This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 3:24 by stancrist
Latest 25-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 25-Nov by stancrist
Latest 25-Nov by autogun
Latest 24-Nov by stancrist
Latest 23-Nov by Farmplinker
Latest 23-Nov by Refleks
Latest 22-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 22-Nov by stancrist
Latest 17-Nov by PRM2
Latest 17-Nov by TonyDiG
Latest 16-Nov by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 16-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 15-Nov by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 15-Nov by TarheelYank
Latest 14-Nov by JPeelen
Latest 13-Nov by DavidPawley
Latest 10-Nov by Lorrybaker
Latest 9-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 9-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 7-Nov by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 4-Nov by stancrist
Latest 1-Nov by roguetechie
Latest 1-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 28-Oct by autogun
Latest 26-Oct by stancrist
everyone is still using the M4 and M249, not the M5 or M250,
I imagine that's probably because the slide was created solely to show what weapons the PGS and IAM would replace.
the A-team grenadier will be equipped with a PGS and nothing for self protection?
Yup. As I said 10 days ago in the PDW thread, "If a new, larger and heavier semi-auto [grenade launcher] should be developed and fielded, a grenadier so equipped probably would carry no secondary weapon, as is typical of XM25 users seen in Afghanistan photos and video."
New users for the M18 pistol?
No, because the M18 pistol is the new, standard issue handgun of the Marine Corps.
But, Army grenadiers equipped with a PGS are possible new users for the M17 pistol.
This is all very exciting. Obviously I'm super stoked off the airbursting grenade launcher. Hopefully they decide to pursue something with more emphasis on lethality/bang vs flat trajectory, as the newest gens of smart optics can counter pretty steep trajectories.
But the Individual Assault Munition is also very interesting. I'm curious whether this will be LAW M72 size, or AT4 sized, and whether it will be optically equipped or just those flip up irons.
Overall I think Ukraine has shown the general utility of having as much man portable HE capability as possible, both for anti vehicle and anti perssonel / fortification.
The 120mm seems like the most lethal but hardest to develop. 120mm power, 69 round loadout, with a accurate man portable launcher that can be gone in 3 minutes.
What comes most to mind is perhaps a 81mm using the Saab MAPAM munition, which gives 120mm level fragmentation but in a smaller shell?
If a new, larger and heavier semi-auto [grenade launcher] should be developed and fielded, a grenadier so equipped probably would carry no secondary weapon, as is typical of XM25 users seen in Afghanistan photos and video."
An interesting chicken egg question is whether this was due to the lack of a PDW for them to carry.
Couldn't / didnt want to also carry a M4, and they either lacked a pistol or figured it was effectively useless at afghan ranges and didnt bother carrying one.
Had an actual MP9/MP7 type PDW been available, I wonder if they would have chosen to carry it?
If it's going to be vehicle mounted I would like to have seen 120mm, while you can carry fewer rounds for the same weight (I think the USMC setup included a trailer with something like 32 rounds) there's more potential when it comes to effects on target, range, and future guided / cargo rounds which is what I would very much like to see at battalion level. The main argument I see with 81mm would be ability to manpack the piece should the vehicle be inappropriate or disabled which is valid but I also think in practice it's much less practical than it is in theory and a vehicle would be used more often then not in the vast majority of cases, and I think guided 120mm at battalion would be an excellent compliment to long range 60mm with MAPAM at company, itself complimented by 60mm commando mortars at platoon.
Taking from the Chinese then, on the precision grenade launchers?
Or is this going to be closer to a XM25 throwback?