You don’t often see an M32 Milkor Multiple Grenade Launcher being used side by side with an old-school M79 Grenade Launcher. Ray sent us this photo taken in Ramadi, Iraq where he and the 3d Batallion, 8th Marines were stationed in 2006. Ray wrote …

I enjoy your POTD-the Fallujah patrol load out prompted a trip down memory lane so I am pushing you this interesting shot of ‘new school meets old school; an M32 Milkor MGL & an M79 side by side. Taken outside Ramadi in 2006 where we (3d Bn, 8th Marines) were conducting a 40mm shoot to farm on the M32, which were being fielded to us at the time. Because of the nature of OIF-and specifically Ramadi-there was a lot of legacy firearms in circulation such as a handful of M79’s which were quite useful for accurate placement and ease of use compared to even 203’s.

Other than weight, there is not a lot to distinguish the M79 from more modern single-shot grenade launchers and less-lethal launchers.

Submit photos you have taken to TFB’s Photo Of The Day.



Advertisement

  • Renegade

    Bloop.

    • shooter2009

      For the Milkor, that’d be “Bloop, Bloop, Bloop, Bloop, Bloop, Bloop.”

  • USMC03Vet

    Ha!

    Firearm Blog is awesome. So many Marines here that have more in common than they know. 2001 – 2004 3/8 I Co. here.

    Did you guys use 40mm out there much? We had some Marine pull off a great shot with one right through a car window into the cab.

    • Thracian Beast

      Too many 2nd MAR DIV here J/K HAHAHAA.

      I was a 0351 so my shit was way more happy, But the guys on A2s A4s hated the size but loved the 40mm HEDP when things had to happen.

      Caution do not spiral football pass a 40mm HEDP across battle space to a buddy no matter what handed you are.

  • Ray_G

    We used a lot of 40mm on that deployment. Downtown Ramadi in ’06 was staring into the abyss. PGM shots, tank main gun, 40mm, we got LAAWs as they came back out, etc. The M32 was good from fixed sites from what I recall, but it would chew up ammo if you fed it in a firefight. Better on patrol to use a 203 or if you had one of the ~5-10 79’s we had turned over to us by 3/7.

  • big daddy

    I hated the M203, nobody liked it. It was heavy and made it difficult to use as either a rifle or grenade launcher. I like the idea of a separate 40mm launcher, it makes it a lot easier for a squad to transfer to another troop if the regular grenadier is not with the squad, you don’t lose firepower. The M32 looks like a great support weapon for a platoon or even mounted on a vehicle. Too bad they stopped development of the XM109 and went with the XM25.

    • 11b

      The 320 is even worse- quite a bit heavier, and only marginally more accurate. Although when not slung under an M4 it’s nice to carry/throw in a ruck, sort of like an M79 would be, I imagine.

    • valorius

      I liked the m203. I had no problem qualifying expert with the m16 even with the 203 installed.

      A 293 can have a bewilderingly high rof with an assistant gunner/loader feeding the beast

  • dp

    Question of curiosity, was anyone bothered with MGL weight? I weights in almost like 2 rifles empty.

  • Commonsense23

    M79 is still the standard all other grenade launchers are judged by, by far the most accurate and shootable grenade launcher there is.

  • Risky

    Ramadi in 2006 was getting to be a pretty rough place to be. Basically bad as Fallujah was in 04 but never got the proper enema it deserved.

  • mechamaster

    M32 loaded with multiple less-lethal round… and M79 with lethal one ?