|
|
|
|
#1
09-11-2009, 05:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Come on guys, the EX-41 was a prototype from the 60s. They abandoned stand-alone grenade launchers like that for a reason - soldiers have to carry enough kit without adding a whole second longarm to the mix.
I know the USMC has bought the M32, and that's ok for mounted troops, but I'd hate to see light infantry saddled with them. 
|
|
#2
09-11-2009, 07:08 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I hate to nitpic but the China Lake Launcher was the experimental pump-action Grenade launcher from the 1960's. The EX-41 was a high velocity pump action weapon from the mid 1990's. Some idiot mixed up the nomenclature and now you have alot of people calling the weapons by the wrong names. I know I'm useing Wikipedia but I hace confirmed most of the info from various sources. China Lake Grenade Launcher EX-41 Grenade Launcher
|
|
#3
09-11-2009, 04:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nah, I wouldn't take the EX-41. I prefer the M32. 6 rounds of semi auto grenade fire.
__________________
 "There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life." Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle Psalm 144:1 “It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
|
|
#4
09-11-2009, 08:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
There was one big advantage to the EX-41 that I know of. I had a friend of mine ask Kevin Dockerty about the system and I got some interesting information. Ever see a shoulder fired grenade launcher hit a target out to 1,200m accuratly. Standalone systems should be used to suplement more conventionally armed forces. Sort of like keeping an M79 in the turret of a Humvee on point to disable suspected IEDs. The M32 is a supression weapon great for driving opponants out from cover and into direct fire. the EX-41 could be concidered a "pocket mortar" due to it's large effective range.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
