .6 9 0 .7 4 0 .3 5 0 .0 3 0 .0 1
5 ,7 m m 0 .7 6 0 .6 9 0 .6 1 0 .2 6 0 .0 3 0 .0 1

(1 ) : C R IS A T p ro te ctio n
(2 ) :
- p ro je ctile m o d e le d a s e q u iv a le n t m a ss s te e l sp h e re
- M -R IT ta rg e t : H e a d + ve rte b ra l co lu m n
- P ro b a b ility va lu e s a re co m p u te d fo r a n in c a p a cita tio n o f 1 0 0 %
(3 ) : p ro te ctio n : P A S G T (K e vla r 1 8 la ye rs) in ste a d o f C R IS A T (K e vla r 2 0 la ye rs + tita n iu m 1 .6 m m la ye r)
(4 ) : M IC m o d e l d o e s n o t ta ke in to a cc o u n t d is ta n c e e ffe c ts in d u ce d b y b u lle t c a vita tio n
(5 ) : 1 5 b u rs t o f 3 sh o ts

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
2-2
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

ANNEX 3
PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24
PFP(NAAG)D(2002)3
+ DISTR LG/3-WG/1

AGREED CONCLUSIONS OF WORKING GROUP 1 – PDW CALIBRE

Working Group 1 has studied in detail the report prepared by France (ETBS). The results
are summarised and commented upon in page of Annex 3.
The observations, agreed by Working Group 1, are:

a. The performance of both the 4.6mm and 5.7mm cartridges are similar for
most of the tests.

b. Each cartridge has demonstrated that in some areas it possesses superior

performance over the other:

(1) The 4.6mm cartridge has superior penetration. With the proof barrel
test it has lower dispersion.

(2) The 5.7mm cartridge has superior incapacitation capability. It also

demonstrated better internal ballistic performance within the test temperature
range. However, it should be noted that this cartridge encountered functional
problems during the oil test.

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
3-1
 NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED

ANNEX 3
PFP(NAAG)D(2002)24, MULTIREF

Synthesis Report

N° 5.7 x 28 4.6 x 30 Remarks

fiche FN HK Observations

2 Vulnerability of personnel to the two projectiles being tested

Vulnérabilité du personnel aux 2 projectiles en présence + - Better incapacitation for the 5.7
3 Penetration
Perforation = = Comply with D/7 (penetration at 200
m). 4.6 seems to offer better
penetration performance
4 Inspection (dimensional/appearance checks, physical/chemical analysis
of propellant) = = Nothing to report
Inspection (contrôles dimensionnels et d’aspect, analyse physico
chimique de la poudre…)
5 Sensitivity of primers
Sensibilité des amorces = = Nothing to report
6 Bullet extraction tests
Epreuves d’arrachement de la balle = = Nothing to report
7 Determination of velocities and accuracy
Détermination des vitesses et des précisions = = Nothing to report
8 Action time and pressure measurement Lower pressure for the 5.7
Mesure des temps de bouche et des pressions = =
9 Production of firing tables Nothing to report (no anomalies
Réalisation des tables de tir = = encountered)
10 Accuracy (expressed as probability of hit) (in a test barrel) Similar performance, very slight
Précision (traduite en probabilité d'atteinte) (en tube d'épreuve) = = advantage for the 4.6x30
11 Barrel erosion test
Epreuve d’usure de tube = = Nothing to report
12 Climatic tests 5.7 unaffected by climatic stresses.
Epreuves climatiques = = For the 4.6, pressure increases by
about 20 MPa depending on the test
13 Extreme temperature conditioning and subsequent functioning tests
Epreuves d’exposition aux températures extrêmes et de 5.7 interior ballistics completely
+ - controlled.
fonctionnement
4.6 pressure and velocity vary with
temperature
14 Firing in extreme cold
Tirs en conditions de froid extrême = = Nothing to report
15 Residual stress test (brass case)
Epreuve de contraintes résiduelle (pour les étuis laiton) = = Nothing to report
16 Salt spray on complete round and waterproofness tests
Epreuves au brouillard salin sur cartouche complète et = = Nothing to report
d’étanchéité
17 Potentially hazardous effects on users (noise, toxicity)
Effets pouvant provoquer un danger pour les utilisateurs (bruit, = = 4.6 louder (higher pressure)
toxicité…)
18 Cook-off
Auto inflammation - - Test unsuitable
19 Rough handling
Manipulations brutales = = 5.7 interior ballistics very well
controlled. (as test 12)
20 Effects of liquids, chemical and nuclear effects, safety and serviceability
of ammunition in storage Application of oil and fuel to cartridges
- + and the magazine led to numerous
Effets des liquides, effets chimiques et nucléaires, sécurité et
tenue au stockage des munitions malfunctions of the 5.7 (very probably
a system problem).
Nothing to report for the 4.6.
21 Projectile performance in worn weapons
Tenue du projectile en armes usées = = Tests carried out in weapons having
fired only 5000 rounds (with no trace of
abnormal wear at this stage)
22 Probability of hit in weapon (3 firers)
= = Nothing to report
Tenue du projectile dans une arme usée

NATO/PFP UNCLASSIFIED
3-2