Read on Twitter
From a recent question... rifle grenades (and their modern day replacement).
It was asked what the difference between a rifle grenade and grenade launcher was. Functionally? Little. Both launches a grenade far further than it can be thrown. But in actual use? A lot. Let's begin.
It was asked what the difference between a rifle grenade and grenade launcher was. Functionally? Little. Both launches a grenade far further than it can be thrown. But in actual use? A lot. Let's begin.
We tend to think of grenades as a modern invention. A mechanical bomb with a timed fuse that's thrown or dropped to cause damage through concussion or fragmentation. Grenades are actually over 1000 years old. The modern word comes from the French for pomegranate, & interestingly
enough, that translation carried over into a number of languages. رمانة, Arabic for pomegranate is also used forgrenade. A small round fruit full of seeds. Not unlike the tiny pieces of metal created by a explosives in a round metal casing detonating. Early grenades were clay
pots filled with a flammable liquid, thrown at enemy naval vessels. With gunpowder they would graduate to metal cylinders, with a pre-lit wick, allowing them to detonate on their own. For several hundred years they would appear & disappear with militaries as their use was needed
but they remained more of a novelty or one off item then a standardized weapon for much of that time. Enter the grenadier. While the term moved on to carry a different meaning it originally referred to dedicated troops who would cease musket fire and move on to tossing grenades
when enemy fortifications/defensive lines were reached. Grenades were still crude, dangerous devices that required the user to have a source of fire and expose themselves to great danger to have much impact. And not very effective. They would see a resurgence in the US Civil War,
where a more modern adaptation called the Ketchum grenade added a plunger detonator and fins to aid the grenade in landing on its nose and detonating.
Improvised adaptations of grenades were features of many major conflicts of the 19th century, often no more than glass bottles stuffed with gunpowder, nails/scrap, and a fuse, tossed into an enemy trench. Largely discarded as a concept by major militaries, lessons learned from
the Russo-Japanese war impressed on modern militaries the value of hand held explosives, especially in urban and close combat. Nearly every major combatant would enter WWI with some sort of standardized, safer, & more uniformly designed hand grenade. Which brings us to modernity.
The basic design of the hand thrown grenade has changed little since WWI. They're more effective, generally easier to throw, and safer to handle, but the basic premise is largely the same. An explosive charge, buried in a pre-perforated or segmented metal shell, with a timed fuse
and at least one safety mechanism (the modern M67 grenade has 3: thumb clip, pin, spoon). Their efficacy in combat was rapidly proven and they became a mainstay of general attacks, raiding parties, and defenders in hardened fortifications. But a problem remained. Grenades are
heavy, and most people don't have Pedro Martinez or Graham Gooche's arm or throw. Grenades are inherently a close quarters weapon. The further you throw, the less accurate you become, and that range is already very short. Enter the rifle grenade: by attaching a device to the end
of a rifle, the gunpowder of a rifle round can be used to propel a grenade 100-300m away in a fairly straight line, and after practice (and later with sights), can be done fairly accurately. Early designs varied from the shoot through versions, where a grenade attached to the end
of the barrel was hollow in the midle to allow the bullet to pass through, using the gas behind it to propel it were used by several militaries. The French VB grenade is a good example of it. Britain entered the war without a rifle grenade but rapidly saw the benefit and raced to
purchase the rod grenade, literally a grenade on a rod. The rod would be inserted in the barrel and armed, specially issued blank cartridge would be loaded, and the grenade fired. These grenades were particularly harsh on the rifles and did not see retention after the war.
The cup-style grenade launcher would also find favor and be adopted by Brits and later Germans in WWII. A removable "cup" would be mounted to the end of the barrel, grenade inserted, and blank cartridge used to propel it.
Finally, what most nations would wind up adopting was a simple thread on receiver to be placed directly on the muzzle to which a finned rifle grenade could be directly attached. This would remain the primary method of grenade launching until the adoption of modern dedicated
grenade launcher. Why the switch? A multitude of reasons. Rifle grenades generally imparted tremendous recoil to the user directly back into the stock and shoulder. They would often be fired from the ground (Seen above) for both recoil reasons and because a heavy munition hanging
from a rifle barrel makes for a very unstable shooting platform. A rifle grenade takes the place of the gun barrel and regular ammunition cannot be fired until the grenade is fired. Blank ammunition needs to be kept on hand & can't be mixed up with live ammo, which would destroy
and possibly detonate the grenade. In a situation where you absolutely need to fire a rifle grenade, you need to wait for the grenadier to attach his firing device, remove and load a rifle grenade, empty his rifle of live ammo and insert a blank round. A lot could go wrong in
this time, all while you're down one rifle to shoot with. To speed this process, the US would develop a breach action, single shot grenade launcher, the M79, firing a lighter weight 40mm fragmentation grenade. The smaller ammunition meant a grenadier could carry more ammo. The
lighter weight and dimensions made it easier to wield, and its break action made for fast reloads. But this now meant your grenadier was (generally) without a rifle. Some efforts to mitigate this included giving the grenadier special anti personnel rounds that were essentially
giant shotgun or flechette shells. But you were still a rifle down. Eventually an experimental underbarrel mounted 40mm grenade launcher called the XM-148 would see combat trials in Vietnam. The design would be refined and eventually introduced as the M203.
The M203 is still in use today with various physical and electronic aiming devices. Ammunition ranges from riot ammo, smoke grenades, parachute illumination, anti-armor, fragmentation, to even grenade launched drones. With the UBGL no rifle is removed from the fight, save for the
moment it takes to aim, flip off safety, and pull the trigger. Reloads take seconds and the primary weapon can still be fired. Gradually, the M320 is replacing the M203 in US service, which loads from the side and can fired in a standalone mode, still using 40mm ammunition.
In addition to the underbarrel and standalone single shot grenade launcher exists the multiple grenade launcher. Generally seen in a revolver style with cylinders, but pump action variants exist, these designs allow a single user to fire six grenades as fast as they can squeeze
the trigger. The downside is its weight and the slow speed to reload the cylinders, but it allows a small unit to bring tremendous firepower to bear and rapidly.
Around the world, the rifle mounted grenade still exists and is service with plenty of militaries, but in general it has been surpassed by and is hopelessly outclassed by modern dedicated grenade launchers. Every modern military has either developed their own standalone grenade
launcher or purchased existing models and works them into their warfighting doctrine. So there you have it, from clay pot grenade to six rounds of death in fewer seconds, grenades and rifle grenades.
