• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Soldiers are officially getting their hands on the most advanced Carl Gustaf

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
819
Points
910
Jealous? H&ll yes....


Soldiers are officially getting their hands on the most advanced Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle yet

Strap in, soldiers, because we're entering some boom times for the Carl Gustaf — in more ways than one.

Swedish manufacturer Saab has signed an $87 million multi-year contract with the Army to furnish soldiers with new and improved 85mm M3E1 Carl Gustaf recoilless rifles in the coming years, the company announced on Thursday.

The Army approved the latest upgrade back in 2017 after announcing that every platoon would eventually receive a Carl Gustaf for combat use. The new version has a titanium shell and weighs in at 14.8 pounds, apparently making it 28 percent lighter and far more ergonomic than its M3 and M3A1 predecessors.

"The current system that the Army uses is the AT4, which only allows Soldiers to fire one shot, and then they have to throw the system away," the Army stated back in 2017. "With the M3E1, soldiers can use different types of ammunition which gives them an increased capability on the battlefield."

The M3E1 "ensures readiness on the modern battlefield with multi-role capabilities through a wide array of munitions including counter defilade, anti-structure, and anti-armor,” Saab US CEO Erik Smith said in a statement.

Since announcing the formal return of the Carl Gustaf, the Army has made efforts to upgrade its current arsenal of M3 recoilless rifles with the M3A1 variant Saab first unveiled in 2014.

The Army allocated more than $17 million to support the procurement of 214 M3E1 recoilless rifles in its fiscal year 2021 budget request. It had asked for 227 and 300 M3A1 systems in 2020 and 2019, respectively.

The M331 is capable of "engaging, neutralizing and destroying lightly armored vehicles, soft-skinned vehicles, personnel in the open or defilade, and field fortifications in both open urban and rural operational environments," according to the Army's budget documents.

Although the 2017 requirements called for the Army to field just 1,111 new and improved M3E1 Carl Gustaf recoilless rifles, Army budget documents indicate a target acquisition objective of around 2,460 total boomsticks through 2023.

New, lighter launchers aren't the only upgrade coming to service members sooner rather than later: Saab recently teamed up with Raytheon for a series of guided flight tests for its new laser-guided munition, aptly called the Guided Carl-Gustaf Munition.

The company signed a $445 million framework agreement with the Army for both Carl Gustaf and AT-4 anti-tank weapon ammunition in 2019.

https://taskandpurpose.com/military-tech/army-carl-gustaf-m3e1-upgrade-contract?fbclid=IwAR0Yuliz4dPCrDLRL8TcedGRGKE4nONScmSrMxiw6cyQXGA9rLgdkx1tRic
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
305
Points
880
Nice. Half the weight of the M2s we had (and I presume are now in the hands of the reserves.)

:cheers:
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
109
Points
680
It should be noted the Canadian Army is looking at the M4 Carl G to replace all M2 and M3 variants. Project is dependent on budget though and still subject to approval
 

reveng

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
59
Points
480
Having multiple boost stages on these sort of munitions seems like a good idea from the perspective of signature management. Perhaps even going as far as to have a min/mid/max approach for launch, flight to target, and the terminal phase. Makes me wish I was smarter, that's for sure! Awesome stuff.

Do they have any Carl G launched sensors yet? They have 40mm launched camera systems already.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
819
Points
910
MilEME09 said:
It should be noted the Canadian Army is looking at the M4 Carl G to replace all M2 and M3 variants. Project is dependent on budget though and still subject to approval

Yay!

I understand the newer weapons have faster barrel wear though?
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
293
Points
880
reveng said:
Having multiple boost stages on these sort of munitions seems like a good idea from the perspective of signature management. Perhaps even going as far as to have a min/mid/max approach for launch, flight to target, and the terminal phase. Makes me wish I was smarter, that's for sure! Awesome stuff.

Do they have any Carl G launched sensors yet? They have 40mm launched camera systems already.

There's some pretty neat predictive sights that let you hit moving targets at 900 meters.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
305
Points
880
daftandbarmy said:
Yay!

I understand the newer weapons have faster barrel wear though?

According to that authoritative source - Wikipedia - the M3 has a 500 round life while the M4 has a 1,000 round life. No idea what the older M2's life is.
MilEME09 said:
It should be noted the Canadian Army is looking at the M4 Carl G to replace all M2 and M3 variants. Project is dependent on budget though and still subject to approval

Please don't throw out the old ones. They make excellent local defence systems for rear echelon agencies. (assuming we buy ammunition in sufficient quantities)

:stirpot:

 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
305
Points
880
Found this about the M2:

The carl gustav M2 is said to have a designed life of just 500 shots. But there was a study done that has fired more than 2,300 rounds before there is noticable (sic) wear on the rifling.

https://www.malaysiandefence.com/on-the-way-nlaw/

So, all in all, the M4 at 1,000 rds is better rated than the M2 and M3 at 500 although the M2 may have, in fact, performed better than its rating.

Each gun battery used to have four and we fired them pretty much each year during annual weapons qualifications. Never knew that there was a barrel life on them back then and not sure that we ever recorded the rounds fired  like we did do for the howitzers (more accurately, the EFCs fired).

:cheers:

 

reveng

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
59
Points
480
Jarnhamar said:
There's some pretty neat predictive sights that let you hit moving targets at 900 meters.

Like the Aimpoint one you mean?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
57
Points
530
Some neat ancillary stuff

https://www.saab.com/products/carl-gustaf-m4


Saab's Confined Space HEAT round - revised backblast template.
https://youtu.be/UEhYqO6McKk

Raytheon CG Guided Munition
"The munition is intended to enable ground troops to engage multiple targets precisely at distances up to 2,000 meters, including moving targets."

https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/guided-carl-gustaf-munition
https://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2019-10-31-Guided-Carl-Gustaf-munition-goes-11-for-11-in-flight-tests

Aimpoint FCS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QozygGyTiqQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNQOXnFyeTg

And I am jealous.


 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
250
Points
880
FJAG said:
Found this about the M2:

https://www.malaysiandefence.com/on-the-way-nlaw/

So, all in all, the M4 at 1,000 rds is better rated than the M2 and M3 at 500 although the M2 may have, in fact, performed better than its rating.

Each gun battery used to have four and we fired them pretty much each year during annual weapons qualifications. Never knew that there was a barrel life on them back then and not sure that we ever recorded the rounds fired  like we did do for the howitzers (more accurately, the EFCs fired).

:cheers:

I have run a number of Carl G ranges in my time and never knew there was a gun history book or that we were supposed to keep track of how many rounds they fired, either...
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Myth
Donor
Reaction score
499
Points
830
I don't think tracking barrel life is done that way; I think it's a case of weapons techs checking them during ATIs for damage.  Willing to be proven wrong, though.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
305
Points
880
dapaterson said:
I don't think tracking barrel life is done that way; I think it's a case of weapons techs checking them during ATIs for damage.  Willing to be proven wrong, though.

Artillery definitely was (and I presume still is). Every gun has a gun history book in which its equivalent full charges fired is meticulously recorded by the detachment commander. That said, they are also checked by weapons techs.

:cheers:
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
819
Points
910
FJAG said:
Artillery definitely was (and I presume still is). Every gun has a gun history book in which its equivalent full charges fired is meticulously recorded by the detachment commander. That said, they are also checked by weapons techs.

:cheers:

Being an infantry weapon I'm sure the only 'books' associated with the 84mm at the platoon level relate to wagers laid on shooters' accuracy :)
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Myth
Donor
Reaction score
499
Points
830
FJAG said:
Artillery definitely was (and I presume still is). Every gun has a gun history book in which its equivalent full charges fired is meticulously recorded by the detachment commander. That said, they are also checked by weapons techs.

:cheers:

Apologies; I was referring to the Carl Gs in Canadian service, not the Guns.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
174
Points
680
I'm just shocked that the US Army was allowed to publish a picture with different camouflage patterns (helmet vs rest of uniform)

:stirpot:
 

reveng

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
59
Points
480
Chris Pook said:
Some neat ancillary stuff

https://www.saab.com/products/carl-gustaf-m4


Saab's Confined Space HEAT round - revised backblast template.
https://youtu.be/UEhYqO6McKk

Raytheon CG Guided Munition
"The munition is intended to enable ground troops to engage multiple targets precisely at distances up to 2,000 meters, including moving targets."

https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/guided-carl-gustaf-munition
https://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2019-10-31-Guided-Carl-Gustaf-munition-goes-11-for-11-in-flight-tests

Aimpoint FCS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QozygGyTiqQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNQOXnFyeTg

And I am jealous.

Some further thoughts on the Aimpoint system. Does anyone have open source perspective on how vulnerable something like that is to a modern LWR system? I'm assuming they'd do everything they can to engineer something that is LPI...


 
Top