I agree that this would be a rather interesting technique especially with the low-velocity 40x46 grenade. You could cover a range of 50 to 400m with with the classic low-arc indirect fire and plunging one. This could bridge some gaps left by the heavier and more efficient mortar fire support from further away.Originally Posted by William F. Owen
As jcustis said there won't be much training time for this specific technique. But which GL would be suitable for this type of support?
a) A rifle with an underslung GL (M203, M320)
b) A stand alone GL (M320)
c) A multiple GL (M32) - could be interesting due to the bursts of grenades.
d) A GMG (grenade machine gun) - depends on the tripod. If MGs were used for long range indirect fire why shouldn't GMGs not be used for long range plunging "mortar" fire?
What about the M320. It has side-mounted sights and even a LRF. There should be a way to turn the sight around 90°. In this case it should be easier to get the rounds on target. Or we use the good old slinging technique with alot of marks after having first lazed the target. Then give the GL a talented guy and let him shoot a lot of rounds. Then make him the squads/platoons first grenadier or light mortarier. He could operate from behind a wall with another guy reloading and an observer close by directing his fire. Does almost sound like a 51mm mortar
Heavy things like the M32 might be a good crew served weapon for a platoon mountain of infantry. But you can carry alot more rounds (12-15?) by bringing instead an M320 with you. If you have your vehicles nearby the situation changes quite a bit.
I do think that a true mortar is a more efficient solution. But why shouldn't we make better use of weapon which has become practically a standard staple for every infantry squad across NATO? We just have to carry a marked sling, an opern mind and more training in you head to do just that.
Firn
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks