Talk:Grenade launcher

message: A grenade is a form of of time bomb, and the bomb explodes on impact. The correct weapoan name would be "warhead launcher" but a better name could probably be made.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.220.0.89 (talk) 13:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect, impact fuzed hand grenades exist. Bones Jones (talk) 07:36, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Weapon Name 

message: Pulled this section out of the article. Metal storm is a cool idea/device but it's not a grenade launcher. Even if they make a MS GL, this article isn't the place to detail the mechanism.
***
Though not strictly a grenade launching platform, the Metal Storm system is certainly usable in this role. The idea is to place multiple projectiles stacked in a single barrel and fire them either in sequence, in bursts, or all at once. Due to this configuration, and the fact that the charges are electronically fired, the system can reach an amazing rate of fire while maintaining simplicity and reliability. The concept of stacking projectiles in one barrel is not new but never before has a system been as integrated and possibly useful as this. Multiple barrels could be mounted holding different types of grenades to deal with different threats such as personnel or heavily armored vehicles. While grenades do not normally pose a threat to armored vehicles, one side effect of an extremely high rate of fire is the fact that it could dig through using successive projectiles fired at one point. This may seem like the ideal system for grenade launchers, however, due to the fact that once a barrel's charges are expended, you would then be carrying dead weight or have to throw away an entire barrel instead of simply inserting a new magazine or belt. For this reason, it is unlikely that Metal Storm will become a standard issue smallarm, other than for special operations, unless a way to make cheaper and lighter barrels can be found. One experimental attempt at meshing a traditional rifle and Metal Storm system is the Australian Advanced Individual Combat Weapon program that takes the standard Steyr AUG rifle and places a 40 mm Metal Storm barrel on top with a fire control system built into the stock. As it is still at the prototype stages, it has yet to be seen whether this combination will actually be effective in the field.
***
:I agree that the mechanism shouldn't be listed here but Metal Storm is one of a few modern uses for grenade launchers that isn't listed in this article. Also, it is currently being developed as a semi-automatic over or under barrel launcher for the Australian armed forces which makes it as relevant as all these fancy prototypes listed in the article that are being made for the US armed forces.--Senor Freebie (talk) 02:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metal Storm 

message: With automatic grenade launchers such as the Mark 19, what is the actual definition difference between an automatic grenade launcher and an autocannon?  Does an autocannon use higher velocities and more streamlined shells rather than shooting out more rounded shots with a lower velocity via less powder?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.25.127 (talk) 14:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: What's the difference?

message: The definition of grenade launcher refers to grenade. However, grenade redirects to Hand grenade, that is weapon designed to be thrown by hand. I think, we need an all-sufficient definition. Ufim (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The definition is rather wrong 

message: perhaps we should include a section about a grenade launchers advantages over say a cannon of similer calibre.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.112.11 (talk) 13:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advantages 

message: This article seems to have a very specific focus on the development and use of Grenade Launchers among the US defence forces. This is not just limited to American service weapons and prototypes being the only ones included in the article but (current) American uses for grenade launchers being the only ones listed. Where is it explained that automatic grenade launchers make an effective and light weapon to mount on helicopters or that many infantry fighting vehicles come equipped with them. Where are the mentions of new models in other countries with different approaches to the problem of weight & size then Heckler & Koch? Russia has a GMG thats 16kg and supposedly portable enough to keep up with a platoon. Australia is developing a very unique an interesting semi-automatic grenade launcher, albeit slowly. China already has something in service akin to the USA's development, designed practically for marksmanship with grenades.--Senor Freebie (talk) 02:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  American centric 

message: I wonder if a small section on grenade launchers in gaming might be worthwhile.  To date, all such additions have been non-constructive, as I saw them.  Not a high priority for me, nor something I feel strongly about, and I wanted to see if there would be strong support or opposition.- Sinneed 16:25, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not really worthwhile.  Just because video games use them, has no real use in an article about the REAL thing.Halofanatic333 (talk) 14:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree about the lack of worth, but this isn't about the "real thing".  It is about "Grenade launcher".- Sinneed 14:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gaming 

message: In the US there are 37mm and 40mm grenades and launchers. Certain military type grenades (high explosive, shaped charge, incendiary) are made in 40mm only; while tear gas, smoke, signal flares, etc. are made in 37mm and 40mm, no high explosive or incendiary rounds are made in 37mm. This is a divide of military 40mm v police 37mm (and in many jurisdictions civilians may legally own 37mm launchers and (nonlethal) ammunition as collectibles). Naaman Brown (talk) 23:21, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  37mm v 40mm in US usage 

message: It actually stands for "Ruchnoy Protivotankovyy Granatomyot" or Hand-Held Anti-tank Grenade launcher. The statement currently on the page is an false urban myth. I would appreciate it if this could be changed. :D  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.215.162.21 (talk) 07:01, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed, sorry about your broken fingers.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 21:22, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  RPG Does not stand for Rocket Propelled Grenade 

message: The U.S. Military invented the Attached Grenade Launcher. The U.S. Army Feild Manual clearly refers to it as "attached". However, a user insists on calling this class of weapons as "underslung" based on a source referring to specific grenade launcher called the "Underslung Grenade Launcher (UGL)". The UGL is manufactured by Heckler & Koch and is fitted to the L85 rifle. I believe that "Attached" should be used as the correct terminology. As calling this class of weapon "Underslung Grenade Launcher" would be the equivalent of calling all sports cars "Corvettes".
Also, a simple Google search for the term "Underslung" shows that it is most associated with "Battlefield" video game series, whereas the term "Underbarrel" is the common name used in the firearms industry, firearms publications and encyclopedias. Such as Small Arms Survey, Jane's and OPFOR WORLDWIDE EQUIPMENT GUIDE. Russia's Izhmash calls their GP-34 an "underbarrel grenade launcher". It should be noted that Izhmash is not an American or even a western source.
I have also reviewed the H&K product website for 40mm systems and they refer to their product as "add-on grenade launcher" they do not use the "underslung" designation. It appears that the term "Underslung Grenade Launcher (UGL)" is nothing more than the British military designation for the specific type of H&K grenade launcher which they use.. Also, the Australians and the Canadians do not use the "underslung" designation. --RAF910 (talk) 20:08, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attached vs Underslung 

message: This is primarily a technical article about a class of military weapons. A large section about civilian ownership rules in only one country is of very little relevance. This website is not the Yankopedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:24, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it could use a more global perspective, though I don't know of many other countries where civilians can own grenade launchers at all. I also need to work in somewhere that some non-English languages have a much broader definition of the term, and that, say, in German the category Granatwerfer also includes mortars. Herr Gruber (talk) 07:45, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

text: I eventually got around to changing the section heading to explicitly state what it really is about. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:27, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is not about US civilian firearm legislation/regulations 

message: The opening sentence, especially "is a weapon that fires a specially-designed large-caliber projectile, often with an explosive, smoke or gas warhead" doesn't really distinguish grenade launchers from other types of weapon which would fit the same definition, such as an artillary piece or cannon. Maybe specifying something about the shell's velocity, average size, or trajectory of travel would make this less ambiguous?
DirkJandeGeer (talk) 19:32, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  opening sentence