7
7point62
Guest
M32 6-shot 40mm automatic grenade launcher. It was experimental in 2006...I'm assuming its in the inventory by now.
A
arizonaguide
Guest
Is that gonna be on the Brady Ban list? Cuz, I want one to defend my home in Phoenix! :)
http://www.kfyi.com/cc-common/mlib/622/06/622_1214436034.pdf
Things are getting more hairy here by the day...and it's gonna get worse when Obama opens the borders to "amnesty". (not to sidetrack the thread...I just really want one! (really just kidding, (kinda!))
:doh:
http://www.kfyi.com/cc-common/mlib/622/06/622_1214436034.pdf
Things are getting more hairy here by the day...and it's gonna get worse when Obama opens the borders to "amnesty". (not to sidetrack the thread...I just really want one! (really just kidding, (kinda!))
:doh:
pardus
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,534
It's actually been around for a long time, it's South African in origin.
7
7point62
Guest
pardus
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,534
Yeah, as far as I know.
7
7point62
Guest
Here's what I think of hand-held, multi-shot auto-grenade launchers: too much of a good thing.
The ammo is bulky and heavy when carried in quantity and the weapon is an ammo pig, so ammo has to be humped in quantity. Effective range is usually less than 500m with weapons of this type, and it is useless in areas of thick vegetation or trees. (Speaking from personal experience here).
My point is, the M203 is fine for grenade launcher support in small unit infantry assaults...and in most applications where you would consider a weapon like the M32, a mounted Mk19 would be preferable.
This is not to say that there would never be missions where an M32-type weapon might be applicable, particularly in an ambush scenario engaging multiple targets in a killing zone...provided ranges were sufficient for arming.
Then it could chug happily like a good piggy.
The ammo is bulky and heavy when carried in quantity and the weapon is an ammo pig, so ammo has to be humped in quantity. Effective range is usually less than 500m with weapons of this type, and it is useless in areas of thick vegetation or trees. (Speaking from personal experience here).
My point is, the M203 is fine for grenade launcher support in small unit infantry assaults...and in most applications where you would consider a weapon like the M32, a mounted Mk19 would be preferable.
This is not to say that there would never be missions where an M32-type weapon might be applicable, particularly in an ambush scenario engaging multiple targets in a killing zone...provided ranges were sufficient for arming.
Then it could chug happily like a good piggy.
If you're in thick vegetation, the contacts are closer, I think it can still be a handy weapon in that situation, you just need to change where it is carried in a patrol, I'd be looking at my #2 scout, if we get contacted and he can lay down 6 quick bombs, that's going to help me break contact and get the #1 scout out of the shit.
MontereyJack
Unverified
How about some movie trivia about this grenade launcher?
1987 "Predator". Pancho, the squad's grenadier used one of these revolver type grenade launchers and used an H&K MP5 for personal defense. Looked good in make believe.
I know....more useless bits of information.
1987 "Predator". Pancho, the squad's grenadier used one of these revolver type grenade launchers and used an H&K MP5 for personal defense. Looked good in make believe.
I know....more useless bits of information.
7
7point62
Guest
There was a revolving drum grenade launcher in the movie The Dogs of War that starred Christopher Walken, about mercenaries in Africa. It looked something like the M32, but maybe an earlier prototype.
The advantage to this is the speed you can pop off 6 rounds.
An M203 is so much slower, even with quick hands.
6 rounds in rapid succession could be just what you need to get the enemy to put his head down and allow you to GTFO of a killzone.
The only thing better than both would be a BELT FED M32, with belts of maybe 15 or 20 rounds. As for humping it, it is heavy- sure. But if you can hump a mortar base plate, or a 240Golf, then the M32 and ammo is no big deal.
An M32 bridges the gap between the M203 and the Mk-19.
I agree having a mounted 19 would be "preferrable", but the lack of portability is an issue, and you aren't taking a Mk19 on a foot patrol.
An M203 is so much slower, even with quick hands.
6 rounds in rapid succession could be just what you need to get the enemy to put his head down and allow you to GTFO of a killzone.
The only thing better than both would be a BELT FED M32, with belts of maybe 15 or 20 rounds. As for humping it, it is heavy- sure. But if you can hump a mortar base plate, or a 240Golf, then the M32 and ammo is no big deal.
An M32 bridges the gap between the M203 and the Mk-19.
I agree having a mounted 19 would be "preferrable", but the lack of portability is an issue, and you aren't taking a Mk19 on a foot patrol.
RetPara
SOF Support
The weapon in DOW was 25mm. Problem with the M32 will be its reload time. The M79 has been brought out of retirement also in some units.
The M32 definately counts as a force mulitplier at the squad level and may prove useful in open or even mountainous terrain. However, I also forsee problems in regards to escalation of force and rules of engagement violations, not to mention an increase in the potential for possible fracticide.
But the best way to find out is to go ahead and field it, atleast for select rapid-deployment units. :2c:
The M79 is still my prefered choice when it comes to grenadier weapons.
But the best way to find out is to go ahead and field it, atleast for select rapid-deployment units. :2c:
The M79 is still my prefered choice when it comes to grenadier weapons.
7
7point62
Guest
I also love the M-79 and carried it for a month. (MOS's did not mean shit...we had six 0331's in our team and only one machine gun. It was SOP for us to cross-train and switch weapons and responsibilities every few weeks.)
The 79 is dependable, user-friendly and once you get the elevation knack, it's like lobbing baseballs at the enemy. Then you've got CS gas rounds, lume, beehive...great weapon.
(An aside: at the risk of being accused of telling a war story, I met a 101st trooper in the evac hospital whos face was all different shades of black, blue, purple, green and yellow. I asked him WTF had happened to him and he said he'd been hit in the face with a 40mm HE M-79 round that hadn't traveled far enough to arm. OUCH.)
The 79 is dependable, user-friendly and once you get the elevation knack, it's like lobbing baseballs at the enemy. Then you've got CS gas rounds, lume, beehive...great weapon.
(An aside: at the risk of being accused of telling a war story, I met a 101st trooper in the evac hospital whos face was all different shades of black, blue, purple, green and yellow. I asked him WTF had happened to him and he said he'd been hit in the face with a 40mm HE M-79 round that hadn't traveled far enough to arm. OUCH.)
L
Looon
Guest
Ive used them in various video games. I think they are great.
M79 is a horrible bit of kit that is prone to hitting you on the head at any moment, even when sitting quietly in a harbour watching your arcs... 
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2006
- Messages
- 2,766
pardus
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,534
M79 is a horrible bit of kit that is prone to hitting you on the head at any moment, even when sitting quietly in a harbour watching your arcs...
LOL, I used to hate fire and manouver while carrying the M79, always ended up with a lump on the back of the head :doh:
WTF is that?
Pump action 40mm. 3+1 (4 rds total)
Similar threads
