Guns for James Bond : Keep it Quiet!

A friend of mine is a major Bond fan, so rather enjoyed the Bond hook I put in the last blog. I thought it might be interesting to look a bit closer at the firearms of Commander Bond.

I’m not going to make an in depth study here, since there are many webpages that have done this already. This one is particularly worth a read.

Bond has been armed with some oddities over the years. In the early books his primary weapon was a .25 Beretta, most likely an M418. About the best thing you can say about this pistol is that it was most certainly concealable. A .25 ACP (6.35mm) is a bit like a knitting needle. It is lethal if you can put it in the right place, but only a “darn” fool would choose it as his main defence. Incidentally my book “Attack, Avoid, Survive” has some advice on getting the most out of “mouse guns” such as the .25.

 

One reader who objected to Bond’s use of such a puny weapon was Geoffrey Boothroyd. If the name seems familiar it is because Fleming named a character after him and the character of this name appears in some of the books and movies. Boothroyd suggested that Bond be armed with the Smith & Wesson Centennial Airweight, supplemented by a .357 magnum for longer range situations.

In Dr. No Fleming equips Bond with a Walther PPK and a Centennial for longer ranges. In Fleming’s defence, an automatic is more logical for an agent who might need to use a suppressor. Some reviewers have noted that Fleming seems to have had a fondness for two-part names such as “Aston Martin” and “Vodka Martini”, so “Walther PPK” may have appealed to him. The claim that the 7.65mm/ .32 ACP gun has “a delivery like a brick through a plate-glass window” is, of course nonsense. The main merit of the .32 is that it is better than a .22 and .25.

 

The most likely explanation for the Centennial as a long-range gun is that Fleming did not understand what Boothroyd was suggesting. The Centennial seems to have been quietly dropped from later books, probably because Fleming was embarrassed by such a foolish mistake.

When John Gardner took over writing the Bond novels he inflicted a variety of personal firearms on Bond. The most bizarre was a Browning M1903 automatic chambered for 9mm Long cartridges. It’s an elegant looking weapon but offers not advantages over more modern weapons. Ammunition would be very hard to find, and when found would be of questionable age and reliability. In later books Gardner’s Bond uses a H&K VP-70, a P7/ PSP and an ASP, a customized Smith & Wesson M39 automatic. In one of the films Bond switches to a Walther P99. The particular movie is notable for some very unsubtle product placement, BTW.

 

My friend voiced the opinion that Bond needed a new, compact 9x19mm weapon, and I had to disagree.

If we accept that Bond is theoretically more about stealth than assault then the Walther PPK remains a good choice, although he’d be advised to use a .380 ACP/ 9x17mm version. It’s a compact, double action weapon and the round is subsonic, making it more compatible than a 9x19mm for suppressed shooting. Bond finally gets a PPK/S in .380 in Skyfall.

 

A more logical choice, however, might be for Bond to acquire a 9x18mm Makarov. The Makarov PM is very similar to the Walther PPK/ PP. The round was designed to be the heaviest load that could be accommodated by a simple blowback design. In short-barrelled pistols it is usually subsonic. The weapon, and its ammunition will often be encountered in the hands of likely enemies, many of which may be armed with vintage Soviet or Chinese armaments. Notable is that Bond never selects an identifiably British handgun. Having a weapon with Chinese, Bulgarian or Czech markings may promote disinformation.

 

There are a couple of alternatives to the Makarov pistol that use the 9x18mm. The Stechkin is probably too big. The Hungarian PA-63 is apparently a little more compact than the PM but cannot use PM magazines. The Czech Vz 82/ Cz 83 is a 9x18mm with a 12-round magazine, but if a bulkier weapon is warranted Bond may be better off with one of the compact .45s now available. The Makarov seems like the best choice. Perhaps Bond might even acquire the PB suppressed variant. At low temperatures the 9x18mm round may become transonic. The PB has a ported barrel to bleed some of the gases off and reduce muzzle velocity even further. The gases are bled off into a suppressor chamber that surrounds the barrel. A second suppressor that captures any muzzle blast can be attached to the muzzle.

 

(The real) Boothroyd’s idea of a second gun for longer-ranged and more combat-orientated situations does have some merit. In some of the books Bond keeps a Colt .45 in his car. Fleming gets the name wrong, but the article here deduces that this is most likely an M1911A1 Government model. A .45 auto is a good choice, since the round is still suited to subsonic shooting. The modern Bond has a wide choice of high-capacity .45s to choose from. The HK .45 Compact Tactical must be in the running, and would honour Flemming’s preference for two-part names. In some of Gardner’s books Bond keeps a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 Magnum in his car. “Live and Let Die” is one of the few movie instances where Bond chooses to upgrade his armament before the mission. Here he carried a Smith & Wesson Model 29 .44 Magnum but uses most of his ammunition shooting the statue of Baron Samedi! 

If you have enjoyed this article or it has been helpful to you please feel free to show your appreciation. Thank you.

The Books

Firearms for Covert Missions.

Regular readers will know that Friday blogs tend to be a little more off-topic than usual. They will also know that I play the occasional video game and that sometimes these inspire eccentric trains of thought.

Recently I was playing a scenario where I had to infiltrate disguised as a civilian. The game let you arm yourself with any of the weapons you had unlocked, however. The game makes you use full-automatic fire when the weapon has the capability so my “covert” weapon was a Mk48 GPMG! This got me thinking about what would actually be practical in the real world.

Usually this comes down to two choices, neither of them ideal.

One option is a compact submachine gun. A problem with these is that while there are a number of models with small dimensions even these can be surprisingly massive. Very few of them are less than six pounds. The main exception that springs to mind is the Czechoslovakian Škorpion, but this is somewhat underpowered. A few of the more recent designs like the Steyr TMP/ Brügger & Thomet MP9 are under six pounds. Machine pistols have other undesirable features. Most fire from an open bolt and the movement of a relatively massive component does not facilitate accurate fire, even when firing semi-automatically. Most designs are single action, requiring a safety to be disengaged or the weapon to be cocked before firing. Not idea for a covert weapon that may be needed at very short notice!

The usual alternative to machine pistols are handguns. The main problem with handguns in this role is accuracy.

A real world attempt at solving these problems was the Soviet APB aka APSB weapon. I first saw one of these back in the 1980s in a magazine. It had been taken from a German “lorry driver”. The APB/ APSB is a modified Stechkin APS pistol. The most notable feature is the modifications made for use with a suppressor. In most weapons 9x18mm ammunition is subsonic. The longer barrel of the Stechkin took velocity up to the transonic range. Cold weather might also lower the speed of sound to levels where any shots might break the sound barrier. To prevent this the APB had a port drilled in the barrel and bled-off gases were diverted forward into the suppressor. Like the APS the APB can be fitted with a shoulder stock. This increases the accuracy of the pistol and is probably the main reason the APS was chosen as the basis of a covert weapon system. The stock also improves control when the APB or APS is used for fully automatic fire. I suspect, however, that the main intention of the APB was to provide an agent with a compact means of accurate, suppressed fire.

The APB was an good answer to the problem of covert/ clandestine armament. The TV show “Man from UNCLE” seem to have reached a similar conclusion, although their “Specials” often mounted an extended barrel rather than or as well as a suppressor.

Vietnam-era SEAL “Hush Puppy”. US army was using subsonic .45 ammunition as its standard pistol round. North Vietnam was using subsonic 9x18mm Makarov ammunition. Hush Puppy was based on a weapon that used supersonic 9x19mm Luger ammunition so needed special subsonic loadings….

If we update this concept the first decision is a suitable weapon, or more specifically a suitable calibre. On another blog I explain that the only logical choice for a military pistol calibre is the 45 ACP. It is a proven effective combat round and it is subsonic, facilitating use with suppressed weapons. All other likely choices are either underpowered or supersonic.

Back in the late 80s and early 90s the US special forces began shopping for an “Offensive Handgun Weapon System” (OHWS). The weapon selected became the Mk23. Logically enough, it was a .45 ACP. The barrel of this weapon was a shade under 6” long. The motivation for that feature may have been to surpass the Colt Govt model that this weapon would inevitably be compared with. A friend of mine got to try out some of the early Mk23s on a shooting range. The extra barrel length caused many of the standard .45 loads he was trying to go supersonic. This drew considerable attention from other shooters. It was not, however, an ideal feature for a weapon that was intended to be used with a suppressor!

Any pistol used for a “Covert Offensive Weapon System” (COWS (I truly suck at naming things!)) should have a barrel length consistent with keeping bullet velocity subsonic under likely temperature ranges. A feature of the OHWS worth emulating is its flashlight/ Laser Aiming Module. As an intended primary weapon system it would be useful for the COWS to have a source of visible and infra-red illumination. A visibly aiming laser can be useful for intimidating an enemy and encouraging them to surrender. It can also be used to designate points of interest or potential threats. An IR laser may be the most practical way to aim the weapon when using night vision goggles.

The role of the COWS will be to provide accurate, suppressed semi-automatic fire.

The most obvious difference between systems such as the OHWS and the COWS would be the provision of a shoulder stock to facilitate accurate shooting. Some readers will be aware that shoulder-stocked Mauser pistols were a very practical alternative to conventional rifles in the early part of the previous century. An updated design of pistol stock might be telescopic or folding. Unlike some current commercial offerings it would attach to the weapon, not the magazine.

To use a pistol stock the weak hand can be used to support the butt. This is similar to the way you would fire a bipod-mounted rifle or machine gun. A variation is to place the weak-side arm under the stock and place the weak-hand on the strong-arm forearm or biceps.

UNCLE wisely provided their agents with a small optic scope. Accuracy is often improved by a better sight picture. A reflex sight would improve the effective accuracy of the weapon system.

  

A foregrip for the COWS may also improve effective accuracy. An interesting option is to use a spare magazine as a grip. A dedicated design of grip offers a good location to mount the flashlight and laser systems. It may still be possible to use the forward pistol grip to store a spare magazine. A foregrip that mounts under the barrel could also be used as the mounting point for a telescopic or folding stock. Mounting such a grip would immediately convert a pistol into a COWS.

COWS is essentially a collection of accessories. A suppressor, a reflex sight and a foregrip/ stock. This means it can be used with existing weapons rather than having to go through the prolonged process that often accompanies the adoption of a new weapon.

So far, I’ve not seen a flashlight/ laser/ foregrip that also mounts the stock. If you saw the movie “John Wick” or the Bond film “Spectre” you may have noticed the KPOS carbine conversion for Glock pistols. Not quite as elegant as the one-piece COWS grip I suggest, but along the right lines. The Belgium VBR-B PDW would serve as a COWS if it was available in .45 ACP calibre.

The Books

 

Assumed Guilt, Assumed Blame and Assumed Persecution.

"None of us took this city from Muslims. No Muslim of the great army now coming against us was alive when it was lost. We fight over an offense we did not give, against those who were not alive to be offended."

Kingdom of Heaven

 

This is a subject I have been meaning to write about for some time. In fact it concerns a revelation I had several decades ago. It concerns a fallacy that most of the world’s population holds to be true. One that is responsible for much of the misery and strife in the world.

Let me begin with a silly illustration. Suppose an Italian flies into London from Rome. Once in the city he announces:

“You see those straight roads? It’s me you should thank for those. Like the alphabet? Yup, me again”.

Or perhaps an Englishman flies to India.

“You like those clocktowers in the town squares? Us to thank for those. Enjoying the cricket? You are welcome!”

This is obviously stupid. Someone taking credit for something that was done generations ago. Something that would have been done long before they were born. There is a good chance that no one directly related to him was involved whatever.

This is evidently preposterous. Why then, does most of humanity hold a view that the opposite is true. Why do we maintain that someone shares the guilt for acts done generations before? Acts that may not even have been made by their ancestors. Acts that are simply accredited to the national, ethnic or religious group they are identified with.

Talk to most young Germans and they have an admirable abhorrence of the crimes of Nazism. But they have also assumed responsibility, which is a quite different thing. You are not responsible for something that happened before you were born. You are not responsible for something that if you had been around you would have had no control over anyway. This does not mean that we ignore that such things might have been wrong or even downright evil. If the human race is ever to progress it must stop blaming innocent people for the crimes of others.

For all I know my great-grandfather may have spent his Sundays running through orphanages with an axe and a flamethrower. I never met the man. If I had I would have probably had no influence over him. His guilt is not mine. Nor is that of my grandfather nor father. Nor is that of the millions of people who just happen to be of the same nationality as me. I have very little influence over the actions of my nation's politicians. Many of the choices they have made I am against. You might just like to ask what I thought before you automatically tar me with the same brush.

 

Many decades back an intelligent but often confused friend told me that I should feel guilty because I am white. I was in Tennessee at the time, but this still baffled me. “Being white gives you privileges and you should feel guilty about that.”

No, that is bollocks! Firstly I dispute that being white does give you privileges anymore. Tell that to my girlfriend who cannot get the money she is legitimately entitled to from the DSS because the staff at the local branch are only helping their friends and families. Secondly, I’ve never owned slaves nor dealt in them. If any of my ancestors ever were involved in the slave trade they were probably the poor sod with the mop and bucket who had the worst job on the ship! Thirdly, I have never, to my knowledge, ever met a slave. Yes, I have met people whose ancestors may have been slaves. Or whose ancestors may have been slavers, for that matter. Often glossed over is that many African tribes happily sold their enemies and prisoners into slavery. But no one I have met actually had this happen to them. That such a thing did happen to an ancestor is terrible. But it did not happen to them. Here we have the third corner of a toxic triangle. With “Assumed Guilt” and “Assumed Blame” we have “Assumed Persecution”.

Terrible things have been done in the past and we should not forget these, lest we fail to learn from them. Your ancestors may have been subject to persecution, genocide, slavery or eviction from their lands. But these things did not happen to you. This does not entitle you to do similar things to someone else. And the people you are blaming and victimizing probably are not personally responsible.

The whole world works on “I hate you because your grandfather might have done something to my grandfather”.
 

The Soldier's Mantle.

In previous blogs we have seen how useful items such as scarves, keffiyeh and bandanas can be. North Vietnamese soldiers often favoured a neckerchief cut from camouflaged cargo parachute material. This was generally worn inside the jacket but could be spread over the shoulders for additional camouflage. A similar idea is seen below using capes of more conventional camouflage material. Capes and cloaks have often been a topic of these blogs but so far I have not made much discussion of their merits for concealment.

 

Recent posts should have made it clear that there is a lot more to camouflage than simply colours and pattern. Shape and silhouette are also very important. There is very little point in camouflaging your face and headgear if a distinctive head and neck shape is visible.

Some camouflage systems recognise this. The Soviet system shown below is obviously designed to conceal the distinctive head and shoulders shape. Modern sniper ghillie suits often address this too. There is, however, in some quarters, a silly attitude that such levels of shape disruption are “just for snipers or special forces”. While it is not practical for all infantrymen to operate in ghillie suits improvements can be made over current levels of camouflage. There is more involved in camouflage than simply wearing a patterned jacket and helmet cover!

Possibly the most practical approach is to create a sort of “soldier’s mantle”. In effect a short cloak or shawl. Shown below is a small net-like item that might be a good starting point. Ideally it would be a light sand colour to be suitable in the widest range of environments. A few blobs of a darker, contrasting brown colour would not hurt. Like the helmet camouflage that was described in a previous blog the camouflage effect is greatly improved if three-dimensional materials such as hessian, scrim and raffia are added. One of the reasons for selecting a net-like material is so that natural materials can be added too.

To correctly position the mantle drape it over the head as was described in this post. The material can be then folded back to gather around the neck when on the move, draped over the head for better concealment when more static. The best way to keep the mantle in place is to sew laces or toggles where you jacket collar meets the shoulder. This leaves most of the mantle free to be draped over your webbing or rucksack straps. The material hanging down in front may help conceal your weapon and chest equipment. Material at the rear will help conceal the top of your pack. The mantle should be of a size that it just covers the upper arms. The folds of the cloth help break up the shape of the shoulders, even when not worn over the head.

The Books