Why was the m79 ever used...

it looks like a boot with a danger tube.

>danger tube

I'm stealing this.

i want one so bad

that stock is pure SEX

Fuck yeah Thumper!

Have heard stories of soldiers in Vietnam practicing to the point they could put one in an oil drum tens of yards out

Attached: 1542680037364.jpg (2000x1414, 2.1M)

That doesnt sound impressive but I'm going to assume you meant firing at a near vertical angle.

How does it compare to the HK69? Very few stand-alone grenade launchers are aesthetic as the HK69.

Rifle Grenades don’t have less range and have a greater charge weight. Also, they haven’t been modernized and could be better.

Kek, that made me giggle

8 fucking posts before someone posts this, why is Jow Forums so uncultured

I want to get one of these so badly, but they're expensive, tougher to find, and the paperwork makes it seem like it's not worth it.

>No, because rifle grenades are silly and the fact that only the French kept using them should tell you something.
Hurrhurr le surrendeur baguette ouioui honhon

And the isreali, and the japanese, and the hajis, and the serbs, and the russians, and the US army (M100), and South Africa, and various police forces in and out the country...

Also 40mm sucks ass for AT grenades.

-A rifle grenade will temporarily disable the normal use of the rifle
-A dedicated grenade launcher can be fired from the shoulder without undue discomfort, something not normally possible with a rifle grenade
-A soldier armed with a dedicated grenade launcher can carry 2 to 3 times more grenade ammo than rifle grenades
-A dedicated grenade launcher is more accurate than a rifle grenade
-With a dedicated grenade launcher there is zero risk of the soldier accidentally chambering a live round instead of a blank during the stress of combat

Are you an idiot?

Heard the top users practiced by putting a 40mm through a moving M113's hatch.

Just think about it for like 5 seconds. Getting a rifle grenade into use takes far far longer than a dedicated grenade launcher.
For a rifle grenade:
Take out mag, stow it somewhere, make sure the chamber is empty, chamber a special blank round you have to dig out of a pocket, get your rifle grenade, jam it on the front of the rifle, then possibly have to do some weird shit like turn it upside down and out it against the ground so the recoil doesn't break something depending on the how that weapon does rifle grenades. Shit takes FOREVER.
M79: sling rifle, grab m79, pop open breach, load grenade, ready to fire.
It's just simpler and easier.

Not to mention that many rifle grenade launchers required making adjustments to some kind of mechanism on the launcher to affect range, which takes even more time. The M79 (and similar) has ranging built into the sight.

More that post-WW1 France was mega-cucked and never recovered from their asshurt, especially after WW2.

My grandfather was an engineer in Vietnam, part of a jungle clearing crew to make runways for emergency plane landings. He was issued an Ithica 37 riot gun and an M79. So having a dedicated launcher instead of rifle grenades let people who didnt have rifles also have a grenade launcher, which frees up more rifles for the front lines.

Ok and? Using a grenade launcher disables your ability to use the rifle.
Why would there be a difference? And there are better butt stocks that available for rifles and are easily swapped.
Again, rifle grenades haven’t been modernized and their weight can be drastically reduced. Grenade launchers have weight and require you to switch to them, rifle grenades don’t.
Are they? Only if the grenade launcher is rifled, rifle grenades have fin stabilization, same with dart ap rounds for tanks and those are very accurate. Actually, almost all of the worlds tanks have a smooth bore.
Im talking about rifle grenades that use love rounds.

Tbqh here Rifle grenades aren't really cumbersome.
Compare it to RPG-7 rocket it's 2 times lighter.

>Using a grenade launcher disables your ability to use the rifle.
I can grab my M79 and grab a slung rifle a lot faster than I can detach a grenade-firing adapter and reinsert a mag with live ammo.

>>And there are better butt stocks that available for rifles and are easily swapped.
Are you suggesting that a solider should swap his STOCK in the field if he has to switch between firing rifle grenades and shooting his rifle?

>>Again, rifle grenades haven’t been modernized and their weight can be drastically reduced
You're right that rifle grenades can be improved in that regard, yet that's not enough to offset the other disadvantages.

>> Grenade launchers have weight and require you to switch to them, rifle grenades don’t.
Switching weapons is much faster than switching an adapter and blanks/ammo on a rifle.

>>Are they?
Yes. Rifling has little to do with it. The reason is that a grenade launcher has a much longer barrel to travel down, rather than the very short spigot or cup used for rifle grenades.

>>tank barrels
why are you talking about tank barrels?

because the need for additional at grenades besides the M79 was critical in vietnam

>AT rifle grenades
>at a time when anything less than a tandem charge warhead may as well be your pissbottle
>important
Pick two, frog.

>tfw no thump gun

think of the possibilities for reloading...

Attached: 6aqtmh111x321.jpg (1500x2000, 317K)

I know a guy who used it in vietnam upon promotion to Sgt. He said that the grenades each weighed 1 pound. He carried 50 rounds at a time on his hips, 25 on each side. They were useful because He had an albino from detroit in his group who could see way better in the dark. He would pick out movement 50 yards or so ahead, he'd tell the grenadier where the movement was, and then the grenade was shot about there. It was for clearing an area at night when you didn't have an actual target to shoot at and were just shooting at a general location to get a guy hiding.

Beyond that, I'm not sure.

No, dumbass, all those countries CURRENTLY use rifle grenades.

there are modern rifle grenades that can take regular rounds, it's not like it's still 1942.

Us should have gone with this instead.

Attached: china lake grenade launcher.jpg (1200x748, 369K)

>Clan Nova Cat patches
Neat. Don't see a ton of Battletech stuff on Jow Forums.

>I can grab my M79 and grab a slung rifle a lot faster than I can detach a grenade-firing adapter and reinsert a mag with live ammo.
>he doesn't know about bullet-trap grenades

Look at him and laugh.
Considering that gross blunder, I think we can also ignore the rest of your arguments as unvetted ramblings. I doubt you ever studied ballistics, squad composition, or anything even remotely serious relative to rifle grenades or UGLs.

>attacking the authority of user’s argument instead of the substance of it
cmon user you’re better than this

S E E T H I N G

Attached: 1550604557984.gif (600x600, 3.47M)

you can carry more 40mm rounds than rifle grenades, and also the m79 was really accurate compared to the 203s that replaced them

this but unironically

I thought they already were.

Also, I found a site that was selling some of these. Not going to try and buy one, but thought they looked nice.

bullet trap grenades only solve one of those other problems, user.

the fundamental problem that rifle grenades have is the very short length of barrel/cup/spigot. Because the have such a short travel distance to accellerate they require a very high force, which means very high recoil. That's why they're so hard on guns. OP asked why not shoot rifle grenades on a M16. What do you thil would happen to an M16's pencil barrel and gas system when you fire one?

A grenade launcher like the M79 has a longer barrel. that means it can use a lower pressure cartridge because it has a longer distance to accelerate along. That's what makes the grenade launcher so much easier to shoulder than a rifle grenade (which were usually fired from the ground, or with the butt rested against an object, not from the shoulder).

Well until he posts some sources beyond "cause I say so", ad hominem is fair play.

China lake+PAP= China beach

but you didnt post any sources either
and you ignored the rest of his post because he happened to be talking about rifle grenades that require a blank as opposed to a bullet trap

he posted things that were logical and make sense
you're just slinging insults

B8

You could conceivably make a rifle grenade that has a small amount of rocket propellant in it that is activated by the bullet being trapped in it.

Umm Garand rifle grenades fit an M16. They're all 22mm I.D. Basically every modern (NATO) small arm will launch rifle grenades

M203 bro...

“Found a site that was making these” bullshit mate these are some real sneaky snake SOG shit, very few were made in the first place

Back in my day we called that a joke. Now get off my lawn.

At that point just dedicate to the bolter/gyrojet meme

He means cumbersome as in time-consuming to use, not physically unwieldy cumbersome.

Had to guess that. Sounded too good to be true, but thought if it was real, that'd be cool too. I'll take an M-79 over a China Lake anyway.

>Mk 18 Mod 0

The only reason. There was going to be a combination gun on the infantry side but M79 was a stopgap to use 40x46mm

I thought the M79 kicked ass. I was in when it was phased out and thought the switch to the M203 was progress that was questionable. The M79 was very light, very fast firing, and easy to learn how to use. The M203 falls into the multitool category of weapons. Also, training with M203 was always secondary to rifle training and thus troops never had the accuracy of bloop gunners.

Vietnam reverse engineered captured Southern M79s and still manufactures and issues them to line units

Some rifle grenades were made for 'shoot though' with a normal round rather then a blank. This resulted in compromises that made them even more shit.

An RPG-7 will go through like, 700mm of armor. A rifle grenade will do.. nothing to a tank. An M79 won’t do anything to a tank, but how much does one low pressure HE 40mm grenade weigh vs a rifle grenade?

If it fits, it ships.

It's all about range estimation. You gotta get the range right or your gonna shoot way over or under. Other than that it's not much different than a rifle.

Can't blame them. Obviously they were on the receiving end and can judge effectiveness.

Could you potentially fire dildos out of one of these?

This but unironically

Sure, though it's way easier to find 26.5mm dildos compared to 40mm.

Damn that could be the new airsoft

just imagine...

Attached: M-32_Grenade_Launcher.jpg (2592x1944, 799K)

Obviously you have never used a rifle grenade.
It goes like this:
Take rifle grenade, stick it on the barrel, aim, fire.

Are you okay?

I read in dispatches that they had sawed off versions made by soldiers

Attached: ACE-13016-28A.jpg (640x480, 121K)

Obviously you haven't. I don't know why you're pretending you have. Most need a blank round to propel the grenade. Shooting a live round into the grenade will detonate it in your face.

my sibkin

cause claire looks hotter with a noob toob

Since this thread has all; the splodey-thing experts in it, why'd we get rid of the automatic grenade launcher?

Bloop, motherfucker!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifle_grenade

skip to the part were it says "bullet-trap" you dumb fuck

We didn't? Mk19s are still ubiquitous af and those marine revolver things are still in inventory, its just that its not the surge anymore so nobody wants to carry that shit around when your chance of contact is low; same mentality behind substituting SAWs with M27s.

Grandfather was a grenadier for a bit, used to talk about the rate of fire on the m79 if you were good with it. And if you were good those were obviously aimed shots as well. could really lay the hate better than someone using a 203

Between the use of a spigot launcher, a metal block or tube inside to completely capture the momentum of the bullet, and a simple, short lived rocket motor, I don't see why it wouldn't work to both reduce the pressure in the barrel to maintain the rifle and produce acceptable launch characteristics

>Semiauto
>self cocking
Pick any two!

Way too heavy vs. the benefit. Besides, by that point underslung GLs were coming into their own and that really was the better solution.

Trips of truth