M-79 and M240 "SAW"

[Raellus]

I recently saw a pic of a U.S. soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan (I can't remember which) carrying an M-79 "Blooper" GL. I haven't seen U.S. troops carrying the ol' Blooper since the mid '70s. I was under the impression that they were all phased out when the M203 came on line. I thought they were all sold (or given away) to our overseas allies (mostly in Latin America). Although I always liked the simplicity and effeciveness of the M-79, there are way more capable GLs out there, nowadays.

So, anyone know what became of the M-79s in U.S. Army service? Are they still being used by SF or something? Did I imagine the whole thing?

Also, it looks like the SEALs are replacing their M60E3s with a chopped down, lightened, tricked-out M240 that they are calling (I think) the M48 SAW. It looks totally badass. Could something like that be modded in the field under T2K circumstances?

[pmulcahy11b]

Don't know offhand about the M-79 in US military use, but it's still in wide use in many countries worldwide. (For that matter, the Iranians still use it. Maybe it's captured from Iran-supported insurgents?)

As for the machinegun, it's true -- called the Mk 48. It's based on late prototypes of the FN Minimi (which in a modified form is the M-249 SAW). FN initially intended to build the Minimi in 5.56mm NATO as well as 7.62mm NATO, but at that time found no market for the 7.62mm version.

[Raellus]

Thanks Paul. Your theory on the M-79 could well be right. If I remember correctly, it had black fixtures (stock and handgrip) instead of the traditional wood which made me think it was a new-ish itteration of the venerable M-79.

As for the Mk.48, that's a bummer. If it was based on the M240, I was thinking that a good T2K gunsmith could probably whip something similar up. Since it's based on an M249, though, it probably wouldn't be feasible.

I haven't heard anything good about the M249 from any forum member who has experience with it. It's a shame, really. It's a neat concept and a sexy looking weapon (especially the various more recent modded versions). I guess in terms of game mechanics, it's not a good pick either.

[kato13]

Originally Posted by Raellus

As for the Mk.48, that's a bummer. If it was based on the M240, I was thinking that a good T2K gunsmith could probably whip something similar up. Since it's based on an M249, though, it probably wouldn't be feasible.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...round/mk48.htm

"It has 70% parts commonality between MK46, M249 and M240"


From this it would seem like there is quite a bit of commonality.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by kato13

"It has 70% parts commonality between MK46, M249 and M240"
From this it would seem like there is quite a bit of commonality.

Yeah, I saw that too. I just figure there wouldn't be enough a need for such a weapon for someone in teh T2K world to re-chamber the M249 for the 7.62mm round. What I mean is, it'd probably be more trouble than it's worth.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Thanks Paul. Your theory on the M-79 could well be right. If I remember correctly, it had black fixtures (stock and handgrip) instead of the traditional wood which made me think it was a new-ish itteration of the venerable M-79.

OK, that makes me think of the Milkor Improved M-79. It has a folding buttstock or a synthetic non-folding stock, a synthetic pistol grip and forestock, and a MIL-STD-1913 rail topped with an Occluded Eye Gunsight. Since the Marines are using a modified version of the Milkor MGL-40, perhaps they are trying the Improved M-79 out too. It would have the advantage over the M-203 of being able to chamber some of the newer, longer 40mm LV rounds that the M-203 can't (since on the M-203, the breech doesn't open far enough).

Law, know anything about that possibility?

[LAW0306]

I cant talk about current op's of my current job sorry brothers.....

[Raellus]

Could be, Paul. It didn't have differently configured grips, though. It had the exact same shape as the old M-79, just black instead of the brown I'm used to seeing in Vietnam era pics. I'm kicking myself for not paying more attention to where I saw that picture. I'm really starting to think that maybe I dreamed it.

[Canadian Army]

I think is article will answer some of the questions about the M79:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M79_grenade_launcher

[Raellus]

Thanks, CA! I'm not going crazy!

Originally Posted by Canadian Army

I think is article will answer some of the questions about the M79:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M79_grenade_launcher

From the Wikepedia article:

"Some US Navy SEALs and Army Special Forces in Iraq have been seen deploying the M79 in recent years. Most notably due to its extended accuracy compared to the M203 (350m effective versus 150 m effective on the M203). It is used extensively for small squad-sized units to disrupt IED's from a safe distance, without having to call in EOD"

[Brother in Arms]

M-79 while not in the regular inventory is still used by special forces units most of the pics I have seen have been in Afghanistan.

Its one of my favorite weapons simple and effective and in a bit more accurate and than the 203. Fairly quick to fire as well , I have read that a good M-79 gunner could put 4 grenades in the air before, the first one hit the ground. Anyone used to firing a break action shotgun can easily operate this arm.

As for a cut down M-240 why not? Something like the M-240E6, a gunsmith would need access to a good machine shop however. It wouldn't be as light as the Mark-48 but it would suffice. Re chambering a 249 to 7.62X51mm would be too difficult.

[Snake Eyes]

Originally Posted by Canadian Army

I think is article will answer some of the questions about the M79:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M79_grenade_launcher

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Lake_NATIC

I see by clicking thru from the M79 page that some outfit claims to be ready to start mass-production of that 4-shot China Lake launcher.

http://www.autoweapons.com/photos06/nov/pump40.html
http://www.autoweapons.com/products/...vedevices.html

Movie here:

http://www.autoweapons.com/gunpics/movies/pump4.mpg

I think I'll have these in my game, 'cuz I'm just that kind of munchkin.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Snake Eyes

I think I'll have these in my game, 'cuz I'm just that kind of munchkin.

Bah. Real munchkins use the MM-1.

http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl15-e.htm

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Brother in Arms

As for a cut down M-240 why not? Something like the M-240E6, a gunsmith would need access to a good machine shop however. It wouldn't be as light as the Mark-48 but it would suffice. Re chambering a 249 to 7.62X51mm would be too difficult.

The M-240E6 is not actually a cut-down M-240; it's a lot lighter because the receiver and some other parts are made from titanium alloy instead of steel.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

The M-240E6 is not actually a cut-down M-240; it's a lot lighter because the receiver and some other parts are made from titanium alloy instead of steel.

Sounds expensive.

[weswood]

Here's something I've always wondered about, maybe somebody here knows: Why does the M79 have such a wierd shaped buttstock?

[copeab]

Originally Posted by weswood

Here's something I've always wondered about, maybe somebody here knows: Why does the M79 have such a wierd shaped buttstock?

My guess is to handle the recoil better.

[O'Borg]

Originally Posted by copeab

My guess is to handle the recoil better.

Probably, it does put the barrel right in line with the shoulder.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Targan

Sounds expensive.

Probably! But about 4 kg lighter, too. Hey, we're the US! We can afford anything, and if we can't we just borrow the money from China!

[Mohoender]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Probably! But about 4 kg lighter, too. Hey, we're the US! We can afford anything, and if we can't we just borrow the money from China!

If you add the increasing involvement of your state in private business that's why some people in France are now calling you the Socialist Union of America (Union Socialiste des Amériques in French).

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by O'Borg

Probably, it does put the barrel right in line with the shoulder.

Yeah, my guess is recoil and sighting.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Brother in Arms

M-79 while not in the regular inventory is still used by special forces units most of the pics I have seen have been in Afghanistan.

Its one of my favorite weapons simple and effective and in a bit more accurate and than the 203. Fairly quick to fire as well , I have read that a good M-79 gunner could put 4 grenades in the air before, the first one hit the ground. Anyone used to firing a break action shotgun can easily operate this arm.

As for a cut down M-240 why not? Something like the M-240E6, a gunsmith would need access to a good machine shop however. It wouldn't be as light as the Mark-48 but it would suffice. Re chambering a 249 to 7.62X51mm would be too difficult.

Yeah, I'll need to figure out a way to incorporate both into my T2K games.

In 'Nam SOG recon teams (and some LRRP teams) carried a sawed-off M-79 with a cut-down grip in a holster made out of a canteen carrier. They used it mostly for breaking contact.

[weswood]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Yeah, I'll need to figure out a way to incorporate both into my T2K games.

In 'Nam SOG recon teams (and some LRRP teams) carried a sawed-off M-79 with a cut-down grip in a holster made out of a canteen carrier. They used it mostly for breaking contact.

This is the one we need:

http://www.autoweapons.com/photos06/nov/pump40.html

[Brother in Arms]

Paul wrote:

"The M-240E6 is not actually a cut-down M-240; it's a lot lighter because the receiver and some other parts are made from titanium alloy instead of steel."

240E6 definitely has had a lot more work done to it then just being chopped. I was just saying something could be could be made up along those lines.

Myself I would add a collapsing stock from the 249, shortened barrel and some sort of a forward grip. something like a para version of the 240.


As for the cut down m-79, I have seen several pictures of these weapons used in Vietnam. given reduced ranges it worked perfectly and was much easier to carry than the full sized M-79. I have ready they continued to use these even after the introduction of the XM-148 and later M203 (though the LRRP teams picked up on the use of the XM-148 pretty quick.)

From what I have read the wood stocked M-79's where coveted by the LRRP and SOG teams for making into cut downs. As Many of the M-79's in RVN had fiberglass stocks and weren't good for cutting down and reshaping into pistol grips.

Brother in Arms

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by weswood

This is the one we need.

A pump-action GL is kind of a neat idea but it didn't quite pan out. The SEALs experimented with those in 'Nam and found them severely lacking. The stopped using them fairly quickly and stuck with the ol' tried and true M-79 and XM-148 GLs instead. They also field tested a three-barrel GL mounted underneath an M-16 but that didn't work out either.

[weswood]

Originally Posted by Raellus

A pump-action GL is kind of a neat idea but it didn't quite pan out. The SEALs experimented with those in 'Nam and found them severely lacking. The stopped using them fairly quickly and stuck with the ol' tried and true M-79 and XM-148 GLs instead. They also field tested a three-barrel GL mounted underneath an M-16 but that didn't work out either.

Yeah, but the idea is cool!

[Brother in Arms]

Here is a recent pic of USMC soldier with M-79

[LAW0306]

Old pic around 02 to 04 he has 1st gen vest on. look at the M32 its what i carry...eat your hearts out...