T.Worx Powered Picatinny Rail

Steve Johnson
by Steve Johnson

T.Worx emailed me an update on their Powered Picatinny Rail project …

Carl J. Wallace, CEO, told me …

We are the only sole source firm currently funded by the US government. We are entering Phase II of the Commercialization Pilot Program for final hardening and kit creation.

Our company (a subsidiary of Prototype Productions Inc) has created a circuit board that can be inserted into Picatinny rails conveying electricity and data in any environment.

Selected by NATO as the STANAG in March of this year, we are moving forward with the sale of our technology both here in the US and world wide.

Unlike competitors, we have created a system solution that addresses concerns about ease of use, weight, redundancy, run times and communication.

The T.Worx stores batteries in the AR-15 stock. Up to four 18650 li-ion batteries can fit in the stock, which could mean 12,000+ mAh of power depending on the batteries used.

A 2-wire digital communication bus connects all the devices allowing them to communicate with each other over a SPI-derived protocol, which would lead to some interesting applications.

Steve Johnson
Steve Johnson

I founded TFB in 2007 and over 10 years worked tirelessly, with the help of my team, to build it up into the largest gun blog online. I retired as Editor in Chief in 2017. During my decade at TFB I was fortunate to work with the most amazing talented writers and genuinely good people!

More by Steve Johnson

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 58 comments
  • GPaulsen GPaulsen on Sep 01, 2012

    Hey guys – I'm a Project Engineer at Prototype Productions who has worked on Powered Rail(tm) platform development for the past couple years. I've also been reading the Firearm Blog for essentially the same amount of time because of your consistently candid feedback when new firearm tech arrives – and you have not disappointed for this article. I wanted to address some of the comments clarify some ambiguities with the info provided on our site. Apologies in advance for the novel.

    The Powered Rail (P-Rail), ignoring the power source for now, has a power/comms contact point at every recoil slot yet maintains the same profile as a standard 1913 Picatinny rail. We have built the first model for a M4/AR15 Carbine with delta-ring due to the prevalence in the Army (our first customer). This is why we don't have the upper-rail powered as-is because it would require machining the upper receiver. Future platforms will be P-Rail “ready” from manufacture, for now we have a couple low profile means of extending power to an optic and we have adapter designs for EOTech, PAS-13 LWTS, and PVS-14 NVM's. Carl mentioned the monolithic, which is a complete upper replacement that extends from charging handle to front rail.

    The rail contacts only transmit power where an accessory is attached; the accessory creates a waterproof seal so you can swim or touch the exposed contacts without worries about shorting or parasitic loss. The rail design is made with multiple redundancies so if there is catastrophic failures to a rail or rail section you still will have the rest of the real-estate to attach a powered accessory. I cannot emphasize enough that the power bus for the rail is essentially platform agnostic and can integrate almost anywhere you see a 1913 rail. The accessories and rails do not care where the power source is coming from, so if you want a pack directly on the rail or vertical grip it would not require any change to the rail – just clamp the pack on. Keep in mind if you're powering a light and laser (that used to be 3X CR123) with 2X CR123's you will need to change batteries more frequently but still benefit from size and weight reduction as well as “no-wire” controls on individual accessories.

    There is a battery pack in the stock for our MIL design pictured. This is a quick-change cassette that holds either 6 or 12X AA's (L91's). The batteries are contained in a similar fashion as a thermal sight, with a protective carriage. To give an idea of power with 12 AA's (~10 oz) you can run simultaneously a PAS-13 LWTS, Surefire M95 light, and a PEQ-15 on their highest/active settings for ~30% of your day before needing change. In other words, changing batteries is significantly mitigated over the duration of a 72-96 hour dismounted mission. Battery charge is indicated on the pack itself so you can check while installed on the weapon or on carry.

    Odds and ends: The command module and new adapters/accessories are being optimized for a much lower profile and better ergonomics. Redundancy is being addressed. There are 7 adjustment positions for the stock (lever is embedded, like a HK416 stock). Power routing is challenging on legacy weapon platforms like the AR because the stock/pistol grip are on a separate receiver as the rails.

    Power rails are just the beginning for truly integrated soldier systems on the weapon platform. Providing the central battery source and networked communication is infrastructure for future capabilities to enhance situational awareness and target acquisition. The P-Rail is not another accessory, it is the future of the Picatinny/STANAG rail. I'm happy to respond to more questions and suggestions – your feedback is beyond appreciated because we are building this product for YOU. We will also update the tworxventures website soon with more up-to-date info, pictures, and some video.

    -Greg

  • Pyronick Pyronick on Sep 26, 2012

    Great idea, it just needs to be worked out a bit better.

    Additionally, the kinetic energy of the piston moving through the buffer tube could be used to recharge the battery. It has loads of spare energy that is just dissipated in hot, compressed air.

    The British MoD is working on e-textile based uniforms and vests. It would route power through the MOLLE grid to power accessoires from a single, central power source.
    If those could be exchangeable with the power source in the rifle you'll have a huge logistical problem solved and probably save a lot of money aswell. I think that (gel) fuel cells could be safer and cheaper aswell, they are generally lighter than off-the-shelve AAA batteries.

    Also, the transfer of power by using old fashioned contacts sounds like a classic recipe for failure. Unless the contacts are covered by waterproof slide covers or something.

    But those issues will eventually doom up during field tests anyway.

Next