Rifle Gernades to replaace the 40mm ?

[pappy]

Just read some reports regarding the requests to develop rifle grenades to replace the 40mm M203s the USMC is using.  The main complaint being the 40mm's lack of range.  Granted the Vehical / tripod mounted Mk19 has longer range, but that's different ammo, I do believe, higher chamber pressures, recoil, etc.

So some requests have come down to develop some rifle grenades to replace or to supplement the 40mm bloop tubes, what do you guys think?

The IDF (Israeli Army) uses them, although they still use 40mm.

I'd think the one important feature would be a bullet-trap type design for a new rifle grenade, that would not necessitate changing to dedicated rifler grenade ammo as was the case many years back.

I think this rifle grenade option is desireable over anti-tank type weapons how issued or recently used, (i.e. LAW's, and the newer bazooka type unit the USMC and Army are using, damn if that designation doesn't slip my mind, getting old sucks.....)

 

[Da_man]

im not sure what you mean by rifle grenades... do you mean sonmething like what was used on M1 Garand?

 

[Britney Spears]

Pappy:

This is something that I've read about in Phil west's scrapbook. The theory being that a section equipped with rifle grenades can put down a lot of fast firepower than one with grenade launchers. e.g. imagine an ambush where 10 or 20 rifle grenades hitting the enemy before rifle fire. Also, training with a rifle grenade would be a lot cheaper, since all you need are dummy grenades and blank ammo. Heck, I suppose you could even play "grenade tag" with each other as long as you didn't get too close or shoot each other in the face.

Big problem with this: I've never seen a 5.56mm rifle grenade. a 7.62 or 30-06 round may have enough gas to propell the grenade a meaningful distance, even then, the old C1 rifle grenade, and the C1 rifle had an adjustable gas setting was (from second hand information, never used one myself) only effective to about 200m and rather inaccurate. 

The Israelis do use a tear gas rifle grenade on their 5.56mm weapons, you see them on TV a lot. I believe those still require seperate ammo for launching. 

 

[1feral1]

France and Belgium are famous for its 5.56 x 45mm launched rifle grenades (on their FNCs and FAMASs respectively), and they are also common in the eastern block too (for 7.62 x 39mm and 5.45 x 39mm weapons).

On most new designs no ballestite (spelling?) ctgs are used, but there is a bullet trap in the base of the grenade, so a soldier just uses ball ammo he has, and a launcher which is attached to the flash suppressor, or the flash suppressor has a small spring clip around the base (promots a seal) its over top of the flash suppressor, which eliminates the use of an attachable launcher. The grenade itself is simply fired off the flash suppressor.

The F88 Austeyr has this clip (but we dont use grenades like this), as do other weapons. The RAN use a line thrower which fits on the end of an Austeyr.


Cheers,

Wes

 

[1feral1]

Pappy:

the old C1 rifle grenade, and the C1 rifle had an adjustable gas setting was (from second hand information, never used one myself)

Ah, the old 1005-21-150-1997 Rifle, 7.62mm FN C1(A1)!

The C1 had a gas plug which was quickly, and simply reversed ( diverting all gases up the bore) to launch grenades ( HE and Smk), and a launcher which fit on the flash elliminator by the bayonet lug. Then a folding grenade sight could be flipped up, and this was attached to the launcher. The launcher was UK made, mainly by Enfield. The flip up sight was graduated in 50, 75 and 100 metre incriments. I am at work at lunch right now, and I just looked as we have a couple here in the Wksp. Identical to the same type the CF adopted. Not to confuse anyone, but Australia used their version of the C1, call the L1.

There was a drill for frag and smk to be attached to a launcher with   a finned 'assembly' which kept the grenade stable in flight. It was a contraption to set up, as the pin had to be pulled prior to firing.

As long as the launcher was attached to the rifle, as many finned assemblies could be launched. Special ballestite ctgs were used, and resembled a blank but were colour laquered at the end (red and black I think)

This was in the days of the old egg shaped frag grenades (not the M67 baseball shaped) were used. I forgot what the CF called them, I think it was M61s, but here we called them M26's. Here they have only recently gone out of service, and have been repalced by the home-grown F1 frag.

There never was a specific grenade adopted for use on the FN C1(A1), just the same types which were hand thrown.


Cheers,

Wes

 

[Kirkhill]

Wes do you remember/know anything about the FN Telgren rifle grenade?  Whether it is still in service?  It was a telescoping grenade that an infanteer could carry a pack of 4-6 on his webbing (about) the size of a 200 rd box of Minimi ammunition.   It was also a shoot-through design. You could use any type of ammunition, even AP as the round passed through a channel packed with some sort of occluding gel.

I seem to remember the Janes small arms editor (Christopher Foss?) arguing the rifle grenade was better than the 40mm grenade because you weren't limited in external dimensions and so could create a wider variety of more effective rounds. ???

 

[dangerboy]

Just to add with the FNC1 you used a different round when firing grenades the C33 round. You would load this round in and fire it to launch grenades

 

[AmmoTech90]

Most modern rifle grenades are bullet trap now.  The old launcher for the FN used both US and British parts, the part that clipped onto the base of the Grenade (C1 Smk/M26/M61 frags) was US.  The 40mm family for the M203 has tons of types of grenades for almost any application.  The only problem the small size of the package you have to fit it into.  With a rifle launched grenade you can get a much longer grenades but you will sacrifice range with more weight.

Pappy your thinking about the SMAW.  Nice peice of kit, you could never get the range/accuracy/payload that that or the Carl G have with a rifle grenade.  The US did experiment with a spherical grenade called the RAW a few years back, don't know if its in their service.  I believe that it had a rocket assist and carried a significantly larger payload than a normal rifle grenade.  That and its accuracy were its major selling points.

 

[Britney Spears]

Thanks for clearing that up, Wes, I did a simple google search and found my source:

http://www.geocities.com/equipmentshop/riflehandgrenades.htm

It just kinda made sense to me that 5.56 rounds would be too weak for rifle grenades, so i never thought too much more about it. Guess you learn something everyday.

I don't have time to research this too much, but several factual errors have been pointed out on that site, so I wouild take it with a grain of salt.
Perhaps you could elaborate a little on the effectiveness of the C1 grenade?

 

[Britney Spears]

Also, in a similar vein:

http://www.isayeret.com/gear/simon/simon.htm

 

[1feral1]

I had not seen one launched since the summer of 1976! I do remember we first used the blue M62s, and then went 'live'.

We were in a trench system with our skid lids on, and if memory serves me right, it was near Survey Point in the happy place called Dundurn, in Saskatchewan. I was there in July this year, and most of those old 1930s brick shacks are long gone along with the wood wartime huts too.

From firing (resting the butt on the ground, and lining the sight up with the end of the grenade) delay was the same burn time as if thrown, about 4 to 5 secs. A distant black puff for and airburst, and other times the grenade would bounce on the ground and then go off.

Just remember ther was no special grenade specifically used or designed for the C1, they were just the same types thrown 'manually'.

Anyways, its pushing 1300 (we are Zulu -10 here), and lunch is over, and I must get back and try to work (overhauling Minimis today).


Up The Johns!

Wes

 

[Britney Spears]

If that wasn't clear enough, here's the complete illustrated pham on the grenade launcher, L1A1. Written in 1976 no less.

http://www.army.dnd.ca/ael/pubs/300-008/b-gl-385/007/PT-001/B-GL-385-007-PT-001.pdf

 

[pappy]

working my way though the commenst, the IDF uses then today, only thing that changes is the flash hider, and that is just a simple addition of a little sprint clip built into it to hold the rifle gernade onto the muzzle. IDF uses M16 family of weapons as well as the Gaili which is being phased out of most infantry unit due to weight, etc, but thats another thread.  Gailis use a modified M16 barrel/flash hider.

Sure this would also work for the C7 in CAF and all the M4 and M16 in US service.

 

[MG34]

The bullet trap grenades ,when fired from a 5.56mm weapon do have sufficent range,the FN,Mecar and 40mm Luchaire  bullet trap grenades have a published range of 300m.More than enough to do the job.

 

[ramy]

What about the new OICW rifle ? It includes a 20mm gernade lauching system .
I havent heard too much about the OICW lately but I guess thats a different thread.

 

[Spr.Earl]

im not sure what you mean by rifle grenades... do you mean sonmething like what was used on M1 Garand?

I'll check my photos,I may have a photo of one or two.

 

[MG34]

RAAM (Rifle Launched Anti Armour munition)

Newest  on the block the Israeli Refaim Telescoping Bullet Trap Rifle Grenade,it incorporates an add on laser range and automatic fuse setting mechanism.

 

[brihard]

The OICW program was shut down. Lots of projected cost overruns, logistical problems, etc. The new XM-8 carbine is the result of the research into 5.56mm kinetic energy weapons research they did for the OICW. Basically it's a new rifle that looks like it has the potential to replace the M16. Nice bit about it is that the gas blowback isn't shot abck into the chamber, but just activates a pistol that pushes the bolt back- much less residue in the weapon's receiver, and tests state upwards of 20,000 rounds successfully fired without cleaning the weapon... Nice piece of kit.

 

[KevinB]

Brihard
from someone (ME) who has handles the XM-8 I can tell you it AINT all its cracked up to be.

Secondly cant you give me any reason why you think 1) a weapon needs to fire 20,000 rds w/o cleaning? [that woudl be like the service life of the weapon...] 2) You believe that to be a fact?

From shooting G36's and AR18's and FN's that all has gas pistons I dont see the 20k # beign factual.

Secondly the XM-8 is a floppy awkward POS.