Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by marktigger »

Lots of talk on the L118 thread about the Charlie-Gee so maybe we should switch discussions to here....could the Mods move the relavent posts. And if some one could do an introduction to the Carl Gustav I would be grateful. (as trying to get out to work)


Image

MikeKiloPapa
Member
Posts: 106
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:10
Denmark

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by MikeKiloPapa »


User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

marktigger wrote:could the Mods move the relavent posts
A good idea, but may be a wider title like " is there any space left for other recoilless infantry weapons than missiles?"
- btw, my answer would be a "yes" but phrasing it with CG features and uses alone could be a challenge
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

I wonder why MKP brought practice rounds into the discussion ... here is the Daddy



Joke-joke!
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by marktigger »

the Carl Gustav M2/M3 & M4 are reuseable systems unlike most of the rockets which are single rounds of ammunition.
The history of the Charlie gee in UK includes use in Oman with the SAS, Northern Ireland with the Bomb Squad and the UDR (their rigid raider water patrols carried them) the Falklands where they were used by the Marines against AFV's and ships and on the recapture by everyone as a support weapon.
Personally only ever fired TPTP out of it. It was a bastard to carry. But I think the lack of investment in them and possibly a bit of blinkered vision sold these weapons short. With other natures of ammunition (available in the 70's & 80's) the "84" could have evolved into a great support weapons system for light role infantry.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

marktigger wrote:M2/M3 & M4 are reuseable systems
Yep, and diligence with the notebooks (paper!) that came with them was less than perfect, which caused many of the weapons to be "half-lifed"
- the new one comes with an automatic counter
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by marktigger »

the L14 manual talks abour the other natures of ammo and the British sights had the range scales for them so I think the intention was there just the budget wasn't

LordJim
Member
Posts: 454
Joined: 28 Apr 2016, 00:39
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by LordJim »

The CG especially the M3 and M4 variants are a superb support weapon as the US Army Rangers would testify, they won't go anywhere without them. It is so versatile, and the current versions are less than half the weight of the old M2 we used to use. What I cannot find is any info on whether they are or have developed ammo that can be used in confined spaces. The reason is that they were able to do this with the AT-4 and was wondering if the same principal would work on the CG's ammo.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

LordJim wrote:What I cannot find is any info on whether they are or have developed ammo that can be used in confined spaces. The reason is that they were able to do this with the AT-4 and was wondering if the same principal would work on the CG's ammo.
It goes the other way: originally AT-4 just borrowed the CG warhead.

CG can do much better for range than AT-4 (below)

Caliber: 84mm
Type: recoilless launch
Overall length: 1040 mm
Weight: 7.5 kg
Effective range: up to 150 meters against moving targets, about 300 meters against stationary targets
Armour penetration: 500+ mm

A 66 mm weapon similar to AT-4 can do 90% of that, but does not have the blast attenuation (which also adds weight as there is a countermass included)
- as a curiosity, the Germans developed a countermass weapon that you could fire inside a Beatle, just opening the car windows (one for firing through and the other opposite)
- but the countermass was something else than liquids, so it (lightweight) spilling out would half fill the Beatle after the shot
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

ArmChairCivvy wrote: " is there any space left for other recoilless infantry weapons than missiles?"
- btw, my answer would be a "yes"

Going back to this:
- Javelin will do everything (except v close up engagements), but is heavy and expensive
- for anti-tank, NLAW cn be present at one level down in the unit structure
- compared to NLAW, CG is a support weapon (going back to marktiggers Q whether infantry should be carrying its own artillery? Yes, it could, but the real Q is : when should it do so?)
- going down to the 66mm recoilless and disposable, every infantryman can , when the threat picture so dictates, carry one - or two!

The missiles vs. other recoilless infantry weapons balance can only be answered in the combined arms context:
- tank/ mech support (the latter having Spikes aplenty?)
- artillery (not only the normal indirect but also smart anti-tank, at range... for which a video clip below)


All of this takes me back to my "hobby horse":
- APS is going to reshape the battle field
- ATGWs and relatively slow rockets (from recoilless weapons) are losing most, in relative terms
- the Big Gun may make a comeback; but MBTs cannot be everywhere
- top attack is the mode against which APS solutions still have some catching up to do. Especially against Javelin/ Spike, but also NLAW
- minimum engagement ranges will "suffer" as the dive angle will become a determinant of success: NLAW comes in with a shallower dive which in turn means that its detection , in time, by APS is easier. You can use a direct-fire mode on Javelin/ Spike at closer distances, but then it is down to whether the AFV can more easily (if it has one) counter with its APS. Self-driving cars have a scanning radius of 200m around them, but the chaotic battlefield will put a lower number for APS sensors' effective reach
- the Bonus round is fired from 70 m away, so that might well be further out than what the "rounds" ejected by APS are effective for
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by RetroSicotte »

NLAW's top attack doesn't really do a huge amount against APS, as the missile still approaches from the horizontal axis, the route that APS is currently enabled against.

There really is a concern of "too many launchers" that can emerge, it's a very intriguing balance.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

RetroSicotte wrote:NLAW's top attack doesn't really do a huge amount against APS, as the missile still approaches from the horizontal axis, the route that APS is currently enabled agains
That is exactly it:
- if before you bought a hundred of NLAWs for every thousand disposable 66/84mm's
- should you now fill in for the NLAW with mini-Spike
- while the Mech./AI would have the heavier versions of Spike (or Javelin, for that matter. They are very similar, just that the Spike family covers a broader "range")
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

LordJim
Member
Posts: 454
Joined: 28 Apr 2016, 00:39
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by LordJim »

What I was getting at was whether there were CG rounds that can be fired form in a confined space using a counter mass like the AT-4CS does? I think the German weapon you are thinking of is the Armburst that had a pretty small warhead but as you say could be fired from almost anywhere with no danger from its back blast.

The CG would be a very good match for out light rapid reaction units such as the Paras and Commandos. The US Rangers have a multitude of founds they use from Dual Warhead HEAT, Illumination, Smoke, Sensor fused HE and so on and love the things. As the roles are similar our units would definitely benefit, with its longer range and greater versatility compared to the two rockets they current carry for anti-armour and anti-structure. I am not saying it should totally replace these but supplement them.

Little J
Member
Posts: 674
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by Little J »

(Edit)
Don't post when tired :oops:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

LordJim wrote:whether there were CG rounds that can be fired form in a confined space using a counter mass like the AT-4CS does?
Is the answer not in
- the GC warhead (not propellant) was initially used for AT-4
- countermass was added (equals added weight, only worth carrying if urban combat is the expectation)
AND the range has been very much sacrificed for making such firings possible/ safe?

It is the came company, after all , making both of them.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

LordJim
Member
Posts: 454
Joined: 28 Apr 2016, 00:39
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by LordJim »

The warhead(s) fired by the CG are different from that fired by the latest AT-4 and AT-4CS. In the latter case you flick a switch on the launcher to change how the round detonates, impact or delay. With those used on the CG you have more options with regards to delay, effect etc.

I cannot the the counter mass in the AT-4CS adding a huge amount of weight compared to the original AT-4, but do not know the actual figures, but it is salt water and the tube has the same dimensions. The range is the same, but then again the range of the AT-4 is considerably less than the CG, which in its latest version can be used to engage targets out to 800m

Sorry if talking about the M3 and M4 Carl Gustav is moving off topic as the title refers to the M2 version.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 362
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by Mercator »

Guys, there is a CG confined space round.

http://www.miltechmag.com/2013/12/mt-ex ... -carl.html

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

LordJim wrote:the range of the AT-4 is considerably less than the CG, which in its latest version can be used to engage targets out to 800m

Sorry if talking about the M3 and M4 Carl Gustav is moving off topic as the title refers to the M2 version.
No problem, because I think (just bcz the thread has been termed "one weapon"... and its derivatives) we are on a trail to "nowhere" here.
- gr8 support weapon
- can do anti-tank, at a stretch, but really the mix should be planned with that in mind
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

LordJim
Member
Posts: 454
Joined: 28 Apr 2016, 00:39
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by LordJim »

The more I investigate the Carl Gustav M4 the more I believe we should get it. It is shorter than the M2/3, weighs less than 7kg, has modern sights and ergonomics and packs one hell of a punch against almost any target. It bridges the gap between short range LAWs and ATGW and per round it is far cheaper, with a sub-calibre training round to make training cheaper still.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2292
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by Timmymagic »

marktigger wrote:Personally only ever fired TPTP out of it. It was a bastard to carry. But I think the lack of investment in them and possibly a bit of blinkered vision sold these weapons short. With other natures of ammunition (available in the 70's & 80's) the "84" could have evolved into a great support weapons system for light role infantry.
My father fired a live round from one once on a firepower demo (not entirely sure why because he was the OC). He said his chest still hurt and ears still rang 20 years later. He always said the demos when a crew would fire off 4-5 rounds in quick succession were probably followed by a medical discharge for the crew 20 minutes later. He did like the CG, but then again he never carried one. His guys view of it was it was heavy, very awkward and uncomfortable to carry. But it was seen as a last ditch weapon, he also felt that the very rapid reload was a bit of a moot point because after firing the signature was so massive that they wouldn't get a chance for a second. I know they seem to have addressed the weight and ergonomics on the newer versions, but you have to wonder on the signature of it still. On a cost basis, and operational basis it probably does make sense as the West's RPG, particularly as a HE and smoke weapon.

Never could figure out how the Starshell was fired though? Surely you have to point it up at a 45 deg angle? That can't be a good idea could it?

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by marktigger »

oh yes I remember the shock wave hitting the chest especially if you were no 2. I was advised at Pirbright to double ear protect so had the yellow sponge plugs and Amplivox on. They usually rang badly form what my instructors told me if there was no "Sock" on the venturl.
The backblast is impressive. I have heard accounts of the "controlled" explosions in northern ireland causing more damage. And of one being accidentally fired indoors in Northern Ireland.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2292
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by Timmymagic »

Wasn't the NI cock up the result of a Sgt. asking for a training round by mistake? He meant an inert drill round and got a bit of a surprise when it took a portacabin out.

Bit like the story of someone clearing a RARDEN for use on an indoor testing range that was rated to 30mm and finding out that not all 30mm are the same when it took the roof off....

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by marktigger »

I was told In NI that it was a TPTP round that was fired given as infantry we had to be able to identify the rounds visually its a hard mistake to make

User avatar
Galloglass
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 01 Apr 2016, 13:29
Ireland

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by Galloglass »

I've fired it a couple of times.....Liked it.
Don't recall any huge impression from the venturi blowback myself.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Gun 84mm Infantry L14a1 (CARL GUSTAV)

Post by marktigger »

I see the Charlie Gee debate has started again on the Infantry weapons thread. I would contend it would be a useful support weapon for not just the Infantry but 2nd and 3rd line units for "Local Defence" the mix of natures on the new versions gives allot of flexibility.

Post Reply