M72 LAW's for US Army

[Slater]

From today's DoD contract awards. I had thought that the AT4 filled that particular role:

Nammo Defense Systems Inc., Mesa, Arizona, was awarded a $498,092,926 firm-fixed-price contract for the full rate production of M72 Light Assault Weapon variants and components for shoulder-launched munitions training systems. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 19, 2026. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Newark, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (W15QKN-22-D-0002).

https://www.defense.gov/News/Contrac...ticle/2880108/


It seems that the LAW has been significantly updated in recent years:

https://www.nammo.com/product/our-pr...re-a8-and-a10/

https://www.nammo.com/product/our-pr...-munition-a12/

[Wake27]

Maybe cheaper and therefore easier to field across the Army, hopefully. I really don't want to roll into WWIII without all of the rockets.

[CRAMBONE]

LAWs have been back for over 10 years. We did a rocket range in the fall of 2010 at Pendleton (we shot the crap out of the then new LAWs). Lack of armored enemy targets in the GWOT made the armor penetration and size/weight of the AT-4 un-needed. Upgraded warheads make the new LAWs almost as effective as the AT-4. As far as I know the AT-4 is still in production and being issued just not primary for line units.

[mack7.62]

Who is the biggest threat to the US today, you don't want to waste a AT-4 on a deplorable's F-250.

[Business_Casual]

I guess MBTs are fairly rare globally, while bunkers, improvised positions and technicals are far more prolific.

[utahjeepr]

In truth, they both suck against a modern MBT. The AT4 is better than the LAW against armor though.

Lower price, lighter weight, and weaker charge help to make the LAW more versatile. Think of it as more of a general purpose "have a crappy day" package. It's really great for redecorating sniper hides without killing the neighbors, etc.

[Wake27]

In truth, they both suck against a modern MBT. The AT4 is better than the LAW against armor though.

Lower price, lighter weight, and weaker charge help to make the LAW more versatile. Think of it as more of a general purpose "have a crappy day" package. It's really great for redecorating sniper hides without killing the neighbors, etc.

Probably would work pretty well against the hundreds of thousands of light skinned vehicles that near peer countries have too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Slater]

There's now a reduced caliber (42mm vs 66mm) version with a carbon fiber warhead, for a "kinder and gentler" effect:

[C-grunt]

Guys i know who went to Afghanistan in the mid teens were using LAWs. They said the weight and size made them far more useful in the mountains than the AT4.

[Alpha-17]

The AT-4 was always a PITA to carry. I wonder if they improved the durability and reliability of the LAW? Always heard they were relatively easily damaged.