XM-25 Heading to Afghanistan With Green Berets

[A4sForever]

Slight course correction:

I'm an Aviator, not a grunt, but from my limited perspective, I've always had a 'soft spot' in my heart for the M79 ... I got to use one @ Pendleton in the mid-'60s ... it was deadly accurate and the range was impressive.




According to guys I know who've used both, they preferred the M79 over the M203. While 'older', the M79 had better range, more versatility, better accuracy, faster reloads, and more dedicated 40mm rounds (obviously) when that's all you're carrying ... some grunts I knew who wore 'green hats' swore by it. They carried it as their primary weapon. They stated, w/out equivocation, that it made the later, M203 'upgrade' look sick by comparison - from a grenadier's point of view, at least.

They said it worked very, very well in a jungle environment. An M79, accompanied by an M2 Carbine + a 1911A1 was what took them to hell & back -- and brought them back home, too ...

/course correction.

 

[eas7888]

Slight course correction:

I'm an Aviator, not a grunt, but from my limited perspective, I've always had a 'soft spot' in my heart for the M79 ... I got to use one @ Pendleton in the mid-'60s ... it was deadly accurate and the range was impressive.




According to guys I know who've used both, they preferred the M79 over the M203. While 'older', the M79 had better range, more versatility, better accuracy, faster reloads, and more dedicated 40mm rounds (obviously) when that's all you're carrying ... some grunts I knew who wore 'green hats' swore by it. They carried it as their primary weapon. They stated, w/out equivocation, that it made the later, M203 'upgrade' look sick by comparison - from a grenadier's point of view, at least.

They said it worked very, very well in a jungle environment. An M79, accompanied by an M2 Carbine + a 1911A1 was what took them to hell & back -- and brought them back home, too ...

/course correction.

The M79 was an amazing weapon for it's time. The biggest drawback it had, as you mentioned, was that soldiers/marines had to carry separate firearms for personal defense. The M79 could carry a wider variety of ammunition, something which has not been lost on the U.S. Army. The M203's replacement, the M320, has a side opening breech, so a wider array of ammunition can be loaded in.

Many of the ol' timers do still praise the M79 for it's accuracy. That being said, I know guys now who can hit at 200M with the 203. It's all in who you give the weapon to, really. That, and training.

It's ugly, don't get me wrong. The M79 is a beautiful weapon. This is just more functional. Now, if they would just replace the M4 component in the picture.

 

[A4sForever]

The M79 was an amazing weapon for it's time...

Roger that: I checked w/ one of my 'former green-hat' guys who lives w/in striking distance re: your input (most of us Vietnam-era guys, regardless of service, who know each other ... really do stay in 'touch' w/ each other) ... and he said:

"The M79 WAS THE ONLY WAY TO GO ... "

They could 'reach out and touch' Charlie @ 300+ yards. Not meters ... yards. I 'killed' a pretend Charlie @ 200+ yards @ Pendleton when I was a young skull full of cottage cheese and knew nothing ... but the M79 made me 'look good'.

Now, you must realize ... Mi Compadre was above average; he was a Green-Beret adviser to a 'Gomer-Green Beret' counterpart 'in-country' ...

He said he 'beat down' more that one ambush w/ the M79 (he thought it was a really, really big-bore shotgun loaded w/buckshot ... ) while serving as an 'Advisor' to the 'Mungs and/or Meos' (whichever) ... and he only carried a 'secondary weapon' (a 1911A1 according to him) alla'-de-time ... and once in a while, he carried a WW2 w/Korean War 'upgrade' in the guise of an M2 select-full-auto-possible when he felt like humping it.

He considered the M2 Carbine a 'pistol' ... and while I laugh ... that's ALMOST what it was designed for ... some kine' 'middle' piece between a rifle & a pistol ... yea-as ???

Glad I wan't there ... and then, at the same time, I wish I could have been there w/ him. But in any case, I defer to his experience .......

 

[Junkball]

So the XM29 was cancelled, but yet lives on in this? I fail to see how dropping the G36-based KE portion of that project suddenly made it workable.

The South Koreans made it work and are fielding this system

 

[Slammer2]

I read something about a year ago about some Army unit using the M79 in Iraq to clear IEDs since they were more accurate and had a longer range with it. If I can find it again I'll post a link. Looks like it'd be fun to shoot.

 

[Jim123]

I read something about a year ago about some Army unit using the M79 in Iraq to clear IEDs since they were more accurate and had a longer range with it. If I can find it again I'll post a link. Looks like it'd be fun to shoot.

I'd be suspicious of that. SMUD (they came up with a term for it) = bad. Think entire city block going up in secondary explosions/mother of all booby traps. I'm sure it's been tried with an M79 (or M203), I'd be pretty surprised if it was allowed now.

Just sayin'...

 

[Lawman]

Most of the EOD guys Ive heard from have been absolutely insistant that you dont shoot at IED's. Basically if you cant without a doubt blow the hell out of it they dont want you messing with it.

However you can blow up an IED with a Hellfire.

 

[nittany03]

So you're going to post online about how IEDs are cleared so Ahmed can read about it? Below average in headwork.

 

[eas7888]

It's online if you just google Counter IED, you'll get tons of useful info. I'm not repeating anything that isn't already in the public domain. Perfectly fine in headwork, thank you.

From the DOD itself

 

[PropAddict]

It's online if you just google Counter IED, you'll get tons of useful info. I'm not repeating anything that isn't already in the public domain. Perfectly fine in headwork, thank you.

Just because some reporter or person who can't keep their trap shut about tactics says something on the internet doesn't mean you have to confirm it.


"Roger out."

 

[eas7888]

The "reporter" or "person" in question is the Department of Defense itself, as per the link that I posted to the Joint IED Defeat Organizations webpage, again, something that is public domain.

Let me make one thing clear. I don't put my fellow soldier's live's at risk. I know you wouldn't do that to your peers, and I absolutely won't do it to mine. I understand you're doing your job, trying to keep sensitive information off of the boards, and I respect that. If you feel my post was out of line, I apologize.

 

[statesman]

Even if that information is public domain, even if it is from the DOD itself, making it easier to find is in poor form.

If Achmed can find it on the DOD website, there is nothing you can do about that... but focusing their attention to AW isn't the best idea.

 

[eas7888]

Even if that information is public domain, even if it is from the DOD itself, making it easier to find is in poor form.

We can agree to disagree here. Nothing about what my original post said was in poor form

If Achmed can find it on the DOD website, there is nothing you can do about that... but focusing their attention to AW isn't the best idea.

This, I can completely agree with you on. I won't argue about not having the information here, it's a private forum, and the moderators have every right to regulate the information here on the boards. I just wonder if this thread, talking about the fielding of a specific weapons system in a theater of operations is any different.

 

[Flash]

Cool it guys, blowing up IEDs with a Hellfire isn't much in the way of new news nor is JIEDDO's webpage.