<![CDATA[
Path:
spln!rex!extra.newsguy.com!lotsanews.com!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!nntp.abs.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!gemini.tycho.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
Approved:
sci-military-moderated@retro.com
Return-Path: news@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net
Delivery-Date: Sun Jan 06 06:16:00 2002
Delivery-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 06:16:00 -0800
for <sci-military-moderated@retro.com>; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 06:15:59 -0800 (PST)
for <sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org>;
Sun, 6 Jan 2002 08:58:48 -0500 (EST)
for <sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org>;
Sun, 6 Jan 2002 05:58:32 -0800 (PST)
Sun, 6 Jan 2002 05:58:37 -0800 (PST)
To: sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
Subject: Re: Grenade Launcher Re: M-240B/G in Afghanistan?
From: Bob Keeter <rkeeter@earthlink.net>
Newsgroups: sci.military.moderated
Message-ID: <B85DC319.333D%rkeeter@earthlink.net>
References:
<20011227230220.18480.00001932@mb-fw.aol.com>
<20011228141140.03371.00001933@mb-cg.news.cs.com>
<KunX7.88336$Wd.27718868@news1.rdc1.az.home.com>
<ihcs2usqhp2s6s3e20ige775f3uf0b5vjv@4ax.com> <3C3043C4.9DC8A5BA@yahoo.com>
<fo9e3ukt7qf5p4em3mqtrds850n1vfvmue@4ax.com>
<B85D37EE.3310%rkeeter@earthlink.net> <a18pmj$odn$1@bob.news.rcn.net>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 13:58:36 GMT
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.214.83.79
X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net
X-NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 05:58:36 PST
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
Content-Length: 1673
Lines: 41
NNTP-Posting-Host: b7658654.newsreader.tycho.net
X-Trace: 1010340862 gemini.tycho.net 79557 205.179.181.194
X-Complaints-To: abuse@tycho.net
Xref: spln sci.military.moderated:41635
in article a18pmj$odn$1@bob.news.rcn.net, Tom Schoene at
taschoene@starpower.invalid wrote on 1/6/02 2:04 AM:
>
> Bob Keeter <rkeeter@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:B85D37EE.3310%rkeeter@earthlink.net...
>> in article fo9e3ukt7qf5p4em3mqtrds850n1vfvmue@4ax.com, Christoph
>> Lichtenberger at christoph.lichtenberger@gmx.net wrote on 1/5/02 12:55 PM:
>>
>
>>> Why not produce grenades in 18.5mm ?
>>>
>>
>> Even a 40mm grenade is a fairly modest affair as grenades go. Drop the
>> caliber to 18.5mm and you reduce its effectiveness to about 1/4 of the
> 40mm
>> item.
>
> The US is planning to adopt a 20mm air-bursting munition for the OICW. They
> don't call it a grenade, but it effectively is one. Effecttiveness is
> debateable, though.
>
Well a 20mm PGU round is an explosive contact-fuzed round, but NOBODY would
confuse it for a grenade, OR as a round that depends solely on its
fragmentation effects for lethality! The OICW's 20mm is going to have to use
a lot of its volume for that fancy fuze and I daresay that it will not have
the muzzle velocity of a good old M-61 20mm Vulcan!
I think that on one level I like the 20mm "grenade" round for the OICW, but
on another its starting to sound extremely complicated (technologically,
with the VT fuzing and all) and very under-powered. Somewhere along the way
subtle technological sophistication and simple brute force lethality have to
balance. Remember the controversy over the .45 long Colt, the .38 Long, and
the .45 ACP sidearms? Or the 9mm vs the .45 (now masquerading as a 10mm!)?
Could be that the 20mm grenade ends up taking the same path to the dustheap
as the 38 long!
Regards
bk
]]>