Why are there SRAWs but no SMAWs?

[Eddie Baker]

I dont believe that the SMAW is used as often as the SRAW. One question though, is the SRAW the same as the BDM, I had heard about it but never actually looked it up.

Actually, the SMAW is most likely used much more often than the SRAW.

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Eddie Baker;1151542']The SRAW . . . was intended to eventually replace the AT-4 as a squad level, rifleman's weapon. It is a single shot disposable weapon, but has a fire-and-forget inertial guidance. It is similar to the UK-selected NLAW (Bofors MBT-LAW). However, production was stopped before even 1000 units (IIRC) were made, and the inventory was retrofit with blast-frag "bunker-busting" warheads.

. . . The SRAW never should have been in game because of how few ever made it into production, much less been in game as the weapon of a dedicated anti-tank gunner.[/quote]

I have yet to see confirmation of a Predator/SRAW being used in combat or live-fire training.

[quote="LUKE_NUKE_EM""]One question though, is the SRAW the same as the BDM, I had heard about it but never actually looked it up.[/quote]

No, they are not the same. The M141 Bunker Defeat Munition is a single-shot, disposable version of the HEDP round for the Mk-153 SMAW launcher (there are also HEAT and thermobaric rounds). It is commercially known as SMAW-D.

ive been watching alot of recent marine videos from afghanistan, in helmand province etc. and one thing i noticed is it seems like alot of marines are using LAWS? They look like laws to me, but im not expert. They are very short collapsible rockets that are single use. They definitly werent at4s.

Yes, the M72A5 and higher variants of the LAW have made a comeback because of their size (both their weight and because they are collapsible); two can be carried for the weight of a single AT4.

[spawncaptain]

Thanks for the replies, Eddie. Since playing Combat Mission Shock Force: Marines, the USMC TO&E has been somewhat special to me (in a positive way!).

So, to portray SMAWs in a realistic way, the USMC faction have get them in addition to the current rifle squad's AT weapons (you could choose between the M-72 and the AT-4 via left and right click in the kit selection menu btw) and the SRAWs (which are to be replaced by the Javelin), if I got everything right. This would create a surplus of firepower for a USMC rifle platoon, but it is realistic. However, as the MEC forces are fictional, they could always receive a counterpart to the SMAW like the RPG-29, if you want to balance the game.

[Eddie Baker]

Thanks for the replies, Eddie. Since playing Combat Mission Shock Force: Marines, the USMC TO&E has been somewhat special to me (in a positive way!).

So, to portray SMAWs in a realistic way, the USMC faction have get them in addition to the current rifle squad's AT weapons (you could choose between the M-72 and the AT-4 via left and right click in the kit selection menu btw) and the SRAWs (which are to be replaced by the Javelin), if I got everything right. This would create a surplus of firepower for a USMC rifle platoon, but it is realistic. However, as the MEC forces are fictional, they could always receive a counterpart to the SMAW like the RPG-29, if you want to balance the game.

More like it would be a left and right click to choose between the AT4 and LAW for Light AT and the Javelin and SMAW for HAT.

The RPG-7 already has multiple round types; there's really no need to add a new launcher for them.

[spawncaptain]

More like it would be a left and right click to choose between the AT4 and LAW for Light AT and the Javelin and SMAW for HAT.

I thought a USMC rifle company has both Javelin and assault (SMAW) sections?

Edit: I think I got it. Because of the player limit, you can't simulate a full rifle company, so why have both Javelin and assault sections.

[Eddie Baker]

I thought a USMC rifle company has both Javelin and assault (SMAW) sections?

No, the Javelin is at the battalion level; individual Javelin teams might be attached to companies and platoons. Though I think it would be a good idea if they were in the arms room at the company level, and the gunners just alternated weapons based on METT, since 0351 Assaultmen get trained on both systems anyway.

Either way, SMAW is not issued like the AT4 or LAW.

I thought a USMC rifle company has both Javelin and assault (SMAW) sections?

Edit: I think I got it. Because of the player limit, you can't simulate a full rifle company, so why have both Javelin and assault sections.

Exactly. You can't even simulate a full platoon, but that's the engine.

[StuTika]

Sooo to sum up, what should we be using? A choice of 2 M72s or 1 AT4 for rifleman AT, and a choice of the Javelin or...what? for the anti-tank class?

Stu.

[jbgeezer]

Well, what will you give US army and USMC? We got little to choose from. Javeling too overpowered and SRAW too unrealistic. And SMAW not even beeing a HAT.. (EDIT:According too Eddie Baker.)

[Ironcomatose]

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Eddie Baker;1151542']It was in game as a placeholder before we had a model for the AT-4.



The SMAW is a company level weapon with a dedicated gunner and a-gunner; they even have their own MOS; MOS 0351 Anti-Tank Assaultman. They are also trained in demo tasks, obstacle breaching (including mine clearing charges) and employment of anti-tank mines.

The SRAW, on the other hand, was intended to eventually replace the AT-4 as a squad level, rifleman's weapon. It is a single shot disposable weapon, but has a fire-and-forget inertial guidance. It is similar to the UK-selected NLAW (Bofors MBT-LAW). However, production was stopped before even 1000 units (IIRC) were made, and the inventory was retrofit with blast-frag "bunker-busting" warheads.

So, no, they are not on the same level. The SRAW never should have been in game because of how few ever made it into production, much less been in game as the weapon of a dedicated anti-tank gunner.[/quote]

The SMAW is a platoon level weapon and in fact we take it out on squad sized patrols with us. I have been trained with the SMAW and im only a 0311 rifleman. It is very common weapon. The SMAW can penetrate 21 inches(HEAA) of hard steel armor so it is very much more powerful than the AT4.

EDIT: My issue is that we dont use the SRAW and i have never seen nor trained with the Javelin and im pretty sure that we are deploying without it. Where as we have plenty of SMAWs lying around and use them all the time.

[quote="charliegrs""]ive been watching alot of recent marine videos from afghanistan, in helmand province etc. and one thing i noticed is it seems like alot of marines are using LAWS? They look like laws to me, but im not expert. They are very short collapsible rockets that are single use. They definitly werent at4s.

Anyway back on topic, I would love the smaw for the marines. Maybe as a pickup kit? The requestable heavy AT could be the SRAW {or javelin if they ever figure out how to implement it} and an alternate could be a pick up smaw?[/quote]

Yes the Marine corps has been leaning towards augmenting the M136 AT4 rocket with the lighter M72 LAW. I know guys who have deployed with the M72 and have used it in combat. Im not sure what criteria the Marine Corps has for issuing the LAW.

EDIT: I see that Eddie is on the ball with this **** so i apologize for the double post and redundant info.

[sakils2]

I personally, would LOVE to see the SMAW's or the LAW's in PR

[Eddie Baker]

[quote=""StuTika"]Sooo to sum up, what should we be using? A choice of 2 M72s or 1 AT4 for rifleman AT, and a choice of the Javelin or...what? for the anti-tank class?[/quote]

What we should be using for Rifleman AT is just what we have; the AT4. For HAT, wqhat we should have been using for a long time is the Javelin, and boo-f***ing-hoo to the actions who don't have a fire-and-forget missile.

[quote="jbgeezer""]Well, what will you give US army and USMC? We got little to choose from. Javeling too overpowered and SRAW too unrealistic. And SMAW not even beeing a HAT.. (EDIT:According too Eddie Baker.)[/quote]

Where the Hell do you think I said it was not an HAT? I said it was not a LAW. And I already said that the SMAW would be nice on certain maps.

The SMAW is a platoon level weapon and in fact we take it out on squad sized patrols with us. I have been trained with the SMAW and im only a 0311 rifleman. It is very common weapon. The SMAW can penetrate 21 inches(HEAA) of hard steel armor so it is very much more powerful than the AT4.

EDIT: My issue is that we dont use the SRAW and i have never seen nor trained with the Javelin and im pretty sure that we are deploying without it. Where as we have plenty of SMAWs lying around and use them all the time.

I wasn't aware they they were actually being issued organically to rifle platoons now, rather than "chopped" from the weapons platoon. When did this begin?

But I already said that the SRAW should not have been in game.

And above all, once again, this is a resuggestion.

[jbgeezer]

Where the Hell do you think I said it was not an HAT? I said it was not a LAW. And I already said that the SMAW would be nice on certain maps.

I got the impression from all you posts in this thread...

[sakils2]

I got the impression from all you posts in this thread...

You were the only one.

[Ironcomatose]

Eddie Baker;1151721']What we should be using for Rifleman AT is just what we have; the AT4. For HAT, wqhat we should have been using for a long time is the Javelin, and boo-f***ing-hoo to the actions who don't have a fire-and-forget missile.



Where the Hell do you think I said it was not an HAT? I said it was not a LAW. And I already said that the SMAW would be nice on certain maps.



I wasn't aware they they were actually being issued organically to rifle platoons now, rather than "chopped" from the weapons platoon. When did this begin?

But I already said that the SRAW should not have been in game.

And above all, once again, this is a resuggestion.

Well ok Eddie if you want to get smarty pants technical They are being chopped from weapons platoons but once they are attached to us then they are pretty much part of the platoon. What usually happens is the weapons platoon becomes 4th platoon and the gun jocks are put into the 0311 platoons while the men they replace are put into what is now 4th platoon thus creating 4 complete infantry platoons.

[Oak]

I personally, would LOVE to see the SMAW's or the LAW's in PR

I believe LAWs will be used as the IDF's LAT:
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f193-i ... f-wip.html

[Eddie Baker]

I got the impression from all you posts in this thread...

It's not a guided missile, if that's what you mean by HAT. But it is a crew served, reusable launcher that, apparently, used to be only issued to gunners with a full time MOS for it. It can be used as both anti-tank and anti-infantry (under cover and in the open) because of multiple round types; the 'M' in "SMAW" stands for "multi-purpose."

Well ok Eddie if you want to get smarty pants technical They are being chopped from weapons platoons but once they are attached to us then they are pretty much part of the platoon. What usually happens is the weapons platoon becomes 4th platoon and the gun jocks are put into the 0311 platoons while the men they replace are put into what is now 4th platoon thus creating 4 complete infantry platoons.

Okay, interesting. So then you "fam-fire" every weapon you might have to pick up.

I believe LAWs will be used as the IDF's LAT:
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f193-i ... f-wip.html

That's correct. Coincidentally, the Mk-153 SMAW is based off an Israeli weapon called the B-300; not sure if they still use it or if it will be in game, though.

[jbgeezer]

You were the only one.

Oh, well okay, dont like me sakils2? you seem to like to hunt me down...

It's not a guided missile, if that's what you mean by HAT. But it is a crew served, reusable launcher that, apparently, used to be only issued to gunners with a full time MOS for it. It can be used as both anti-tank and anti-infantry (under cover and in the open) because of multiple round types; the 'M' in "SMAW" stands for "multi-purpose."

Okay, well, but do we have other alternatives for HAT for US army and USMC?

[Eddie Baker]

Okay, well, but do we have other alternatives for HAT for US army and USMC?

Not really, no. Mk-153 SMAW is USMC only (except for a brief period in ODS when the Army borrowed some), and outside of the Ranger Regiment and other SOF (who use the Carl Gustav M3 recoilless rifle), no similar system is in Army service. The Javelin is pretty much the only realistic HAT option for the US Army; it's issued at the rifle platoon level in a weapons squad (2 x M240 and 2 x Javelin teams), and in Stryker and Bradley mech rifle platoons, issued as needed to trained gunners in the rifle squads. So, two to three in every platoon (about 40 men).

[jbgeezer]

Will they be given the javelin? Ive heard that the javelin makes using a HAT too simple, am I correct? I understand if you cant answer that yet though. Yep its probably worse, but what about the M47 dragon? Though I would agree in that adding it would be highly unrealistic, it is the only wire-guided weapon in that role used by the US army (exept for TOW, but that is more stationary, or mounted on vehicles. Javelin would be so simple, its just lock-fire-and forget. And that would be really unfair for example vs. the eryx.

[Eddie Baker]

The leftover Dragons are in a landfill somewhere. From what I understand, they were lemons. If not mounted on the M113 cupola, you could only fire them from a sitting position with your legs pressed against the bipod, which made it virtually impossible to engage anything but a stationary target.

Javelin would be so simple, its just lock-fire-and forget. And that would be really unfair for example vs. the eryx.

As I said before, boo-f***ing-hoo for them. Other factions in game have the BMP-3, BRDM Spandrel and gun-launched anti-tank missiles. None of which have any direct equivalent in any "Blue" faction, but are very powerful, especially with a good crew. Hell, the PLA makes do in-game with a 120mm bazooka [PF-98].

[charliegrs]

I believe LAWs will be used as the IDF's LAT:
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f193-i ... f-wip.html

oh yeah i forgot about that, so its already made i think it should be used for the usmc on afghan maps, for the LAT gunner. its light, 2 can be carried by a single soldier and they dont need as powerful a LAT against the taliban. and for USMC vs MEC/PLA maps give them the at4 for the LAT gunner as its a bit bigger and would be more useful against enemy vehicles.