Rifle-Hand stick grenades: infantry firepower
World War II: Victory
at Oberhoffen, France, 11 February 1945
Second Lieutenant (then Sergeant) Eric
C. Dahlgren, U.S. Army, Company E, 142d Infantry, 36th Infantry Division.
Congressional Medal of Honor Citation:
He led the 3d Platoon to the rescue of
a similar unit which had been surrounded in an enemy counter-attack at
Oberhoffen, France. As he advanced along a street, he observed several Germans
crossing a field about 100 yards away. Running into a barn, he took up a
position in a window and swept the hostile troops with submachine-gun fire, killing
6, wounding others, and completely disorganizing the group. His platoon then
moved forward through intermittent sniper fire and made contact with the
besieged Americans. When the 2 platoons had been reorganized, Sgt. Dahlgren
continued to advance along the street until he drew fire from an enemy-held
house. In the face of machine-pistol and rifle fire, he ran toward the
building, hurled a grenade through the door, and blasted his way inside
with his gun. This aggressive attack so rattled the Germans that all 8 men who
held the strongpoint immediately surrendered. As Sgt. Dahlgren started toward
the next house, hostile machinegun fire drove him to cover. He secured rifle
grenades, stepped to an exposed position, and calmly launched his missiles from
a difficult angle until he had destroyed the machinegun and killed its 2
operators. He moved to the rear of the house and suddenly came under the
fire of a machinegun emplaced in a barn. Throwing a grenade into the
structure, he rushed the position, firing his weapon as he ran; within, he
overwhelmed 5 Germans. After reorganizing his unit, he advanced to clear
hostile riflemen from the building where he had destroyed the machinegun. He
entered the house by a window and trapped the Germans in the cellar, where he tossed
grenades into their midst, wounding several and forcing 10 more to
surrender. While reconnoitering another street with a comrade, he heard German
voices in a house. An attack with rifle grenades drove the hostile troops to
the cellar. Sgt. Dahlgren entered the building, kicked open the cellar
door, and, firing several bursts down the stairway, called for the trapped
enemy to surrender. Sixteen Soldiers filed out with their hands in the air. The
bold leadership and magnificent courage displayed by Sgt. Dahlgren in his
heroic attacks were in a large measure responsible for repulsing an enemy
counterattack and saving an American platoon from great danger.
Vietnam good: M14 rifle grenades
Sergeant Major, U.S. Marines, by Maurice J. Jacques.
covered the area with smoke rounds to obscure
their movement. I mentioned to Sergeant Haferkamp that I had never
witnessed 60mm mortars fire so fast or so accurately. The vision remained with
me as an idea to be used later".
Later
on, he discovers how the fire was delivered so quickly in a conversation with
Staff Sergeant Pete Connors In the mess hall. Sgt. Connors was in the company
he had been watching and it was his idea to use rifle grenades in a
helicopter assault. I'll pickup his later statement as to how his company
employed them.
"I
told him I had watched their progress that day and was impressed with how
rapidly they had been able to put their 60mm WP rounds into the tree line.
Staff Sergeant Connors laughed and said that what I had witnessed was not
60mm mortar fire, but rifle grenade used in a unique manner. Connors told
me he assigned one M-14 grenade launcher to each squad. Since new men had a problem
telling where enemy fire was coming from, he gave the rifle grenade
launcher to his most experienced men. The M-14 required the spindle valve be
turned to the OFF position to fire the rifle grenade. Connors said he required
his Grenadier to have one WP grenade attached to the rifle and a crimped
cartridge in the rifle's chamber. The Grenadier also had a full magazine
of 7.62mm rounds locked in his rifle's magazine well. As soon as he fired
the WP grenade, the Rifleman/Grenadier immediately turned the spindle valve to
the ON position, pulled back on the operating rod, and loaded a live round into
the chamber. He followed the burst of his WP grenade with a stream of nineteen
rounds of accurate rifle fire. Knowing where the enemy was located, the rest
of the rifle squad could key in on the bursting white phosphorous grenade and
deliver more accurate fire."
"SSgt
Pete Connors, Fox Company, 2/7, was killed in action trying to save one of his
men who lay wounded in a rice paddy."
Maybe
his method can be used to save other men's lives. That would probably make him
smile.
Vietnam
bad: a near disaster from enemy rifle grenades
L/cpl Joe C. Paul, Company H,
2d Battalion, 4th Marines (Rein), 3d Marine Division (Rein)
Congressional
Medal of Honor Citation:
Near
Chu Lai, Republic of Vietnam, 18 August 1965. In violent battle, L/Cpl. Paul's
platoon sustained 5 casualties as it was temporarily pinned down, by
devastating mortar, recoilless rifle, automatic weapons, and rifle fire
delivered by insurgent communist (Viet Cong) forces in well entrenched
positions. The wounded men were unable to move from their perilously exposed
positions forward of(the remainder of their platoon, and were suddenly
subjected to a barrage of white phosphorous rifle grenades. L/Cpl. Paul,
fully aware that his tactics would almost certainly result in serious injury or
death to himself, chose to disregard his safety and boldly dashed across the
fire-swept rice paddies, placed himself between his wounded comrades and the
enemy, and delivered effective suppressive fire with his automatic weapon in
order to divert the attack long enough to allow the casualties to be evacuated.
Although critically wounded during the course of the battle, he resolutely
remained in his exposed position and continued to fire his rifle until he
collapsed and was evacuated. By his fortitude and gallant spirit of
self-sacrifice in the face of almost certain death, he saved the lives of
several of his fellow Marines.
Panama: Disaster at Punta Paitilla
Airport
Two platoons from U.S. Navy SEAL Team 4
are pinned down by enemy automatic
weapons fire attempting to get in close to set explosive charges against
Panamanian strongman, Manuel Noriega's Learjet to prevent his escape from
Panama. As bullets skip across the runway into SEALs who were trying to block
the runway with a light airplane, casualties mount from automatic weapons fire.
Someone has to silence the enemy guards firing behind the cover of dirt filled
barrels.
U.S. 40mm M203/M79 40mm
grenade cartridges
World40mm cartridges
for M203/M79 Grenade launchers
A SEAL with a 40mm M203
grenade launcher attached to his M-16 Assault rifle rushes forward to get
into firing position. He is cut down and later dies.
4 SEALs dead, 8 seriously wounded
before fire superiority is gained and the enemy killed.
A high price to pay for an attack that
could have been done at a safe stand-off using the maximum effective ranges of
the weapons in their hands as suggested vigorously by LTCDR
Mike Walsh before the mission but over-ruled. For more details on Seal Team
4's raid on this airport click here
THE PROBLEM WITH BULLETS
The basic flaw in fighting on the automatic weapons-swept battlefield is you
fight the enemy at best even when you do not have SUPERIOR explosive effects. A
5.56mm bullet doesn't explode, so you must maneuver to get a straight shot at
an enemy protected behind the terrain or urban cover. In fact, after Korea, we
lost the rifle grenade with the demise of the M14 in Vietnam and have been
suffering ever since. The enemy has always had rifle grenades, after WWII added
Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs) that can be carried
loaded in their reusable-launchers which have distinct firing grips
at-the-ready and fired as soon as you stop to aim.
CHICOM disposible rockets like the PF-89 above have firing
grips to run into firing position ready to launch
Our disposible
rockets require their sights to be opened before firing---they don't have
pistol grips so they can be ran into firing position like the RPG or the new CHICOM PF-89 disposible
anti-tank rocket. We need to add firing grips to our disposible rockets to
gain this capability and field the re-usable M3 RAAWS
84mm launcher which already has it to ALL infantry units not just Rangers.
After the RPGs the enemy fielded the
AKM series of selective-fire weapons around the world immediately after Korea,
resulting in free world forces being pinned down by a weapon with 30 shots to their 8-20,
in some cases them firing only one shot for every trigger pull while the enemy
could fire a continuous burst on fully automatic. In WWII, the good
guys could shoot faster, now the bad guys had the advantage until the M16
arrived to save the day. Unfortunately, instead of improving the rifle grenade,
the U.S. threw out rifle grenades with the M14 and adopted the single-shot
M79 shotgun-style 40mm grenade launcher in Vietnam which made the rifle
squad lose a rifle's worth of firepower in order to lob a tiny grenade whose
meager 5 meter kill radius explosive effects were absorbed by the dense jungle
and not the enemy. The Grenadier himself couldn't defend himself from
close-range automatic weapons fire attack. After the war, the 40mm grenade
launcher, M203 was attached underneath a M16 rifle but still shoots the
miniscule 40mm grenade from a select few people in the squad, who are likely to
get pinned down and be unable to support their comrades by explosive effects
fire as seen time and time again in places like Punta Paitilla.
For a good simulation of the impotence
of the M16/M203's 40mm grenade, download this simulation of a dismounted force
attack on a drug lab:
Delta
force attack in the jungle
Explosive effects need to be a
capability of EVERY Soldier in the rifle squad.
>
U.S. disposible rockets like the M136 "AT-4" (84mm) above DO NOT have
firing grips to run into firing position ready to launch, requiring the Soldier
to pause and open up sights during a critical part of the battle
The SEAL team
firefight was ended when a M136 AT4
rocket was fired at Noriega's Learjet, disabling it.
To help change this, the U.S. Army's
small arms team is seeking a combination 5.56mm and 20mm grenade launcher with
air burst capability called OICW or "Objective
Individual Combat Weapon" to replace the current M16/M4 carbine and M203
GL family of weapons. While its a good idea to give every Soldier
a grenade launcher, it is added weight for him to carry and cost. We hope
the "smart" 20mm GL is adopted as an add-on to the M16/M4 5.56mm
family of weapons instead. What we really need NOW is the rifle grenade.
THE PROBLEM WITH GRENADE LAUNCHERS
The world is urbanizing, just bullets will not do. Regardless, there is a limit
to the amount of explosives a 20mm shell can hold, even a "smart"
one. The M203's 40mm grenade is too weak for MOUT other than precision-fire
into a window.
But it gets worse, much worse.
The M203's barrel blocks the bayonet
lug, thus if the enemy gets close to you, you cannot rifle-bayonet
fight with him as time and time again, recent battles have proven
necessary.
The M203 GL is an ignored weapon. There
is no MILES simulation for it, so it doesn't get used on force-on-force
maneuvers other than to signal/mark targets--which is a good use I myself use
all the time. But its HE effects are not factored into
training, and you FIGHT as you TRAIN.
You cannot just go and shoot a M203,
you need a range and expensive one-time use ammunition. It simply doesn't
happen.
Next, thanks to personnel turmoil,
Grenadiers are never assigned for long, and the Grenadier vests never leave the
supply room or never get ordered. Thus, someone with no experience firing the
weapon is given it just before a Field Training eXercise (FTX) or worse combat,
and has no way to carry 40mm shells other than a loose clump in the BDU trouser
pockets, where they inevitably fall out. I resorted to taping the cardboard
packing sleeves together to hold the 40mm shells in groups of three in my BDU
pocket during recent JRTC-prep maneuvers. The new MOLLE and
RACK vest panels for the 40mm GL will likely suffer a similar fate except
in elite units where every shred of combat advantage is strived for.
We need something bigger and we need
EVERY SOLDIER to have it--so if someone is in position to hit the enemy they
can, preventing designated Grenadiers from having to get up and expose
themselves into a firing position. That something is the bullet-trap or thru
rifle grenade.
THE SOLUTION: Modern Rifle/Hand
grenades
The Israeli Defense Force (IDF) are big
believers in rifle grenades. An IDF Paratrooper writes:
Photo
courtesy of the AWESOME IDF Special Forces web site: www.isayeret.com
"Haven't used the bullet-trap
type. We always used a Mecar type, fired by a blank. We keep the blanks in a
special magazine in a pouch...I've used both, the 203 and the Mecar type. Used
the Mecar type very effectively in Lebanon... One of my guys stopped a moving
car full of Tangos with a Mecar...Our Paras always carry rifle grenades, plus
the 203...Good thing about the rifle grenades is their light, you can carry a
whole quiver...We tend to favor them over the 203... It's a quiver pouch on
your back, like a quiver of arrows...[See photo above] We carry the RPG
warheads the same way...Well, not everyone gets them. You give them to the
trained Grenadiers...The neat thing is you can train on practice ones over and
over again... not like M203 which gets ignored (doesn't have a resuable
practice round)...and shooting rifle grenades is FUN"
Colombian Army Soldier---notice rifle grenades on high-tech
leg holster:
And
this Russian Soldier taking a break from combat in Chechnya:
The beauty of the
rifle grenade is you can TRAIN ON THEM ANYWHERE there is open space to shoot.
You simply take practice rifle grenades and launch them with low-cost blanks at
your targets to perfect your aim. After shooting them, you go down range, pick
them up and shoot them again. And again. "Practice makes perfect" is
the by-word for a can-do generation that doesn't know MTV and "No
Fear" t-shirts with slacker mottos like "If you can't win, don't
try". Perfect aim allows you to hit bad guys in moving cars when "the
chips are down: and lives are on the line.
In contrast, U.S. forces DO NOT have
rifle grenades and must rely on the M224 60mm mortar at company level without
fire direction for area suppression; an exercise in futility on the
battlefield. Too heavy to be carried swiftly to various parts of the
battlefield like the "knee mortar", its 60mm projectile is too wimpy
to control the terrain with explosive effect from a static position without a
Fire Direction Center (FDC) and is ineffective against buildings in MOUT. In
Vietnam, the enemy ran circles around our units humping the 60mm mortar,
pummeling them when they stopped to rest. If they had rifle grenades they could
have stopped this immediately.
http://www.earlyamericanhomes.com/Vietnam/articles/1997/04972_text.htm
A noted weapons analyst describes how
this could be dealt with:
"The 60mm mortar is an order of
magnitude larger than the 40-50mm mortars (actually "grenade
launchers") I was writing about.
No, I would not recommend the 60mm
mortar for a hunter-killer team. Wrong size. Weapons at each echelon should be
matched.
Squad weapons (rifles, SAWs, and rifle
grenades) reach out several hundred meters, essentially in direct-fire.
Shooters are often pinned and can barely get a fleeting glance at the targets.
Platoon weapons (Light/Medium Machine
Guns, recoilless rifles, etc) need greater range (about 500-1,000 meters) to
overwatch all of the squads. By being farther back, they cover the platoon
front and also draw less suppressive fire. They are still rapidly emplaced and
frequently shifted, so are also direct fire, only.
Company weapons (tripod-mounted .50 cal
Heavy Machine Guns, mortars, heavy recoilless rifles) have still greater range
(well over 1,000 meters, and 3,000 meters becoming the norm once TOW fielded)
to overwatch all of the platoons. They are far enough back to where they can
set up a stable firing position, hence this is where indirect firing mortars
first appear. They also require large crews to handle the ammunition, observing
and fire control, etc., so they do not belong in the front lines.
Placing heavier weapons farther forward
generally doesn't work. They are too readily suppressed, the crews are too
exposed, and the commander loses control. In WW I, we tried pushing French 75s
along with the assault elements to take out machinegun nests. Germans tried
same sort of thing at times. Both sides just got the guns stuck in mud and lost
the crews to the very same machineguns they sought to kill.
The 60mm mortar is too cumbersome for
platoons, and too light for companies. Its bursting charge is too small to be
effective, and its range is mediocre. Peacetime 'Light fighters' prefer it to
the 81mm because they can carry it easily, but combat experience (WW II, Korea,
Vietnam) always resulted in replacement by the heavier mortar for a few years,
until peacetime preferences took over, again.
Regards the article on Vietnam, you see
the problem throughout. Mortar crew too small to carry enough ammo,
so everyone else has to carry rounds. Crew constantly being suppressed. Ammo
quickly expended. Accuracy and effectiveness doubtful. Compare to what
could have been instead with a company 81mm platoon and battalion 4.2"
mortar platoons in direct support, reacting to calls for fire from the lead
platoons. A lot easier and more effective, assuming that you have guys trained
as FOs. But hey, that war is long over and I do not need to refight it. Just
remember that there are plenty of lessons from it, and most are, 'don't do
what we did.'
To do 'hunter-killer' today, squads
would suppress and leader should simply call-for-fire.
Digression: During early 1980s,
concurrent with GEN Wickam's 10,000 man Light Infantry Division (LID), we went
off to replace the company 81mm and battalion 4.2" mortar with the 'new
and improved' 60mm and 81mm, respectively. They claimed that new projectiles were
so much more lethal that we could 'do more with less.' Well, to make a long
story short, Light Fighters still have the 60mm, the heavy fighters scrapped
the 81mm altogether and went up to 120mm mortars at battalion. What does that
tell you?
It was after I learned more on rifle
grenades that I came to appreciate the value of the 40-50mm mortars that were
common at the outbreak of WW II (Germans, Poles, Russians, Japanese, others).
Their role was an extension of WW I anti-machinegun 'hunter-killer' teams. The French
merged a Chauchat automatic rifle team with VB rifle Grenadiers into a squad
for taking out German Maxim 08/15 light (okay, 60 lbs, but still portable)
machineguns. The Chauchat would suppress while VBs were fired and adjusted
until the target was killed. In such a role, a 40-50mm mortar is much more
stable and accurate than a grenade launcher. Of course, trench warfare did not
set in in WW II, so the small mortars disappeared over time. Still, they were
far more useful in a defense than most people realize."
Unlike the older generation rifle
grenades that needed to be fired by special blanks, the latest generation of
rifle launched munitions can be launched SAFELY by standard live ammunition.
This is a grenade that is placed over the end of the service rifle and launched
by trapping the bullet completely or as it passes through. This can propel very
large charges of explosives up to 150-350+ meters with a 20+ meter kill radius.
Every Soldier can have BT rifle grenades. The VJ Serbian Army is fond of
their family
of rifle grenades and has taken to shooting them at
peacekeepers and innocent civilians. The rifle grenade can be practiced on
in training using blanks and practice rifle grenades to achieve a high level of
accuracy at a very low-cost, that means EVERY Soldier can be proficient with
their use...
One problem is the weight and size of
the BT Rifle grenades.
What we suggest is that the BT Rifle
grenade body telescope to a compact size like FN's do. When ready to use, you
extend the fins, put on the end of your rifle, then fire. But taking this the
next step, we suggest that the BT Rifle grenade be given the option of being a
HAND GRENADE like the German
"potato masher" seen at the top of this page. By pulling a pin,
the grenade can be thrown with fins extended or compact like a can. Then each
Soldier could have a large supply of grenades that can be rifle launched
or hand thrown as the situation requires, as SGT Dahlgren did in WWII France.
The Serbs wear special Load Bearing Vests (LBVs) that contain several rifle
grenades in accessible poches at their back, like a quiver for arrows. We would
do well to learn from our enemies on this one, using the modular approach to
adding rifle/hand grenade pouches to our current TLBV/ETLBVs and MOLLE/RACK
LBVs.
Thus, instead of carrying BT Rifle
grenades AND hand grenades, Soldiers and Paratroopers
carry just the BT Rifle/hand grenades, increasing their firepower and
flexibility to execute Airborne
Warfare.
In fact such grenades already exist in
the British Army.
In the Gulf War Soldiers of the British
4th and 7th Armoured Brigade used French 40mm Luchaire rifle grenades. These
have a "bullet trap" so they can be fired using conventional ball
ammunition. Bullet-through, or bullet trap, grenades - like the Belgian FN and
MECAR designs, French Alsetex, and Israeli IMI BT/AP and BT/AT range - allow a
Soldier to load a rifle grenade without fiddling about with blank rounds during
a fire fight, and hit targets up to 300 meters away. U.S. Alliant Technosystems
(see pictures on this page) have riot control and instant flechette rifle
grenades to get the shotgun effect many like when shooting the M79 in closed
terrain/vegetation in Vietnam (See Feedback #4 at the bottom).
The original rifle grenades were
anti-personnel (AP), but with developments in shaped charge technology they are
also available now in anti-tank (AT) versions.
Grenade Hand-Rifle, Anti-Personnel L2A2
Weight: 395g.
Length Overall: 81mm.
Max Diameter: 60mm.
Weight of explosive: 170g.
Type of explosive: 55/45 RDx/TNT.Delay Time: 4.4 + 0.5s.
Lethal Radius: 10m.
Number of Fragments: Approx 1,:00.
The L2A2 can be either fired from a
rifle but it is usually hand thrown. For training there are the Grenade Hand,
Practice, Inert L3A1, L3A2 and L3A3. Also available is the Drill Grenade, Hand
L4A1 and the L4A2, both are fitted with the Drill Fuse, Grenade, Percussion
L30.
The marines almost get rifle grenades
in the 1980s but wimp out (so much for their warrior spirit)
Noted weapons expert
Last Dingo passed this tidbit and photo on to us:
RAAM (Rifle Launched Anti-Armour
Munition) was developed at the end of the 1980s for the needs of the USMC.
For use, first an adapter must be
installed onto the assault rifle. The grenade can be fired with completely normal
ammunition, whereby in case of ball, the projectile remains and the grenade
brings it away to a safe distance. Afterwards, the rocket engine at a safe
distance ignites, thus RAAM can also be fired from closed areas. The HEAT
warhead is ignited by a proximity fuze and becomes armed only after 10 meters
of flight.
Manufacturers: Olin
Kind: Rifle anti-tank rocket grenade
Weight: 1.65 kg
Length: 56.4 cm long
Range Effective: 250m
Caliber: 400mm
U.S. Forces out-gunned on the modern
battlefield, why?
We have shown how we are getting our
"rears" handed to us in the close fight by enemy rifle grenades,
RPGs, AKMs etc. However some may say the smaller M203 GL round can be carried
in larger numbers and fired over a longer period of time before running out
than non-collapsing fin rifle grenades.
The problem is the M203 is ineffective
versus an enemy with rifle grenades (Vietnam), and in the hands of a dedicated
Grenadier is often pinned down and unable to fire (Punta Paitilla). If you
factor EQUALLY all of the general infantry tasks in a sort of mini-Battlefield
Operating System (BOS) kind of way, the result is the needed corrective action
gets stymied by Lowest Common Denominator (LCD) thinking. The LCD here is that
the M203 has smaller shells so you can carry more of them compared to
non-collapsing fin rifle grenades and continuously fire them over time, if you
elevate this aspect to an equal footing to the explosive effectiveness factor,
you negate the entire need to go with rifle grenades.
Result: status quo remains intact! And
we will continue to lose the close fight, and men, and battles and wars....
However, it doesn't work:
1. If the dedicated M203 Grenadier is
pinned down by enemy fire.
2. The Grenadier is poorly trained due to manning turmoil etc. and cannot shoot
accurately--vital for its puny warhead size---due to the weapon not taken
seriously and having no consistant training means
3. The shells being fired over time, even if they are landing near the enemy
are irrelevent due to their small size/effect.
4. The weight of the M203 GL itself--inefficient way to deliver grenades at
extended ranges
What matters is HITTING AND KILLING the
enemy and the M203 40mm GL isn't doing it.
On the other hand, rifle grenades are 3
times as lethal, and if packaged right can be carried by EVERYONE IN THE SQUAD.
What this means is instead of 6 pounds of M203 Grenade launcher weighing down
the M16, you can have 6 x RIFLE GRENADES right there. You are already "6
rifle grenades up" on the M203 from the "get-go". For the same
weight as a M203, your Grenadiers can have 26 x rifle grenades compared to just
20 x 40mm grenades and a 6-pound M203 dead weight attached to the M16.
Then, if you make the rifle grenade
fins/tube collapse, they can be carried in less space and thrown as baseball or
"stick" hand grenades---now you are giving the Soldier a vastly
improved fighting potential----he has 30 rifle or hand grenades---depending on
the situation he has 30 explosives effect charges for 0-40 meters or 100-350
meters, whereas the M16/M203 GL Grenadier has 20 x 100-300 meter explosive
effects and 4 x 0-40m explosive effects available. The Rifle/Hand Grenades are
the same size as an illumination M203 40mm Grenade now.
INDIVIDUALLY:
30 is better than 20.
30 is better than just 4.
GROUP:
Then you multiply this by the potential
of the rest of the squad.
Paratrooper 2000 Rifle/Hand
Grenade-equipped Infantry Squad
1 Squad Leader = 10 R/H grenades
2 Grenadiers = 60 R/H grenades
2 Fireteam leaders = 20 R/H grenades
2 Rifleman = 20 R/H grenades
2 Auto Riflemen = 20 R/H grenades
130 Total Grenades from 0-350 meters
1999 "Status quo sucks" M203
GL and Hand Grenade-equipped Squad
1 Squad Leader = 4 x H grenades
2 Grenadiers = 40 x 40mm, 8 x H grenades
2 Fireteam leaders = 8 x H grenades
2 Rifleman = 8 x H grenades
2 Auto Riflemen = 8 x H grenades
40 x M203 GL Grenades
from 50-350 meters
36 x Hand grenades 0-40 meters
A mere 76 total grenades. If the
two Grenadiers are pinned down, there is no extended range fire available.
In the U.S. Army the Fireteam leader
has a M203 GL and there is 2 Riflemen in the squad, probably in realization the
M203 is best used for leader target marking than explosives effect killing. Yet
another reason why we need rifle grenades so we are not out-gunned on the
modern battlefield.
With the loss of the M8 Armored
Gun System, retirement of M728 Combat Engineer
Vehicles, Iowa
Class battleships, our infantry is set for a repeat of October 3, 1993 Somalia
all over again. We MUST do something TODAY to give our troops shock action to
prevail on the increasingly urban battlefield.
BT Rifle/hand grenades are something we can do to solve this.
Lets do it before its too late.
GOOD NEWS! BULLET TRAP RIFLE GRAPPLING
HOOKS IN U.S. ARMY SERVICE IN BALKANS NOW!...and soon as breaching aids for
urban combat!
The crisis in the former Yugoslavia and
the millions of mines still buried there has forced the adoption of a bullet or
blank launched grappling hook from the M16 service rifle to breech mines/booby trapped-areas..
In a training situation like at JRTC,
your designated grappling hook launcher Soldier rapidly removes his Blank
Firing Adaptor (BFA) and fires the grapnel either 100 meters, or 80 meters or
20 meters depending on which type blank cartridge used. The system can be used
in a hand toss mode and could easily fit inside a breech
kit with other implements or simply fit inside a BDU
trouser pocket.
In a combat situation, ball rounds (not
tracer or armor piercing types) could be used for a long 100 meter range
placement.
This hopefully will mean that
experience/success with rifle launched grapnels for breeching will result in
new interest in rifle launched GRENADES for destroying/combat.
Better Urban Combat Simulation using
“paint-ball” technologies
The old adage, “You fight as you train”
is a warning to the wise that we have to be as realistic as possible or else
pay for it when the bullets are for real. We are unfortunately not doing this
due to the limitations on the amount of destructiveness we can apply to
training structures and our people. The key weakness has been that we cannot
use live ammunition, but this has been recently solved by using less powerful
ammunition with non-lethal plastic bullets filled with paintball type colors
like SIMUNITION. The realism now matches the firepower effects of real bullets
and our tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) can develop in more realistic
ways at least for the close ranges in an urban setting where SIMUNITIONs are
effective (under 100 meters).
One area where we are still weak is in
team entry into a room through a predictable door using predictable “stacking”
techniques. This may be ok for police SWAT situations but it’s a disaster
waiting to happen in urban combat where its live or die not freedom or arrest.
The solution has always been in a combat situation to enter a building or a
room at a point of our chosing where booby-traps and enemy fires are not likely
to be in place using a breach hole. Breach holes can be made by the explosive
effects of a tank main gun, autocannon fired in a continuous stream,
demolitions charges or today with an infantryman firing a breaching charge from
a safe stand-off.
The U.S. Army is proceeding with the
Rifle Launched Entry Munition (RLEM), which is a bullet-trap rifle grenade that
upon contact after launch creates a breach hole in building walls. We need to
be able to simulate it in training or else our TTP will not reflect the reality
of its existence and capabilities and we will continue to execute the
increasingly risky predictable door-entry TTP.
FM 7-8 Infantry Rifle Squad and
Platoon, Change 1
www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/7-8/ch6.htm
LREM
How to simulate the RLEM?
I propose we take the currently
type-classified U.S. Army Launched Grappling Hook (LGH) and remove or cover its
snag wires with a soft plastic cap holding paintball pellets. Upon launch using
a full-power blank, the RLEM simulator flies towards the wall and upon impact
splatters paint ball pellets marking where the breach hole is. The team then
gets to proceed through the nearest door to that spot via referee
(Observer/Controller: O/C) and "enter" the building from that
unexpected point on. Obviously if holes are cut-out of MOUT buildings and
covered with plywood the plywood could be removed to simulate a breach hole
being built.
What we need is get the LGH maker (SAA
Intnl), the RLEM maker (Rafael, Israeli company) and Tippman (Paintballs) to
join together to make the re-usable RLEM simulator for the U.S. Army to mass
produce it and make it available for all Army units to better train as we need
to fight.
Other Paint-Ball technologies available
There are many paint-ball grenades,
grenade launchers, claymore mines, mortar launchers in use to better ceate the
indirect fire and grenade effects that MILES-type laser “tag” systems cannot
relicate. The U.S. Army should as soon as possible develop paintball launching
adaptors to interface with its existing M120 120mm mortars and M203 40mm
grenade launchers to increase training realism to compliment the urban combat
advances made possible by SIMUNITIONs. It may be a pyrotechnic or a compressed
air propelling system. The paintball grenades and claymore mines are good-to-go
as-is and just need to be widely purchased for Army MOUT training.
When Soldiers realize the realism that
paintball type technology offers to Army urban and close combat training, being
a Soldier will become “fun” again while the deadly need for high levels of
proficiency will not be lost on them. Getting hit by a SIMUNITION round hurts
and serves as a reminder of what a real bullet could do and is a catlyst to
quicken the training efforts of everyone.
Paintball Experts (Claymores, mortars,
Grenade launcher paint balls)
http://www.tippmannexplosives.com/
howitzer.htm
mortars.htm
mines.htm
grenades.htm
grenade_launchers.htm
Tippmann Ordnance Co.
1000 S. Lincoln, Unit T
Loveland, CO 80537
Toll Free 1-888-315-5270
RLEM Details
www.aerotechnews.com/starc/1999/080399/Israel_Munitions_USArmy.html
www.rafael.co.il/press1098.html
LGH details
www2.saa-intl.com/saa-intl/Lgh.htm
www.geocities.com/equipmentshop/breechkit.htm
(scroll down)
"SILVER BULLET" SOLUTION?
ADAPTOR TO MAKE HAND GRENADES RIFLE GRENADES?
During the Korean war, we had a Mk2A2
adaptor for baseball shaped grenades and an adaptor for soda-can shaped
grenades which could make HAND grenades into rifle grenades.
Bert Kortegaard, Korean war combat
veteran and webmaster writes:
"The spoon flew off in the air,
just the way it did when thrown.
Check my page at:
http://rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/mk2rifle.htm
You can see how the spoon fits in the
restrainer. You mount the grenade to the converter, which keeps the spoon down.
When you may definitely want to launch ... about the same ready status as Lock
and Load, you FIRST make sure you have a grenade cartridge in the rifle, SECOND
mount the launcer/adapter, THIRD pull the pin (you had to hold the launcher
with one hand while pulling the pin, because of the sometimes excessive
pull-force required, so as not to screw anything up. At that point, the
launcher-grenade is about as safe as the ordinary safetied grenade.
1st, the arming-clip that you insert
the safety spoon into is kept on the adapter by the bent metal tab. When you
fire it, inertia is enough for the arming clip to straighten out the bent piece
and this lets the adapter/grenade accelerate out of the clip, and frees the
spoon, arming the grenade.
2nd, the grenade stays attached to the
adapter throughout the flight path, to the bitter end".
If we are so cheap that we can't create
a family of rifle/hand stick grenades, why not then update the grenade adaptor
idea using a bullet trap? A bullet trap can be launched by EITHER live rounds
OR powerful blanks...
Such an adaptor could propel the
current M67 fragmentation hand grenade to a much
safer distance than what the arm can throw. The M67 is far more powerful and
effective with its 15m kill radius than the puny M203 40mm grenade's 5m radius.
The adaptor would enable the entire
family of U.S. hand grenades to become RIFLE grenades---consider:
MK3A2 concussion
offensive hand grenade
ABC-M7A2/3 CS Hand
Grenade
AN-M8 HC White
Smoke grenade
AN-M14 TH3
incendiary hand grenade
M15 White Phosphorous
grenade
M18 Colored Smoke
grenade
ABC-M25A2 riot
control hand grenade
M61 FRAGMENTATION
HAND GRENADE
M67 FRAGMENTATION
HAND GRENADE
M69 practice hand
grenade
XM84 Stun Grenade
KEEP THE M203 GL and------get
Rifle/Hand Grenades
Having said all of this, we are not
advocating the elimination of the M203 for its precision-fire capabilities, its
ability to fire the multi-buckshot round like a shotgun (good luck getting that
round) and a more subtle reason--its a permanent weapon not a round of
ammunition like rifle/hand grenades. Sadly, but there is the possibility that
as a round of ammunition it will get ignored like the M202, AT4 and M72 LAWs
do. At least with the M203 GL its sort of like a "finger in the eye",
reminding you that you have to order some ammunition for it and hopefully
train/employ it. So let's keep all the investments we have made and "plus
up" the rest of the squad with rifle hand/grenades.
AIRBORNE!
FEEDBACK!
#1 A noted U.S. Army
tactician/historian writes in:
"Did you know that we had rifle
grenades in WW I? It was the French VB (initials of the inventors). The rifle
had a can-shaped attachment added to the end of the barrel and the grenade was
inserted into the can. The grenade had a hole through the center of it, with a
small firing pin inside the side of the hole and attached to the fuze. To
launch the grenade, you fired a standard rifle bullet. As the bullet passed
through the center hole of the grenade, it struck the firing pin and started
the time fuze (2-4 seconds). The muzzle blast following the bullet acted
against the base of the grenade and launched it about 200 meters.
Problem, however. French used 8mm
bullets. We used 7.62mm (.30-06). The smaller bullet had a tendency to deform
and deflect as it passed through the grenade, causing erratic problems. We
recognized the problem and were fixing it when the war ended. Also, the can
attachment blocked the rifle's sights, so accurate rifle fire was impractical
until it was removed.
Do you know why the WW II 12-man
Infantry squad retained one M1903 bolt action rifle along with the ten M1
Garands and one BAR? No, it was not a "sniper" weapon. For that there
was an M1903A4(with scope). The M1903 was needed as a squad rifle grenade
launcher (not the VB, but the conventional rifle grenade with blank cartridge
as we know it today). The M1 Garand did not have its grenade launcher
developed until later in the war, at which point the M1903 was no longer
needed."
#2 A weapons analyst writes:
"Good story, but do not draw too
many conclusions from it. As described in this very interesting and innovative
example, the rifle grenades are being used to mark targets. They are not being
employed in lieu of mortars (or any other indirect fire support). As the
storyteller himself explains, his initial observation was mistaken and the
facts were presented later.
One obvious "minor tweak"
would be a manual spindle valve (like a wingnut) on the M14. I don't know if
you are familiar with the M14, but the spindle valve is essentially a slotted
screw head and you need a screw driver (the multipurpose wrench of the rifle
cleaning kit) to turn it. A manual lever would simplify the switch between
bullet firing and grenade launch.
The jury is still out on the relative
merit between M203 compared to rifle grenade. Each has pros and cons. The 40mm
grenades are smaller and lighter, seem to be more accurate, and have a low
firing signature. Low felt recoil is good for Soldier all around. Instant
availability of M16 bullets is a plus. On the other hand, rifle grenades could
carry larger warhead and could have greater range, but the heavier recoil might
tear up the weapon over time, and the individual grenades are rather bulky and
heavy. There are performance trade offs between using blank cartridges and
"bullet trap" grenades. Compared to something like a LAW or AT4, the
rifle grenade has a shorter direct fire range, but much lower signature. The
grenade is also much smaller and lighter.
As I see it, the real issue is
sustained dedicated fire support versus individual Soldier capability. If you
want Grenadiers to support the riflemen with sustained, accurate fire as they
close with the enemy, then the M203 is probably the better solution. If you
want to give lots of troops an individual capability to deal with special
situations (e.g., close-in antitank), then the various rifle grenades are
better.
[If you want longer range antitank
capability, then recoilless rifles and rocket launchers are needed. If you want
sustained indirect fire support,(HE or smoke), then mortars are needed.]
So, once again, all of the above are
useful so long as they are employed within their tactical and technical
capabilities. It's not a question of, 'which is better?' The question is,
"what do you wish to accomplish?"
#3 Military historian/tactician writes:
"I agree with the Feedback #2's
comments, for the most part. I would never want to see the grenade launcher
removed from the squad. It is very accurate in the hands of a trained
grenadier. I know a man who can hit tank size targets on the front slope ten
out of ten at one hundred meters (yes I'm bragging, but it's also true).
However, the problem lies with his final question. 'What do you wish to
accomplish?'. If you don't have rifle grenades in your inventory, that are
accessible to the troops, then your ability to use them is a mute point. You are
forced to do without them even if you do need them. I know you are tired of
hearing this but, to have it and not need it is better than to need it and
not have it. As of now we don't have it.
I have seen a demonstration at Graf,
put on by SF, in which they had two 60mm mortars firing WP and HE at tank
targets. It was quite a show. They probably fired thirty rounds in two minutes
and they were mixing in HE rounds. After watching that I figured it would be
better to be shelled with HE than WP. If they were firing smoke from a 203 it
wouldn't be the same. The 203 smoke rounds that we had were not very good at
obscuring anything and would certainly not worry anyone to much. On the other
hand a WP rifle grenade would certainly cause you to ponder your next course of
action more carefully if you were on the receiving end.
One thing he is dead on about is the
ruggedness of the M16 versus the AK family of weapons. It's something to think
about. I doubt the M16 could stand up to a lot of rifle grenade firing. [Editor:
heavier barrel M16A2s, M4 carbines, not a problem]
If you notice the people who use rifle
grenades the most use the AK or a variant like the Galil. I have never liked
the Galil because of it's weight, but it's probably no coincidence that the two
armies that use rifle grenades exclusively are the the IDF (Galil, a variant of
the AK) and the SADF (R-4 variant of the Galil a variant of the AK). Both of
these armies have rejected the 40mm grenade launcher for there Infantry
although the Israelis do use the 203 for special troops and riot duty. They
both have a lot of experience with Infantry combat and should not be ignored.
If we look at this from a tactical
point of view Feedback #2's arguments get a little shaky. When I think of the
rifle grenade, I see two very important uses. Making contact and breaking
contact. He misses the point of the marking targets. Those marines were not
just marking targets they were obscuring their own movements at the same time
and creating some fear in the hearts of the NVA. The 203 would not scare anyone
and would more than likely not obscure all that well.
In the book, Sgt. Major the author
points out that he trained all his men how to use rifle grenades and they saved
their asses many times by allowing them to break contact. The advantage of
rifle grenades are all at the squad level. Calling in mortars when you make
contact takes time. At the squad level, being under fire is not a leisurely CP
exercise in deciding which weapons system to employ. It's better to do something
quick than weight around for mortar rounds or Arty to start falling. Calling in
fire is the job of the Plt. Leader or Plt. Sgt. I know we spend a lot of time
teaching Calls for Fire, but a squad leader usually is involved in the fire
fight and shouldn't be bothered with anything other than trying to gain fire
superiority. Rifle Grenades would help you do this at the squad level. Missiles
like the AT-4 and LAW are good direct fire weapons but they are bulky and heavy
and are impossible to drop in dead ground and although we should have a bunker
busting round they both fire HEAT. The rifle grenade can do direct fire, cover
dead ground, fire obscuration and Anti tank. That's versatility at very little
cost and eliminates a squad leader trying to employ weapons systems that are
not organic to the squad and therefore not under his direct control.
My last point is cost. We could take
the money from one day of lobbying for the F-22 Rupture and by enough rifle
grenades to supply the Army for years of Infantry Combat. That's not the kind
of thing the Army traditionally does but it is smart and there's nothing wrong
with that.
#4 A U.S. military weapons expert
writes:
"Thanks for your note. You put a
lot of work into those webpages. Congratulations. I'll be using them.
Couple of thoughts:
1. In Vietnam, I was in the Delta. I
usually carried an M-79 with a shotgun round in the open chamber. It
wasn't a rifle, but for the dense brush, it was nice. The Swedish K was another
nice brush gun. When you broke into the open, the M79 was remarkably accurate.
I could never get as good with the M203. The VC had the RPG-2 and the AK--which
were a tough combination to beat. The 40mm was no match for the RPG.
2. The problem with the M1 and M14
rifle grenades was that the firer needed a special round to fire it. When
bullets are flying close by, it was too easy to screw up. Another common
problem with the cage-type stick grenades was that folks would forget to arm
the grenade before firing. The rifle-trap grenade solved both these problems
but probably came on the scene after we had bought into the 40mm concept.
3. A real whizz-bang weapon for the
urban fight (or any close fight) is the Russian RPO flame thrower. It can reach
out a kilometer away with a flame round, smoke round or a thermobaric
(fuel-air) round. We are still horsing around with the four-shot projecter
[M202] that nevers gets out of the arms room and no one knows how to use. And
we still have some back-pack flame throwers somewhere in the inventory. Smoke
and flame are big in the urban fight and fuel-air makes a tremendous bunker
buster. I feel that flame warfare is an area that we aren't really thinking too
hard about--probably due to the bad press that napalm received.
4. Some of the recent Soviet/Russian
handgrenades are impressive. They have done some great stuff with fragmentation
patterns and capabilities".
#5 A Korean war combat veteran writes:
"Times change, and so does weapon
effectiveness. In general, we preferred regular Mark Deuce and Mark 14 hand
grenades, with heavier duty stuff from the 60mm mortars. Since most action in
Korea was at night, we didn't tip our positions or make mistakes like
forgetting something critical (like putting in the grenade cartridge - these
things happen when a flowing-water of guys are coming at you in the dark), or
having to change the adapter (from the M1). Remember, T-34 armor was
invulnerable to the anti-tank rifle shaped charge grenades. Usually, we'd just
shower grenades down, 30 yards or more, if they attacked us, and got to within
10 yards or so if we were going after them.
Night patrols, when 'stuff hit the fan'
all grenade action was at close quarters. The rifle grenade was useful for
50-100 yard tries at crew served weapons in movement situations, or so I heard.
I wrote a short story (on-line) where I
use the carbine mounted illum grenade:
http://rt66.com/~korteng/souvenir.htm
but in a real situation we would have
more men, and would have called in illum from our 60s (by scr-300 or
wire)"
#6 Korean war combat veteran, Bert Kortegaard writes:
"Feel free to copy any photos or
information on my KW site, for use in your work. Please do refer to the URLs
themselves, and feel free to use my name where you like. I do understand what
you are saying, and you are certainly doing important work at correcting an
all-too-familiar trend.
For better information than I can
provide, you might consider contacting Lt. Joe Owen (WIA, med ret) who was the
1st MarDiv B-1-7 60mm platoon leader at Seoul and in Chosin. He wrote a book
"Colder Than Hell", which was published by the Naval Institute Press,
Annapolis, and they should be able to put you in contact with him. He would
have very clear ideas and examples on all comparison aspects of modern rifle
grenade technology as needed in infantry combat. Also, he should be able to put
you in contact with other officers who would have first hand knowledge on your
questions.
Good Luck, Bert"
http://rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/
#7 a noted weapons futurist writes:
"I was looking over Mike's
riflehandgrenade page again, hit a link and found I had a new game on my
machine (so I had to try it out..)
Interesting -no save mode and you can't
take much damage -first few times I got royally creamed! Here's what I've
learnt:- You get shot alot less if you crawl and crouch (goooo figure!!!) Best
tactic is to take to the high ground and take the bad guys from the flank or
behind (that's either really obvious or profound!) Tracers help.
Use the scope to scan the land, and
take out foes at a distance if you can. Even with the M203 it would be useful
to have a grenade you can just toss around a corner (Pop-top 40mms?)
The following may just be game quirks
Distance -a building just a few inches across may only be 72m away. Figures
that are just specks are only 200m, so well withing killing range. Even under
100m you need lots of holdover for the M203. 40mm grenades are not area weapons
-unless you are putting them in a confined space you need to be jolly accurate.
The M203 in the game loads
automatically, so you can keep it on target and walk your shots. This is
probably not as easy with a real M203, but it would be possible with the
6-12shot revolver grenade launchers I've been talking about, or Larry's double
barreled M79
...be warned, my machine is playing up
-don't think it is the game, but be careful."
OUR REPLY: Delta Force is such a good
simulation, the U.S. Army Dismounted Battle Lab uses it as a base for its
"Virtual Soldier" system at Fort Benning, Georgia where a Soldier is
rigged to sensors and interacts with the game holding an actual weapon etc. #8
An aviation expert writes in:
"Dear Sirs: I had just read
an article in http://www.geocities.com/equipmentshop/riflehandgrenades.htm
Stating that a M136 AT4 rocket was fired at Noriega's Learjet. DO you relize
that this Learjet was not Noriega's aircraft. He never owned a Learjet. This
jet was leased to the Panama Government and Noriega did fly in this aircraft
but had no ownership. Distroying this aircraft was a very costly mistake by our
government. Let's explain the whole truth. The real reason that I am writing to
is if you would supply me with the photos of the aircraft after it was
distroyed. I did see this aircraft as it was containered back to Fort
Lauderdale, but the aircraft was already dismantled. I now teach maintenance on
Learjets. Please help if you can. Thank you for your assistance."
Our reply:
Sir,
all you had to do was go to www.google.com and type in the words,
"noriega", "learjet" and "hole", VOILA! your
picture you requested!
Thanks for sharing the info on our boo
boo!
Airborne!
Mike Sparks
Click here: Patilla Field, Panama
??-??-1989
www.specwarnet.com/miscinfo/patilla.htm
REFERENCES
U.S. Army Hand grenades
in Korean war
U.S. Army Rifle Grenades
in Korea
CHICOM and North Korean
grenades
Want Pvt Murphy in your pocket?
Return
to U.S. Army Airborne Equipment Shop inside frame