LeMas USG Report

[LittleLebowski]

In a perfect world, someone would be eating crow at another forum that praised this stuff.

[nycnoob]

Why did this report require a FOIL request to see the light of day?

[jstone]

In a perfect world, someone would be eating crow at another forum that praised this stuff.

This is exactly what I was thinking. There actions were very "proffesional". In a perfect world this company would be sued out of existence. Im 100 pages in and the email that le mas sent after a request to tour the facility was laughable.

Edit: seeing how the professionals of that site were so high on the stuff, it makes me wonder how many of them are truly what they claim they are. It seems most of them are probably posting from there mall details.

[Tamara]

I can't believe that there's anybody who still needs proof that, yes, the world is round.

[Drifting Fate]

I can't believe that there's anybody who still needs proof that, yes, the world is round.

No, no, no, don't you read Bloom County? The world is shaped like a giant burrito.

[Chuck Haggard]

Even outside of the magic bullet issues, I found their general QC to completely suck. Tried some of their ammo in various calibers, I found it was common to have like a 400fps spread in velocities from one shot to the next. Had several near squibs where the bullet barely cleared the barrel and the brass stayed in the chamber. All of my experience was with handgun ammo.

[KevinB]

Rifle ammo (5.56mm) had the same issues -- major accuracy issues even at 100m.
According to Mr Bulmer it was designed for 1:9 twist weapons (when everyone uses 1:7...)



I was effectively run off Professional Soldiers for questioning the ammo (after I had gotten a bunch of it). A buddy of mine dissected it years ago and showed the same results Doc had gotten - and well as ARDEC.

[DocGKR]

For historical purposes, below is the original post I made about this subject close to a decade ago:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our initial memo, dated 11 March 02, was the first scientific testing of RBCD ammunition. At his insistence, Mr. Bulmer of LeMas, Inc--the RBCD military and law enforcement distributor--was present during our testing for that report. While he was here at our test facility, we discussed the physiology of wounds and showed him the characteristics of the RBCD projectiles compared to other bullets we shot into the gelatin. We explained everything to him and hid nothing. We even demonstrated how to conduct proper terminal performance testing. At the conclusion of the testing, Mr. Bulmer unexpectedly took all the remaining unfired RBCD ammunition from the test with him. Since then LeMas has refused to sell any additional ammunition to us for further testing and Mr. Bulmer has waged a smear and deception campaign to prevent proper scientific ammunition testing of their products.

Note: The following LeMas analysis was privately funded, with all research conducted by private institutions, separate from any Federal Government or U.S. Department of Defense involvement.

Mr. Bulmer of LeMas has made numerous incredible claims regarding “Blended Metal” bullet performance superiority compared to conventional ammunition; a few are noted below:

From Army Times quoting Mr. Bulmer: “APLP ammo is manufactured using a so-called ‘blended-metal’ process.”

From LeMas advertising: “As a final note, all RBCD munitions use lead free components”

From AFJI quoting Mr. Bulmer: “Platinum is one of the many metals used in the manufacturing of RBCD ammunition.”

From LeMas advertising: “Blended Metal Technology utilizes manufacturing processes that facilitate the homogeneous blending of multiple metal compositions. BMT payloads offer the user munitions that are ‘smart’ bullets.”

From SOCNET discussion with Mr. Bulmer and LTC Raper: “…the jacket receives 5-8 different metals inserted as a payload (may be compressed powder, not exactly sure about that), including platinum, in some loads.”

From LeMas advertising: “This technology is best described as ‘blended metal programming’. It is not just another ‘shiny new bullet’ but a projectile payload, pre-programmed to sense varying rates of deceleration…Upon arrival in soft target medium the payload de-programs and, only then, expends 100% of its retained energy in the form of micro-fragments.”

From AFJI quoting Mr. Bulmer: “These are virtually lead-free, blended-metal bullets they’re made from various metals with the ability to go through different types of armor, glass, metal, and body armor and not deploy.”

From Defense Review: “Calibrated 10% ballistic gelatin literally pulls heat away from the Blended Metal Technology (BMT) bullet as the bullet passes through it. This results in the BMT bullet remaining intact, and not going frangible like it would in living tissue. Live/living tissue, with its much higher temperature, has a totally different effect on the LeMas/RBCD BMT rounds. A living body's heat is the necessary mechanism for the LeMas/RBCD Blended Metal Technology (BMT) SPLP bullet to deploy as it was designed to do.”

From AFJI quoting Mr. Bulmer: “…when a BMT round strikes soft tissue in a chest cavity, the resulting hydrostatic shock is so severe it destroys brain tissue mass”.

Some examples of LeMas advertising:





-----------------------------

Interestingly, the LeMas advertising and Mr. Bulmer’s astonishing claims had no support or substantiation other than Bulmer’s meaningless pseudoscientific jargon and some poorly performed demonstrations on clay, deli meats, as well as a couple of unrepeatable and inaccurately documented animal “tests”, that were more akin to senseless butchery than useful testing yielding any valid information. I have personally and publicly provided Mr. Bulmer the correct protocols to use in live animal testing several times, for example as documented in my discussions with him at Lightfighter on 12/9/03 and AR15.com on 2/21/04. We know that Mr. Bulmer was informed on how to conduct live animal testing correctly, yet for whatever bizarre reason, he chose to ignore proper research protocols. LeMas documented their poorly done “animal tests” on video; to avoid a USDA hearing for its illegal treatment and use of the pigs, LeMas Ltd. was stipulated to pay a fine for the following offenses:

• Conducting research on hogs without being a registered research facility
• Failing to appoint an institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) prior to conducting research on hogs
• Conducting research on hogs without proper training and without using properly trained staff
• Conducting research on hogs without first engaging an attending veterinarian
• Failing to maintain IACUC records while conducting research on hogs
• Causing trauma and behavioral stress to hogs while conducting research
• Physically abusing hogs while conducting research
• Failing to comply with the regulations in the humane handling, care, and treatment of animals.

The LeMas advertising videos are enlightening, as they show high velocity rifle bullet impacts up to between 3000-4000 fps, with significant fragmentation and stretch injuries and wounding effects similar to those described by Fackler for high velocity, early upset, fragmenting projectiles:

1. The bullet fragments in tissue.
2. Multiple fragments spread out radially from the wound tract.
3. Temporary cavitation stretches tissue.
4. The multiply perforated tissue cannot absorb the stretch that would ordinarily be tolerated by intact tissue.
5. The weakened tissue is torn and severely disrupted.

Nothing unusual or groundbreaking; no mysterious temperature sensing; no remote hydrostatic shock…just plain old ordinary physics and physiology at work.

Duncan MacPherson, the man who not only literally wrote the book (MacPherson D: “Bullet Penetration--Modeling the Dynamics and the Incapacitation Resulting from Wound Trauma”. Ballistic Publications; El Segundo, 1994) on the physics of projectile injuries, but is also very accomplished in the field of heat energy transfer rates has shown the heat transfer mechanism hypothesized for LeMas ammunition is physically impossible.

As a result of the above unsupported assertions and problematic behaviors by LeMas and Mr. Bulmer, the following questions were posed in vain multiple times to Mr. Bulmer during various internet exchanges:

--What are the names of the engineers who are designing the LeMas/RBCD BMT bullets and loadings?
--Where can we contact these individuals?
--Where are the LeMas/RBCD BMT bullets made?
--Where are the LeMas/RBCD BMT loads assembled?
--Can we visit the LeMas/RBCD BMT production areas?
--Are the LeMas/RBCD BMT bullets actually made of “blended metal” as defined by NSWC Crane: www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVSEA/N00164/N0016404R4846/SynopsisR.html, ASM, or any other recognized materials science organization?
--What chemical elements are actually present in LeMas/RBCD BMT bullets?
--How does the bullet construction and loading methodology differ between the LeMas/RBCD BMT and conventional bullets?
--What are the measured pressures of the various LeMas/RBCD BMT loadings?
--What are the accuracy results from the various 5.56 mm LeMas/RBCD BMT loadings at 100, 200, 300 and 500 yards?
--Are the LeMas/RBCD BMT loads likely to meet the requirements to be declared legal for land warfare use by the JAG?

Despite Mr. Bulmer’s attempts to prevent us from getting additional ammunition samples, in January of 2004, we were able to “borrow” some RBCD/LeMas .45 ACP ammunition in order to conduct SEM analytical testing. The following is what we wrote:

A preliminary SEM Elemental Analysis of RBCD/LeMas/Blended Metal ammunition has been completed on .45 ACP bullets sent to us from two different colleagues who had received ammunition samples from Stan Bulmer of LeMas.









As can be seen above, in addition to a typical copper jacket, the RBCD/LeMas bullets analyzed were fabricated with a nylon core (that gets variably squished and deformed during manufacture, resulting in inconsistent bullet CG) and metal nose portion that turns out to be composed of LEAD, with slight amounts of antimony. In other words, the RBCD/LeMas bullets are lightweight, high-velocity, lead nosed JSP’s—so much for lead-free, programmable, heat sensitive “blended metal technology”…

[DocGKR]

The war of words continued through 2005, with Mr. Bulmer and LeMas continuing to offer no proof or evidence to support their fantastical claims.

In early 2005 and again in early 2006, we obtained additional samples of LeMas ammunition; in February of 2006, we reported the following:

The 5.56 mm ammo shipped to us by modog consists of bullets with an ave weight of 45.0 gr made using standard swaged copper jackets and lead-antimony cores--these molybdenum disulfide coated bullets are completely conventional in every way and use no blended metals, exotic materials, bonding, or other unusual construction. These bullets are identical in every respect, down to the elemental level, as commercially produced .223 varmint rifle bullets. Despite being labeled as “Land Warfare” their exposed lead noses classify them as JSP’s and would render them not legal for combat use under current JAG rules.



Also shipped was .45 ACP ammunition that has bullets of an ave. weight of 83.5 gr made using a conventional copper jacket into which a lead-antimony nose and nylon core are placed. The exposed lead nose classifies these bullets as JSP’s. No blended metals, exotic materials, or bonding, is noted. Please note that the construction of these LeMas/RBCD .45 ACP handgun rounds, like other ones we have recently assessed, appears use an improved nylon material resulting in more consistent cores and less core-jacket structural defects than those we previously publicly illustrated at TF.

Finally, the 9 mm ammunition sent by modog consists of similar JSP bullets of an ave 59.2 gr weight that are similarly made using a conventional copper jacket housing a lead-antimony nose over a round nylon dual ball as noted in the earlier ammunition illustrated at the link above. Again, no blended metals, exotic materials, or bonding.



Of interest, the handgun bullets had an unusual exterior bump/hump/protrusion on the base of the copper jacket, possibly produced when the lead and nylon materials are compressed into the copper jacket.

As the purported unique composition has been one of the primary advertising gimmicks used by LeMas to market their “BMT” ammunition and try to differentiate it from “conventional” munitions, it deserves a significant amount of attention. LeMas repeatedly made false and inaccurate claims about their ammunition composition and construction. We have completed XRF and SEM testing on a dozen LeMas loads. NONE of the projectiles were made using blended metals, platinum or any other exotic metals; only one did not contain lead. Please note that our results are in congruence with several other research facilities that have independently tested the LeMas/RBCD bullets with exactly the same results--NO blended metals, NO platinum or other exotic materials, NO thermally reactive materials, and definitely NOT all lead free.

For example, the SEM’s below illustrate the molybdenum disulfide exterior coating, standard copper jacket, and conventional lead core construction of the LeMas 5.56 mm Land Warfare bullet:



Unlike the salesmen from LeMas, SEM and XRF do not lie…

Does it matter what the ammunition is made of? Yes, especially in light of international treaty obligations, environmental factors, basic scientific honesty, and simple truth in advertising.

The term “blended metal” is not just a “marketing” term as stated by Mr. Bulmer; it has factual meaning. As mentioned previously, one can look-up the U.S. military definition at: www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVSEA/N00164/N0016404R4846/SynopsisR.html. The American Society of Metals (ASM) has a nearly identical definition, as do other recognized materials science organizations. The U.S. military has previously purchased and used ammunition made using blended metals. In fact, we have previously tested it in gelatin and Dr. Fackler wrote a paper discussing the terminal performance of these true blended metal rounds in living tissue (Fackler ML: Tungsten Frangible Bullet Wounds in Pig: Exam by Autopsy and X-Ray. Wound Ballistic Review. (4)3:33-34, Spring 2000). Fair-minded people expect a bullet described as being made using “Blended Metal Technology” to actually be made using blended metals and not just be a relabeled, misnamed bullet made using conventional construction methods. Again, all of the LeMas ammunition testing I am aware of to date, both at our facility and elsewhere, has demonstrated that NONE of the LeMas ammunition is made using blended metals; all are produced using conventional methods, and all but one contain lead.

Mr. Bulmer wrote at Lightfighter.net, “That there are no historical DOD JAG rulings that would prohibit the BMT non ballistic tipped rifle ammunition to be used by US active duty personnel in a declared conventional war”. Yet this is not true. Since the LeMas/RBCD ammunition has now been proven to be of lead core construction, the exposed lead at the tip of the LeMas bullets, for example on the misnamed Land Warfare rifle ammunition, is clearly a violation of the Hague convention. Likewise, the exposed lead at the tip of the LeMas/RBCD 9 mm and .45 ACP handgun ammunition is also in violation of the Hague Convention, while the radiolucent nylon polymer core in the handgun bullets and the plastic tip of the Urban Warfare and TFSP rifle bullets are prohibited by Protocol I of the 1980 UN Conventional Weapons Convention.



As a result, the US DOD JAG has ruled that the LeMas/RBCD ammunition is illegal for use in international armed conflict--whether by military personnel or private contractors hired by the U.S. government to perform security work.

Mr. Bulmer and LeMas frequently crow about the LeMas “BMT” armor penetration ability and brag about its ability to perforate AR500 steel; in our testing, we were also able to shoot the LeMas 5.56 mm Land Warfare bullets through 0.25” AR500 steel--not an unusual outcome given the high projectile velocity. But how does the LeMas “BMT” ammo do against actual Level III or IV armor? In our testing, multiple shots of the same 5.56 mm LeMas Land Warfare loads that zipped through steel were stopped cold by plain ordinary Level III hard Dyneema (3.2 lb/sq ft) armor plates made by AMI. On the other hand, M995 rips through these same level III plates like they are not there--so much for the “superior” LeMas “BMT” armor piercing capability…

What happens when one pulls LeMas “BMT” rifle bullets and substitutes conventional lead-core, swaged copper jacket commercially produced varmint bullets? In our testing, when we replaced 5.56 mm LeMas “BMT” Land Warfare bullets with “conventional” Sierra 45 gr JSP’s, nothing changed--the Sierra bullets behaved identically as the LeMas “BMT” bullets, with the same ability to punch through steel because of the high velocity and yet fragment in soft tissue because of the lightweight, varmint JSP construction. Hmmm….

Using stereomicroscopy comparative analysis and SEM data, AFTE affiliated forensic scientists were able to prove that each of the LeMas rifle loads tested actually used commercially produced conventional rifle bullets: for example, the LeMas 5.56 mm Urban Warfare load is actually a Nosler 40 gr Ballistic Tip #39510, while the LeMas 5.56 mm Land Warfare appears to be a Sierra 45 gr JSP Varminter #1310. Similarly the LeMas .308 Land Warfare turned out to be a Hornady 110 gr JSP #3010, while the LeMas .308 TFSP is really a Hornady 110 gr VMAX #23010, and the LeMas .308 Urban Warfare is a Nosler 125 gr Ballistic Tip #30125--oh, and the one lead-free LeMas rifle load we tested, the .308 SSSP/HARPPII, turned out to use Barnes Solid 125 gr all brass bullets #30812.

Several of the LeMas rifle loads appear to be purposefully mislabeled with respect to projectile weights in what is likely an attempt to deceive purchasers of the actual COTS bullets being used--for example, the early LeMas 5.56 mm “State Department” load (later re-named the Urban Warfare, perhaps because it was publicly revealed that the State Dept. did not actually use this load) described as using 39 gr bullets actually had 40 gr bullets; the LeMas .308 TFSP load, labeled as using 112 gr projectiles, turned out to be 110 gr bullets; while the LeMas .308 SSSP/HARPPII load purported to use 124 gr bullets, in fact uses 125 gr bullets.

Sectioned LeMas .308 bullets are depicted below--once one digs past the outer moly disguise and truly assesses bullet construction, it is obvious the LeMas bullets are conventional commercial bullets.



Below is a SEM comparison of the 5.56 mm LeMas Urban Warfare with a Nosler 40 gr Ballistic Tip:



Below is a SEM comparison of the 5.56 mm LeMas Land Warfare with a Sierra 45 gr JSP:



Below is a SEM comparison of the .308 LeMas Land Warfare with a Hornady 110 gr JSP:



Far from being a “non-comparable technology”, a “new generation of munitions”, a “paradigm of technological innovation”, “the single most significant advancement in small arms since the advent of the 20th century”, as Mr. Bulmer claims, the LeMas rifle ammunition is actually nothing but lightweight, repackaged varmint bullets disguised with a black coating of moly, and driven to higher than normal velocities with concomitantly higher than normal pressures. For example, the maximum pressure for 5.56 mm ammunition using the military case mouth test methodology is 58,700 psi. When tested using the military case mouth pressure method in a standard military 20” 1/7 twist test barrel, the LeMas 5.56 mm Land Warfare ammunition demonstrated a 10 shot ave pressure reading of 63,200 psi resulting in a 3907 fps ave velocity. Note that standard military 5.56 mm 62 gr M855 FMJ tested in the same fashion yielded an ave 50,080 psi pressure and an ave velocity of 2985 fps.

When lightweight, thin jacketed varmint bullets are shot from barrels with fast twists, they have been noted to break apart in flight, shortly after exiting the barrel. This phenomena was noted several times during pressure testing of the LeMas 5.56 mm Land Warfare load which uses the thin jacketed 45 gr Sierra Pro-Hunter Varminter JSP. On the target range this can be annoying; if bullets disintegrate in flight during combat, the projectiles cannot hit and incapacitate the enemy--a potentially disastrous consequence.

As noted above, in their written statements to the U.S. DOD, Mr. Bulmer and Mr. Hamilton of LeMas asserted: “The ballistic wound ‘maximum effective range’ potential from the Blended Metal Bullet designs in live tissue is not driven by the same limitations inherent in current ‘jacketed lead bullet’ constructs. BMT’s extended ‘maximum effective range’ tissue destruction capabilities are vastly superior to currently procured bullet designs.” As is now so painfully obvious, Bulmer and Hamilton were NOT telling the truth, since the LeMas “BMT” bullets are indeed “jacketed lead bullet constructs” and not the “revolutionary”, “pre-programmed”, “smart” bullets they falsely claimed in their slick attempt to defraud the U.S. military.

Mr. Bulmer has repeatedly claimed that LeMas ammunition could not be properly tested in ordnance gelatin because LeMas used new “BMT” bullet construction technology and materials--clearly this is now proven to be a bold-faced lie; one that is refuted by the engineers at Barnes, Hornady, Nosler, and Sierra who all report that they use ordnance gelatin to design and test the conventionally constructed, readily commercially available bullets surreptitiously being used by LeMas/RBCD. In fact these companies, as well as the forensic literature, adamantly state that over many years of hunting use, as well as in human shooting incidents, bullets of these types have been shown to have a close correlation between shots into living tissue and shots into properly prepared ordnance gelatin. Once again, the Bulmer/LeMas hype does not match factual, verifiable reality.

Unlike Bulmer and LeMas, I have NO financial interest in the success or failure of LeMas/RBCD or any other product, company, or commercial entity involved in any weapon or ammunition program. I want our troops to have the best possible munitions that meet current law of war legal requirements; as far as I can tell, Bulmer and LeMas are self-serving meretricious salesmen peddling a fraudulent product. Exactly who is the biased person in this equation???

The incessant misinformation, deliberate obfuscation, and wanton disregard of basic physics and physiology by LeMas and Mr. Bulmer strains credulity: Ultimately, the veracity of LeMas and Mr. Bulmer in particular is untenable due to their numerous distortions, prevarications, and unsupported statements, along with their deliberately vague answers and outright lies in response to legitimate questions about their product. It appears that LeMas conspired to disguise readily available commercially produced bullets, fraudulently re-labeled them with bold, high-tech names, lied about the bullet material properties, made some amazing pseudo-scientific sounding yet unsubstantiated terminal performance claims, and then charged a substantially inflated fee for this “unprecedented technological innovation”. What a great marketing scam…if they had gotten away with it.

The big unanswered question is how could so many supposedly professional individuals in the military, law enforcement, medical, and media communities have been fooled for so long by LeMas? Were they all innocent duped bystanders, or did some of LeMas’s vocal supporters have financial ties to LeMas? Also, what was RBCD’s role in all this? Inquiring minds want to know…

---------------------------------------------------------------------

ADDENDUM:
Congress appropriated $1,050,000.00 in the FY03 budget for the government to conduct a comprehensive study of LeMas “BMT” ammunition and evaluate the remarkable claims made by LeMas. A 3 year, multi-agency testing effort was conducted and the results compiled and documented. The long awaited USSOCOM/ARDEC report on LeMas ammo was made available for distribution to authorized organizations in August of 2007. Virtually every single claim made by Mr. Bulmer and Mr. Hamilton regarding LeMas bullet design, manufacture, construction methodology and composition, pyrophoric and thermodynamic properties, behavior in tissue simulant, intermediate barrier capability, terminal performance in tissue were all determined to be FALSE. Hopefully this will put to rest any residual doubts about the fraudulent nature of LeMas "BMT". Note that the USSOCOM/ARDEC report validates ALL the information we have released publicly to date above.

[Rich]

. I remember him posting at the ammo forum at AR15 and the issues with his claims