M25 GL question for the peanut gallery
 

I know the US Army is essentially getting rid of their 40mm M203's in favor of the 25mm M25. And that the USMC has decided they weren't impressed and other then a few used by Force Recon and occasionally by SOC units have stuck to the M203 and the M32. And are looking into the Israeli air-burst system for the M203 (which is in it's infancy stages in development).

Has anyone come across ANY indication the USMC is actually using any M25's (outside the exceptions mentioned above)?

Re: M25 GL question for the peanut gallery
 

I know I'm just a "Bubblehead" and they say we're in the upper <10% of the USN because the "Boats" have things that go roundy roundy and up and downy (So I slipped through the cracks!) :p ...anyway as I'm very tired I hope this answers your question on pg.3 of this ref bottom.
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2012armamen...arlesClark.pdf

Have a Great Weekend!

Regards,
Pat

Re: M25 GL question for the peanut gallery
 

Try this thread on tanknet: http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=36470

Covering their bases or even more stuff to lug around?.

(UK tried a rifle grenade - Rifle Grenade General Service or RGGS, a bullet trap model, however it was fairly soon ditched for the 40mm UGL as soon as that became available.)

Andy

Re: M25 GL question for the peanut gallery
 

Yeah, the USMC dumped their rifle grenades when the M79 came out in 1962.

I guess the "big debate" is many feel the 25mm doesn't pack enough punch, and apparently now someone is questioning if the 40mm has a big enough bang.

:re:

Re: M25 GL question for the peanut gallery
 

I never once saw, or even heard of any rifle-grenades in the USMC the whole time I was in.

Tho knowing the Corps they probably have a stockpile of Lewis guns and Springfield M1863 rifled muskets someplace "just in case".

Re: M25 GL question for the peanut gallery
 

I handled an old ENERGA drill round back in my TA unit in the 70s. It weighed a ton.

The old lag who had brought it out when someone had asked about what the loop on your left (?) ammo pouch was for explained that it was for the adaptor for the SLR to fire the beastie. You had to fiddle with that onto the end of the weapon and then load special blanks, also while remembering to set your gas regulator to a special setting (or bad things happened).

The grenade would then break your arm with its recoil if you did not hold the rifle right, and if the enemy allowed you another shot after the inevitable miss (fumble grenade out of pouch and onto adaptor, fish out individual ballistite cartridge and insert in a weapon not designed for single feeding while Mr T-62 is 25 yards away and is very ticked off) then it would disassemble your rifle into its constituent parts.

Rifle grenades were not good for the health of rifles, apparently. In WW1 and 2, any dedicated rifle grenadier was given an old beater of a .303, reinforced with wire windings to fire the things from in addition to his real rifle that he shot regular ammo from. Rifle grenades were not popular then, and the ENERGA was apparently loathed even more given the vitriolic way the old timer went on about the thing...

As for accuracy, apparently on a par with the 2 inch mortar - so not much of that, then.

The BA used the RGGS briefly, and that was quite soon replaced with the 40mm UGL. Probably a case of deja view all over again.

Re: M25 GL question for the peanut gallery
 

That description of the Energa grenade almost makes PIAT sound like a user-friendly design...