This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 19/12/20 by autogun
Latest 6:33 by QuintusO
Latest 6:19 by TonyDiG
Latest 1:19 by DavidPawley
Latest 28-Jul by gatnerd
Latest 24-Jul by autogun
Latest 23-Jul by roguetechie
Latest 23-Jul by roguetechie
Latest 21-Jul by stancrist
Latest 19-Jul by TonyDiG
Latest 16-Jul by QuintusO
Latest 14-Jul by Farmplinker
Latest 7-Jul by Farmplinker
Latest 7-Jul by Red7272
Latest 5-Jul by stancrist
Latest 3-Jul by autogun
Latest 3-Jul by TonyDiG
441D fires a 5.07 lbs (2.3kg) projectile with 590g HE fill of PBXN-110, steel body containing an additional 800 steel pellets. Body splinters into fragments approximately the same size as the pellets (unknown if PFF / scored internally). Safe to 40m, fully armed by 70m, not supposed to engage targets closer than 200m
Great info, thank you! I'm going to copy that into my notes.
I'm very surprised that the 84mm 441D does not seem to be better then the M72E11; e11 has 800g HE + 4000 tungsten BB's.
Does anyone know the HE fill for the LAW Anti Structure M72A9? I know the 'reduced caliber' ASM is 400g HE, curious what the full size ASM brings to the table.
If it turns out that the M72 ASM is comparable in payload to the CG 84mm ASM, I'm going to officially throw Carl under the bus.
Especially as the newest LAW's seem to have the option of a Fire From Enclosure variant for urban warfare, which I haven't seen for the CG.
441D's SAI (Safety, Aiming, and Initiation) unit has an additional 353 g or so PBXN, bringing the total HE fill to some 948 g, or about 41.2% of the shell mass
Good catch, missed that.
If it turns out that the M72 ASM is comparable in payload to the CG 84mm ASM, I'm going to officially throw Carl under the bus. Especially as the newest LAW's seem to have the option of a Fire From Enclosure variant for urban warfare, which I haven't seen for the CG.
I wouldn't throw it out just yet, they each seem to have their unique advantages. The M72 has a much shorter minimum range, which may be very useful at fireteam / squad level. On the other hand, Carl Gustav has a larger warhead (as per
For those reasons I think it makes sense for something like the CG to be at platoon level, with something lighter and shorter minimum range (like M72 or Bur) in the squad.
Very Informative Information in your forum
A few years ago we had a 200-300 post thread on man portable HE systems. The general consensus on the 3 best bang for the buck western systems were: -Milkor M32 w/ Medium Velocity Airburst Grenades + Fire Control Unit -M72E11 Airburst Law + Fire Control Unit And then to your point -Imortar lightweight (10lb) 60mm with Fire control unit + SAAB MAPAM
A small derivative of a 51 mm mortar, the FLY-K / LGI :
Yes I remember that one, very neat system. The video I saw of it firing was very quiet.
Whats the actual HE/ Frag effect of them? And how are they typically deployed (ie 1 per squad? How many rounds?)
And have you tried experimenting with a FCU like the Multi Ray 800 with them?
Is Eyrx still a thing. Seems like the ideal direct fire support for platoon with a MP or thermobaric warhead.
I gotta be honest, I'm a little confused by this entire topic and a bunch of the rampant and wild speculation since it's really obvious from the tfb article itself, some recent army presentations, from the solicitation itself, and from the things we know about how the xm25 1.0 saga finally wrapped up last year that clearly point to this program being a program meant for an americanski xm25 to win....
For one, the DOD now owns in-house the xm25 TDP and all the hk IP related to it.
For two, they also own a good majority of the IP that would go into producing the smart optic itself which could very likely just outright be raided from one of four currently running optic programs.
For three, the only other possible contender that might meet the requirements that they've set is a rheinmetal product that may not be done and could very likely "fall afoul" of the same "German export laws" and cause a similar situation to xm25 1.0 again!
The americanski xm25 is going to win since this is a program designed around it winning and that has eliminated the roadblocks from the previous disaster.
An Americanized 25 also fits with the broader strokes of their infantry combat master plan right now.
Finally, it appears as if this solicitation is more about giving people a Better antimateriel rifle much moreso than better HE projection capabilities.
There's other programs and work out there that's focusing on brute HE projection which the majority of things being discussed in this topic fit into much better.
And arguably from my perspective I can see why they'd want this xm25 2.0 better AMR AND other stuff for their HE projection needs.
I gotta be honest, I'm a little confused by this entire topic and a bunch of the rampant and wild speculation since it's really obvious from...some recent army presentations...