One Marine's opinion on the M32

[General Jack Ripper]

Who cares what FutureWeapons says: Get the straight dope from a grunt in the field.

It's nice to see the M32 in action, but I was surprised at the Marine's comment at the end of the video.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ed4_1197298246

[akd]

Posted this in another thread, but might as well post it here. I think we have far too many of the things in the game right now:

Use of multishot grenade launchers to grow

By Dan Lamothe - Staff writer

Posted : Thursday Feb 5, 2009 10:41:57 EST

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va. — Prompted by its success in defending against convoy attacks and ambushes, the Corps will vastly expand the availability of a 40mm, six-shot rotational grenade launcher first fielded in Iraq on an experimental basis in 2006.

For the first time, the launchers will be fielded “across the board,” said Patrick Cantwell, a former captain who now works as the Corps’ small arms capability integration officer. The weapons will be assigned to headquarters units and distributed upon the request of individual unit commanders, going to everyone from military police to infantry and logistics units.

“We moved very quickly ... and got those initial ones out there and have been very happy with it based on the operational usage,” Cantwell said. “We have basically expanded the role of that system, and we’re looking to make it a permanent part of the Marine Corps inventory.”

The Corps plans to purchase 2,118 multishot grenade launchers, Cantwell said, about 10 times the number currently fielded. No requests for proposals have been issued yet, and the quantity of launchers to be ordered could change before the RFP hits the streets, based on cost and how long the weapon is expected to last, Cantwell said.

Marine Corps Systems Command first purchased about 210 M32 multishot grenade launchers from Tucson, Ariz.-based Milkor USA after commanders in the field sought them through a universal urgent needs statement, said Capt. Geraldine Carey, a SysCom spokeswoman. The cost of the launchers purchased was not available.

The project was called for in 2004, after Marine gunners decided at a symposium that the Corps needed an alternative with more punch than the M203 grenade launcher, a single-shot auxiliary weapon to the M16 rifle that gives small units the ability to provide their own indirect fire support.

Milkor is working under the assumption that the Corps may eventually expand the fielding of the M32 until there is at least one in every infantry squad, said Richard Solberg Jr., a company spokesman. It plans to offer the Corps not only more M32s, but its new Mark 14, a multishot grenade launcher that performs “identically” in testing.

U.S. Special Operations Command began fielding 300 Mark 14 launchers in January, Solberg said.

“This next go-around, the Marines are going to have that option,” Solberg said of the Mark 14. “We obviously want to get lighter, faster and quicker for the Marines.”

Brazilian, Italian and South African militaries have carried multishot grenade launchers for years, but the M32 offered a new forward grip and scope, which was mounted to the top rail and eliminated the old leaf sights that appeared on the M203. The scope allowed a Marine to follow the grenade to the target and immediately adjust and follow up with additional fire.

The Corps must hold an open competition for the weapon’s contract, so the new grenade launcher may not be the same brand, officials stressed. The specifications for the new launcher include:

• Semiautomatic fire.

• Revolving action, with a 5.5-inch chamber.

• The ability to fire rounds at least 150 meters accurately.

• Weight of no more than 16 pounds when unloaded.

• A 32-inch stock, collapsible to 28 inches.

The Milkor M32 weighs 14.2 pounds unloaded and 18.2 pounds with ammunition, company officials said. Its specs meet all of the Corps’ other requirements for the next-generation launcher.

The Mark 14 model also meets the specs, but it varies from the M32 because it offers a shorter barrel (8 inches instead of 12), a stronger stock and a grip styled after the M16 rifle, designed to save the services money in replacement parts.

Despite its shorter barrel, the Mark 14 weighs the same as the M32 because its receiver, stock and other parts of the weapon were beefed up. The company made the modifications in anticipation of fielding a future “medium velocity” round sought by SOCom, which could travel between 600 and 1,000 meters — 400 meters farther than the M32’s rounds, Solberg said.

The Corps also is training Marines to fire a variety of nonlethal ammunition with the M32, according to a March 2008 letter sent to Milkor from an instructor at the Interservice Nonlethal Individual Weapons Instructor Course at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo. The ammunition includes sponge grenades, foam batons, and rubber balls, the letter said.

The Corps will not require units to take the multishot launcher on missions, because of its weight and the size of its rounds, and will continue to field the M203, Cantwell said. Instead, the multishot launcher will serve as an “additive” weapon, mainly in convoy, urban or defensive situations.

“We didn’t want to give it to everybody and say, ‘You have to take it,’ so what we’ve done is give them the flexibility,” Cantwell said. “Convoys are a big [situation] where ... it performs very well, and just about every Marine unit out there is doing convoys.”

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news...chers_020209w/

It's not really said explicitly in the article, but I kinda get the impression the m-32 is only appreciated in certain circumstances. Of course, if they actually expected a man to haul that thing around on foot along with a carbine all the time, I would imagine it wouldn't always be popular.

I'd really like to see an option for m-203s only, as this is standard in the game's time frame. For a more realistic "what if?", it might be better to have it as an item that can be acquired from a Marine vehicle.

[General Jack Ripper]

Posted this in another thread, but might as well post it here. I think we have far too many of the things in the game right now:

I agree, I think the Marine Squad leader should have one M32, thus there should only be one M32 in a whole squad. I do appreciate the extra firepower in the game, but one thing I wondered while watching my pixel marines unload with those M32's is: "Who's carrying all of that ammo?" 40mm isn't exactly a small round, and it seems like the squad is carrying upwards of 100 40mm rounds, because they were shooting them while assaulting for a good ten minutes continuously.

Edit: That idea of having it as an 'acquire' item is really good.

[theFightingSeabee]

I wouldn't mind having one. But the game is set in 2011 (I think), so who knows what the standard will be. Either way, I don't mind having them in the game. They are extremely effective.

Still, the 203 option would be great for any number of reasons, including period specific user-made scenarios.

[akd]

I wouldn't mind having one. But the game is set in 2011 (I think), so who knows what the standard will be.

Nah, 2008. Maybe CM:SF 2 will be 2011 or 2012?

[Battlefront.com]

We debated about putting in only one M32, but decided against it since the weapon acquisition was apparently fast tracked for rapid fielding. It seems that stalled out, but that happened after we made the decision to swap out the M203s for the M32s. I'll look into the possibility of having the M203 be optional, but no promises on that.

As for the amount of ammo, it's no different than if they had M203s. Remember, there are three Fireteam Leader), which means a total of 84 rounds per Squad (28 rounds per Fireteam Leader). There are no additional rounds held by other men, so that's all they have.

Steve

[MikeyD]

From the look of the clip it seemed that was the first time that Marine had ever touched the weapon! He seemed to be doing a lot of fiddling with it trying to get the sight to the correct range. Its looked about the same skill level as if someone had given me a 5 minute talk about the M32 then push me out the door to fire the thing downrange.

[Dietrich]

I'll look into the possibility of having the M203 be optional, but no promises on that.

Meaning an M203 would be typical for a fireteam (or even squad) leader, with an M32 appearing as a supplemental bonus (for a squad leader, presumably) if equipment is set to Good or Excellent?

[Battlefront.com]

Standard Marines TO&E is for each Fireteam Leader to have a M16 with M203. The new TO&E, which CM:SF currently simulates, has each Fireteam Leader with a M4 and M32 launcher. Either way, that's 3 launchers per Squad because there are 3 Fireteams per Squad.

If I can squeak it in the M16/M203 combo would be an alternate to the M4/M32 by using the Equipment setting is lowered. But I have to think through the ramifications from the code's standpoint.

Steve

[Dietrich]

I'd rather have a TO&E which reflects reality more than theory. (But, Steve, I reckon you could point out that TO&Es in CMSF generally reflect theory at least somewhat more than reality...assuming that is the case.)

I'd be fine with squad/fireteam leaders with M16 with M203s. By way of suggestion:

Poor = M16 + M203

Fair = M16 + M203

Normal = M16 + M203

Good = M4 + M32 (squad leader)

Excellent = M4 + M32 (squad leader and all fireteam leaders)

Thus, with equipment set at Excellent, a scenario designer could simulate a Force Recon unit, which could be assumed to theoretically have better equipment allotment than a standard USMC infantry unit.

Speaking of number of 40mm launchers in a given squad, doesn't the fourth man in each fireteam also have an M203, or am I confusing that with the typical Army fireteam?

[akd]

I'd rather have a TO&E which reflects reality more than theory. (But, Steve, I reckon you could point out that TO&Es in CMSF generally reflect theory at least somewhat more than reality...assuming that is the case.)

I'd be fine with squad/fireteam leaders with M16 with M203s. By way of suggestion:

Poor = M16 + M203

Fair = M16 + M203

Normal = M16 + M203

Good = M4 + M32 (squad leader)

Excellent = M4 + M32 (squad leader and all fireteam leaders)

Thus, with equipment set at Excellent, a scenario designer could simulate a Force Recon unit, which could be assumed to theoretically have better equipment allotment than a standard USMC infantry unit.

Speaking of number of 40mm launchers in a given squad, doesn't the fourth man in each fireteam also have an M203, or am I confusing that with the typical Army fireteam?

Force Recon has a completely different structure and I believe uses M4a1s all around (and may re-equip with SCARs). FR has 6-man teams, 3 teams per platoon.

[Dietrich]

Force Recon has a completely different structure and I believe uses M4a1s all around (and may re-equip with SCARs). FR has 6-man teams, 3 teams per platoon.

So I guess the closest one could come to simulating a Force Recon platoon in CMSF would be an SBCT or HBCT scout platoon. *shrug*