Note that in the article they are calling for 36 per battalion. It should be easy enough to figure out at what level they are being deployed based on that number.
Note that in the article they are calling for 36 per battalion. It should be easy enough to figure out at what level they are being deployed based on that number.
Good!
For light TOEs 36 per battalion sounds like one per rifle squad plus three unassigned in the company arms room.
One weapon like that per fire team is just too much in small Army squads. Too many suppression weapons equals not enough riflemen to clear with.
Now, if the Army squad would just get rid of one of the SAWs. One light machine gunner, one grenadier and six or seven riflemen would be better. Balanced fire teams made better sense in the days of the BAR and M1, especially in big USMC squads.
Last edited by Rifleman; 10-15-2010 at 06:37 PM.
"Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper
GLs in an Infantry Bn
According to the May 2010 version of the Fort Knox Special Manual on BCTs,Originally Posted by Rifleman
An Infantry Bn has 15 M320 in its HHC, 20 M320s in each of three rifle companies and 16 in its Wespons Co, for a total of 91 in the Bn.
So, it is clearly NOT a 1 for 1 swap.
It looks like one per squad but I still don't see the point. According to Wikipedia the system weighs 14 pounds but it doesn't say if that is loaded or empty. I am guessing empty. It gives the weight of the Target acquisition/fire control but does not say if that weight is included or not. Logic would suggest that it is included in the weight of the system but since this data apparently comes from the company who is trying to market it to the military, logic may not apply. There is no weight given for the ammo. There has been no data that I have seen on the effective burst radius of the round. I also have questions about what will happen when the highspeed optics fail. I would like to know what secondary weapon the gunner is supposed to carry. Most importantly, I would like to know why we need this. This appears to be a very narrow niche weapon. It appears that it can only really do one thing that the M203 can't. Is it really worth the cost or could that money be better spent elsewhere?
“Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.”
Terry Pratchett
Somebody's light bulb clicked on a little earlier, and designed the (rifle ) grenade sight T59, for the use of low-angle and high-angle fire. It could be fitted to pretty much every US WWII rifle and carbine.You know, it need not...all it would take is a graduated level that could attach to the side of the mil-std 1913 Picatinny rail. Our current M224 60mm has that built into the firing assembly. It just needs to be small, lit by a tritium ampule, and could clip on via any number of attachment means that are already in use for side-mounted sling swivels.
A couple rounds to get the thing zeroed and locked down with Loctite, and there you have it. No need to fiddle with a sling marking system that would rely on the grenadier to pause and adjust it to the appropriate length for use. There would be slight variation due to the surface the buttstock rests on (sand, gravel, boot tip, etc.). The only thing limiting this setup would be the degree of accuracy required in the requirement document, as it related to mounting the sight to the rail, adjusting the rail in relation to the launcher receiver, etc.
We might never get there due to tight tolerances required by whomever would generate the specifications, but my light bulb just clicked on.
Slings were already marked with tape in WWII, usually with the aid of a clinometer. When used in the high-angle role, an additional, rimmed .45 propulsion cartridge was inserted into the launcher tube.
The interesting thing about rifle grenades was the broad range of uses, already in WWII. Here are just some of the lesser known ones:
- After removing the detonator, a 30-yard cordtex (explosive 1/4 inch cord) was tied to the (Mills) rifle grenade and shot across the minefield, clearing a long and 8-inch narrow path. By using two such paths 10 feet apart, a cordtex net could be dragged across the minefield to open a 10-feet street (Source: British Commandos, Nr.1 of the often mentioned Special Series)
- "Grapnel" Grenades were first improvised to clear from a covered position trip-wire up to a 100 yards away. A simple AT rifle grenade got almost completely stripped down and a wooden plug with three inserted hooks got fixed with a screw as new head. A heavy 150 yard chalk line was attached and coiled up. ( Combat Lessons 4, WWII series)
- In a similar way com. wire was layed across streams, to up to 130 yards. (Combat lessons 6, WWII series)
- 60mm Mortar bombs were attached by wire and pliers to the grenade projectors M7 and M1 and fire to up to a range of 110 yards. Used to clear houses and hedgerows. (Combat lessons 6, WWII series)
- WP (smoke) rifle grenades with reduced WP charge were used by grenadiers to mark hidden targets, especially for the supporting tanks. (The reduction of the WP avoided the concealment by the very smoke) (Combat lessons x, WWII series)
- Some German rifle grenades could also be thrown by hand, lightening the combat load. This was considered to be very useful for mobile, light units operating far from the next base. ( Other countries had also special rifle adaptors for hand grenades) (Small unit action in Russia)
All in all it seems that the rifle grenade can still be useful in some "odd" or special jobs which need an odd or oversized warhead shape. Breeching, Mine-clearing, Grapnelling are just some of them.
The 40mm grenades at one side of the spectrum and the shoulder-fired weapons on the other seem to cover the big rest well enough. We will see how well the 25mm grenades widen that spectrum.
Der Kampf der Infanterie, the fight of the infantry, a swiss army movie of 1976 is interesting for a couple of things I noticed. Of course the Swiss German makes it rather hard to understand the talking of the soldiers, even for fluent German speakers.Somebody's light bulb clicked on a little earlier, and designed the (rifle ) grenade sight T59, for the use of low-angle and high-angle fire. It could be fitted to pretty much every US WWII rifle and carbine.
Slings were already marked with tape in WWII, usually with the aid of a clinometer. When used in the high-angle role, an additional, rimmed .45 propulsion cartridge was inserted into the launcher tube.
The interesting thing about rifle grenades was the broad range of uses, already in WWII. Here are just some of the lesser known ones:
- After removing the detonator, a 30-yard cordtex (explosive 1/4 inch cord) was tied to the (Mills) rifle grenade and shot across the minefield, clearing a long and 8-inch narrow path. By using two such paths 10 feet apart, a cordtex net could be dragged across the minefield to open a 10-feet street (Source: British Commandos, Nr.1 of the often mentioned Special Series)
- "Grapnel" Grenades were first improvised to clear from a covered position trip-wire up to a 100 yards away. A simple AT rifle grenade got almost completely stripped down and a wooden plug with three inserted hooks got fixed with a screw as new head. A heavy 150 yard chalk line was attached and coiled up. ( Combat Lessons 4, WWII series)
- In a similar way com. wire was layed across streams, to up to 130 yards. (Combat lessons 6, WWII series)
- 60mm Mortar bombs were attached by wire and pliers to the grenade projectors M7 and M1 and fire to up to a range of 110 yards. Used to clear houses and hedgerows. (Combat lessons 6, WWII series)
- WP (smoke) rifle grenades with reduced WP charge were used by grenadiers to mark hidden targets, especially for the supporting tanks. (The reduction of the WP avoided the concealment by the very smoke) (Combat lessons x, WWII series)
- Some German rifle grenades could also be thrown by hand, lightening the combat load. This was considered to be very useful for mobile, light units operating far from the next base. ( Other countries had also special rifle adaptors for hand grenades) (Small unit action in Russia)
All in all it seems that the rifle grenade can still be useful in some "odd" or special jobs which need an odd or oversized warhead shape. Breeching, Mine-clearing, Grapnelling are just some of them.
The 40mm grenades at one side of the spectrum and the shoulder-fired weapons on the other seem to cover the big rest well enough. We will see how well the 25mm grenades widen that spectrum.
Rifle grenades are featured very often both while defending and attacking, against infantry and AFV.
1) An strongpoint gets attack one of the defender calls out the range, and another adjusts his bipod with engraved range scales on it. Later you see how different defenders engage out of the trench the attacking infantry with massed indirect rifle grenade fire.
2) Armored infantry advances through forests and meadows in alpine terrain and,while still mounted, get attacked by various AT-weapons, like mines, ATM and rifle grenades.
3) Airmobile infantry inserted behind the frontline get counterattacked by infantry supported by MGs, mortars. Some riflemen get tasked to support the advance by using their rifle grenades in the same mini mortar-like role as seen in 1).
The rifle grenades were quite heavy and thus the recoil was wild, making it quite (un)popular in soldier stories. In direct fire the shooter had to be careful to follow the correct procedure.
Overall the greater ease of use of the 40 mm GL as well as the spread of ATM might have been key factors in the decline in popularity of rifle grenades. With training time ever limited it certainly is sensible to focus it on weapons expected to be widly in use.
The UBGL is essentially an (almost) always ready-to-fire version of WW2-era rifle grenades that used muzzle cups (such as German Schissbecher).
Modern rifle grenades are descendants of those WW2-era rifle grenades that used a rather stokes-like principle (sitting on the muzzle).
The UBGL and stnad-alone GL designs add (just like the Schiessbecher) a certain fixed cost of mass. No matter how many grenades you carry, you gotta carry those 1-4 pounds of weapon.
Thus we have today the choice between
* rifle grenades with zero fixed costs (mass) thanks to ladder sights on the grenade itself
OR
* grenade launchers with fixed costs (mass), which in present GL designs is somewhat outweighed by less slow use (I wouldn't say 'quick' as long as you need to flip up sights or carry a carbine in ready position but have to switch to a stand-alone GL). The variable costs (mass per shot) is also smaller.
Recoil as a problem rather favours rifle-attached solutions, for the additional weight reduces felt recoil. A given warhead mass and a given trajectory (~muzzle velocity) will yield about the same recoil all else equal (weight and thus recoil differences between fin and spin stabilisation may occur, though).
In the end, today's rifle grenades have two niches:
(1) Whole small unit grenade salvo without many heavy GLs
(2) Large calibre grenades (see the Simon doorbreacher rifle grenade)
GLs have other advantages
(1) Potential exploitation of Medium-low pressure principle.
(2) Can be carried ready for fire in UBGL
(3) Can be a multi-shot weapon (revolver or pumpgun principle usually)
(4) already standardised
(5) No need for bullet trap or special ballistite blank cartridge
(6) Can be used on weapons of different calibres without aiming issues
(7) The limitation to few soldiers inherently leads to higher practice standard by specialisation in practice
(8) Propellant power is independent of rifle/carbine calibre and barrel length.
The French, Israelis and some other countries make still much use of rifle grenades.
I mostly agree with this summary.
It is interesting that early post-WWII AT rifle grenades shared the technology, warhead or even more parts with the missiles fired by rocket launchers. This goes for the French (AC58 - WASP 58), Swiss (Gewehrgranate 58 - Raketenrohr) and the USA (M31 HEAT - LAW72).
For direct fire the max. effective ranges seem to have been around 75 to 100 m. Used like spigot-mortar with rocket-boosted grenades ranges up to 550 m, although shorter ranges would have been the norm. Velocities of up to 75 m/s were achieved, but with 7,62 mm blanks and as said with a rocket boost. Not much compared to the claimed 250 m/s of the Wasp and still a lot slower than the 145 m/s of the LAW72.
The Swiss army used the training rifle grenade 58 to lay cable across obstacles, something which was already done in WWII.
All in all I could imagine those niche uses ( points taken partly by Fuchs) with modern assault rifles.
(1) Whole small unit grenade salvos (HEDP, etc)**
(2) Large calibre niche grenades (SIMON, smoke grenades)*
(3) Cable, Grapple, Cordex projector
All of them should be bullet-trap or -through types. If practical, the lighter rifle grenades (HE/HEDP) could also double as defensive handgrenades, like some German WWII ones.
*Heavy AT grenades don't seem to make sense enough compared to light rocket launchers like the LAW72 to develop, train and carry them.
**Light mortars have taken part of that role, even if the rifle grenades are of course a different kettle of fish.
P.S: I guess Schissbecher is a typo
Last edited by Firn; 10-14-2011 at 04:15 PM.
Some typos happen unconsciously, but honestly...
It was a stupid design, about as much over-engineered as the 5 cm leGrW 36 (platoon mortar). German engineers of the 30's were totally in love with spin stabilisation and neglected fin stabilisation (see also Rz 65, Nebelwerfer 41).
This, by the way, enabled the 8th air force to use its quite poor heavy bomber designs (which were mere target practice for fin-stabilised low-tech R4/M rockets!) in the first place.
niches for the XM-25 and rifle grenades
XM25 could be “good enough” for use in some kind of adventure park but virtually useless everywhere else. See post 928 on Roles and Weapons with the Squad.
That first niche would require prompt supply of spare rifles, carbines and attachments to replace those damaged or wrecked delivering volley fire during operations, and earlier in range practice and field exercise ?
What useful niches (other than salvo line throwing) are left when a section/squad typically has hand grenades, UGLs and demo charges plus Armbrust, M-72 or suchlike; and when a modern platoon can have a 60mm handheld mortar (issued or attached) and also one or more 40mm MGLs ?
Last edited by davidbfpo; 10-17-2011 at 07:44 AM. Reason: Last sentence replaced at author's request
correction to last item
It has been pointed out that lack of calibre makes for confusion. Can sentence be corrected?
Last edited by davidbfpo; 10-17-2011 at 07:45 AM. Reason: Done by moderator
I am disappointed. Why did nobody point out that rifle grenades inherently kind of exploit the high-low pressure principle?
------------------------
@Compost: Why should a salvo of rifle grenades wreck the weapons? The rifle/carbine is largely unaffected by the use of rifle grenades.
UBGLs and MGLs will typically not be together in a small unit. 40 mm medium velocity ammunition also puts a bold question mark behind a platoon ("commando", "light" or "patrol") mortar since it has ~700 m range and enough physical effect to achieve similar psychological effect.
2 out of 3 aint bad, 3 out of 3 would be better
First, “bullet-trap or –through designs” produce a pressure pulse that is higher than the normal pressure for which the rifle or carbine was primarily designed. For grenade launching to be approved that higher pressure must be within safety limits. Perhaps that also means there are no cumulative affects and my residual concern there is wrong.
Second, the user expects the recoil to be higher and anyway to achieve range a recommended method of firing is with the butt grounded. If/when the weapon is held down with inadequate pressure – especially against a hard surface – the butt is liable to damage together with any frangibles attached to the weapon. That is likely to occur due to haste and stress during operations and exercise and training. An expert is unlikely to make that mistake but in volley/salvo fire only some will be rifle grenade experts.
Agree UGLs and MGLs and mortars will typically not all be together in a small sub-unit such as a section/squad but at least two of the three are on issue to some modern platoons. The USMC platoon now has one or more MGLs and its squads have UGLs able to fire LV and MV rounds.UBGLs and MGLs will typically not be together in a small unit. 40 mm medium velocity ammunition also puts a bold question mark behind a platoon ("commando", "light" or "patrol") mortar since it has ~700 m range and enough physical effect to achieve similar psychological effect.
However, a light mortar is longer ranged than 40mm MV weapons and can launch a significantly heavier and more damaging weight of ‘munitions’ particularly including HE, line, smoke and exotics such as para-cameras and micro-UAVs. If a light mortar is needed by a USMC platoon then a 60mm can be obtained from the company weapons platoon.
Hence my phrase: “when a modern platoon can have a 60mm handheld mortar (issued or attached) and also one or more 40mm MGLs “.
In line with that concept, the Br Army platoon has regained a light mortar and its sections have UGLs. I believe that 60mm mortar would be carefully kept on issue (although not invariably carried on light infantry operations) even if the platoon were to gain one or even two of the increasingly attractive 40mm MGLs.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks