@PigSlaughter1988 Actually this system, in it's various forms, never made it out of development. The Army was looking at a version modified for "bunker busting", but that seems cancelled. For current weapons you have the M136 (aka, "AT-4"), the AT-8 (thermobaric warhead), M3 MAAWS (improved Carl Gustav; used by 75th Infantry Regiment (Ranger)), FGM-148 Javelin, and BGM-71 TOW (and Hellfire, but that's strictly mounted on aviation assets). The Army has borrowed SMAWs from the USMC.
yeah but the USMC are usually sent in first to flush em out, then awesome countrys like australia come to do the Special Forces stuff. So i think the marine corps needs it more cause they're going to be facing heavier armour and denser infantry.
The Army may have FGM-148 Javelin but the Marines have FGM-172 SRAW.
USAAIRPOWER 1 year ago
and then came the AT4-CS. . .
Flaggedagain 1 year ago
@Flaggedagain
This is Years ahead of AT4, completely out classes it.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
@Beliserius1 sorry dude we have MBT-LAW here in Sweden sens 2000. and the FGM-172 SRAW is cancelled
Moontrue1on1 7 months ago
@Moontrue1on1
Firstly, both the SRAW and LAW existed in exactly the same time frame.
Secondly, the SRAW was not canceled, and is in active service as of now.
Beliserius1 4 months ago
is this weapons stil used in the army ? i heard that the green berets use(d) it.
which different anti-tank weapons does the army use in generel ? at4, carl gustav, predator, javelin, smaw...
PigSlaughter1988 1 year ago
@PigSlaughter1988 Actually this system, in it's various forms, never made it out of development. The Army was looking at a version modified for "bunker busting", but that seems cancelled. For current weapons you have the M136 (aka, "AT-4"), the AT-8 (thermobaric warhead), M3 MAAWS (improved Carl Gustav; used by 75th Infantry Regiment (Ranger)), FGM-148 Javelin, and BGM-71 TOW (and Hellfire, but that's strictly mounted on aviation assets). The Army has borrowed SMAWs from the USMC.
MorganKeyes 1 year ago
@MorganKeyes
ok, thx 4 the informations!
PigSlaughter1988 1 year ago
why didn't they keep this the smaw is stupid and pointless compared to this.
CaliYoungGun1991 1 year ago
Wouldn't it be better with 1 version with a multipurpose warhead capable of top attack and direct attack modes? Like the MBT LAW?
antiflax 2 years ago
how much $ ?
aguri2 3 years ago
I don't know if they have released that info but it is certainly within the USMC's budget
cripticstone 3 years ago
ha ha, I so happy for USMC, but I am sure that they are some US alies (like Georgia) who will need that kinnd of stuff quite soon ;)
aguri2 3 years ago
yeah but the USMC are usually sent in first to flush em out, then awesome countrys like australia come to do the Special Forces stuff. So i think the marine corps needs it more cause they're going to be facing heavier armour and denser infantry.
cripticstone 3 years ago
@cripticstone Special Forces > Rangers and Marine Force Recon > Paratroopers > Infantry > Everyone else.
comedyguy911 8 months ago
@aguri2 Probably way too much.
Nater245689 1 year ago
cool
BonesTheCat 3 years ago
Yes I like pie to
cripticstone 3 years ago
why dont they attach these things to the sides of abrams? that would be cool. two t-90's two kills.
coleraine20 3 years ago