We at SADJ wanted to cover the history of U.S. grenade machine guns, and with a recent visit to US Ordnance, the prime manufacturer of the MK19 Mod 3, it seemed like a perfect time. Later in this article, we’ll cover the modern MK19 system and improvements in depth. But first, a look at where we’ve come from...

Throwing grenades is nothing new. Reports of tossing explosives at enemies go back to the dark ages and certainly many armies had “grenadiers” in the 1700s and 1800s; light the fuse, toss the grenade. It wasn’t until mechanical fuses and primer firing were evolved that the idea of launching grenades automatically occurred. There are many early patents for weapons designed to launch explosive devices, but until the 1950s, the U.S. didn’t take the idea too seriously. With the advent of the 40x46mm grenade and its legendary M79 launcher, wheels started turning in the minds of designers and soldiers alike. Evolution of the single shot launchers has been covered in-depth by SADJ in the past; it is the idea of the U.S. designed, belt-fed, quickly repeating launchers that is our subject.

A proper timeline would be in two lines; the 40x46mm low velocity rounds, and the 40x53mm high velocity rounds. LV rounds have a range of 350-400 meters and can be shoulder fired or fired in a vehicle-mounted full-auto launcher, the HV rounds can go out to 2200 meters and are not for shoulder fired launchers.

Approximate Milestones for 40×46 Low Velocity Development:

1950s: Development of the 40x46mm low velocity grenade, and M79 launcher.
1965: Development and deployment of the MK18 Mod 0 crank fired launcher.
1968-71: Development and deployment of the MK20 Mod 0 automatic launcher.
1968: Development and deployment of various XM174E2 launchers.
1968: Development and deployment of the dual caliber M129 helicopter gun.

Approximate Milestones for 40×53 High Velocity Development:

1964: Final evolution of the 40x53mm high velocity grenade.
1966: MK19 Mod 0 design at Naval Ordnance Station, Louisville.
1969-74: Development of the Hughes XM175 series of launchers.
1968: Deployment of the first MK19 Mod 0 to Vietnam.
1971: Deployment of the first MK19 Mod 1 to Vietnam.
1974: Development of the MK19 Mod 2, not fielded.
1970s (Approximate): 600 MK19 Mod 2 Aluminum receiver guns- Israel.
1984-1989: Final development and manufacture of the MK19 Mod 3 by Saco Defense, then 1990s General Dynamics, and currently US Ordnance.

“The Honeywell Gun,” variously called the XM172, or the MK18 Mod 0, this was a crank fired belt fed, with 40x46mm ammunition; the same ammunition used in the M203/M79/M320 system. The ammunition is pre-loaded into a tape that holds the case in line with the barrel. Two rounds were fired per full revolution of the belt, allowing for slow, ranging fire, or firing up to about 250 rounds per minute. Belts were 24- or 48-round lengths. This was into action in about 1965 and survived in various places for U.S. forces (Navy) in Vietnam, primarily on “PBRs” (patrol boat, river) although some use on Chinook helicopters working over landing zone perimeters was seen.

MK18 Mod 0 with the cover open, showing the lower rotor with a round in position, and the upper rotor inside the cover. The two rotors are keyed together so that when the top cover is down, each rotor makes half of the chamber. Since it is Hi-Low pressure, low velocity, the round can be fired like this, and much like a revolver, the projectile must enter a separate barrel. The rounds were initially held in a metallic tape, since they didn’t need to be extracted, the tape simply came through with empty cartridge cases in it. This was later changed to a reloadable Mylar backed fabric which, for many, doubled as a grenadier’s belt for the M79 shooters.

Around 1966, the Navy wanted a better system than hand-cranking. Colonel George M. Chinn, author of the famous five-volume series of books “The Machine Gun” was involved. His team at Naval Ordnance Station in Louisville, Kentucky was simultaneously involved in designing an automatic grenade launcher to replace the crank-fired MK18 and, by 1967, the team had the boxlike MK20 Mod 0 in 40x46mm, and was preparing for the new MK19 system in 40x53mm.

The MK20 is an unusual design, the cocking handle is pushed forward, and the barrel moves forward and stays “cocked.” On pushing the trigger, the barrel springs to the rear, over the grenade, pushing it onto the firing pin and the barrel moves forward with the projectile moving forward in its bore. The cycle repeats as long as the trigger is depressed. Production was ended in 1971, when Chinn’s group was advancing the MK19 system.

The MK19 Mod 0 was fielded, at first, in 1968 in small numbers in Vietnam, and was an unreliable system. It utilized the newly designed 40x53mm round, and fired from an “open bolt” but using ‘advance primer ignition’. This means the firing pin struck the primer before the cartridge was fully seated and in battery. The Mod 1 debuted as in this example in 1971 and, by 1974, it was evident that there were reliability issues and a “Mod 2” was designed but not implemented. These were all done by Colonel Chinn’s team at the Naval Ordnance Station in Louisville, Kentucky.

There was, in fact, a production of the Mod 2. The MK19 Mod 2 Israeli contract gun in 40x53mm with an aluminum receiver. Approximately 600 were made. There’s no clear historical evidence pointing to the location of actual manufacture; at Naval Ordnance, or as a technical data package exported to Israel, perhaps with parts for assembly abroad.

In any event, these functioned but were not advanced into larger production and the MK19 Mod 3 replaced them in service. The Israeli Mod 2s were sold on the surplus market, and the parts were initially offered as “MK19 Mod 3” replacement parts in the mid-2000s, but of course none of the parts interchanged with the Mod 3 guns. Some steel receivers were made and project guns tested in the U.S. by a variety of smaller manufacturers, but there was a clear size and parts difference with the issue MK19 Mod 3. Today, it appears these parts are offered as “MK19 Mod 2.5” complete guns in a modern production, new receiver program. Not to discourage potential end users, but these are not compatible with the MK19 Mod 3 system, which is physically larger and does not interchange parts. It would be inadvisable to mix the systems and support, so if the Mod 2.5 is chosen, it should be supported on its own and verification of spare parts supply should be done.

M129: This is a unique electrically operated system that had a cam path in the receiver housing, but instead of the bolt traveling in that path like a Gatling or an M134, the barrel reciprocated. The barrel would start in the forward position, and when fired would cam back over the round, fire it, then move forward for extraction. These were mounted in chin pods on the front of many Huey gunships in Vietnam as well as other rotary winged aircraft. It replaced the very similar M75 system which had accuracy issues, among other problems. The M129 could fire either 40x46mm or 40x53mm grenades, depending on how the feed was set up.

The XM174E2 was a drum fed 40x46mm automatic gun on tripod that was made in very small quantity in the late 1960s by Aerojet Ordnance & Manufacturing Company. These made a shadowy appearance in Vietnam: Colonel David Lutz, USMC ret’d, told this author once of how he’d found two of these XM174E2s with drum feeds at a base armory and took them to his area of operations in the A Shau valley. He and his men were quite impressed with the accuracy and firepower in fighting the Vietcong and NVA, and wanted more of them. As Colonel Lutz (Lt. Lutz at the time) stated it “Then, adult supervision showed up, demanded to know where we had gotten these, and took them away in that time-honored military tradition of if it works well, you can’t have it.”

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, there were two versions of the M175 40x53mm grenade machine gun; first was the XM175AL (above, left) which had a milled, rounded receiver, and the second version XM175ST (above, right) had a boxlike sheet metal receiver. Hughes Gun Systems in Culver City, California was the design group and manufacturer. Both were open bolt firing, link-belt fed, could be converted to be right- or left-feed, and did not require external power like the M129. The M175 was designed initially for ground vehicle use, and then the vision changed for it to become a manually operated helicopter door gun.

More on the MK19 in the Modern Day….

In the 1980s, FNMI in South Carolina was awarded the contracts for the M16A2, the M249 SAW, the M240G, and the MK19 Mod 3, all at the same time. Chief Engineer George Kontis described the situation, “We knew we could not properly perform all four of the contracts simultaneously, and the contracting officer did as well, and offered our choice of three—leave one behind. After a full review, I determined that the MK19 Mod 3 TDP and learning curve would be the hardest, so FNMI withdrew from the MK19.”

Saco Defense was awarded the contract for MK19 Mod 3, and it took almost six years to develop the TDP and production process on the especially difficult receiver and bolt production. We visited the Saco facility numerous times during this period and tested the weapon in many of the phases of production along with the M6E4 program run by Marc Desrochers. Kevin Sullivan of today’s Nostromo company was project manager in the mid to later MK19 program success. Saco was bought out by General Dynamics, and the GD MK19 Mod 3 production was in full delivery for many years. Several other companies have tried to go into production, but the advantage goes to larger companies, and indeed the U.S. DoD wanted a secondary manufacturer capability during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars; ATK was awarded this, with FN Manufacturing as a subcontractor on the receivers and bolt bodies.

In the 1990s, I was involved in importation of special tripods and mounts from Vinghog of Norway for my USG customers. At that time, the accepted first burst hit probability at 1000 meters for the MK19 Mod 3 on M3 tripod with fixed cradle was approximately 53%. In our testing for U.S. government agencies, we ascertained that the HK GMG had a much higher first burst hit probability, and much of that advantage was in the tripod and soft mount as well as a good sighting system. (GMG testing for this author started in 1993 and continued through the Yuma Proving Ground tests in 1996-97. It’s a fine GMG but not the subject of this article).  

The customers wanted to retrofit their MK19s to gain similar accuracy. With the addition of the special Norwegian soft mount, the Adjustable Sight Mounting Bracket and some rudimentary head’s up sights with 40mm gradients, we brought the MK19 Mod 3 reliability to about 85% for first burst at 1000m. My point? The MK19 Mod 3 is an excellent grenade machine gun that needs mount stability and proper sighting. The advancements since that time have been by leaps and bounds, with the ability to land short bursts at long ranges increasing exponentially.

The MWO

There is a program that came out of the accuracy testing that was done. In June of 2002, a five-year plan was adopted for the MK19 Mod 3s in the U.S. Army system. MWO 9-1010-230-50-1 was implemented with an expected completion date of June 2007. However, that was only in the U.S. Army and later USMC/USN inventories; there are still tens of thousands of MK19 Mod 3 around the world that need this upgrade.

The purpose of this particular modification work order (MWO) is to convert the MK19 Mod 3 Grenade Machine Gun, to the MK19 Mod 3 with Adjustable Sight Mounting Bracket. Maintenance time is reduced and there is now a structural mounting point for fire control devices. The previous “sight mount” was a half-step, providing a not very secure rail base to the existing rear sight body. With this new purpose-designed mounting base, a variety of enhanced sighting devices can finally be used. The modification kit has the trapezoidal mounting base & screws, along with directions, and, for the armory, a fixture for drilling. This MWO was used as a vehicle to provide some upgrading of other parts, in particular the firing pin, firing pin sear, cam cocking, cocking lever and an adjustable secondary drive lever. 

US Ordnance has the contracts for the M60E4 (the Navy SEALs’ MK43), the US M2A1 .50 caliber, as well as M240 series and other M2 guns. After several years of research and prototyping, then going into production, US Ordnance perfected their MK19 Mod 3 manufacturing procedures. They had also inherited one of the original technical data packages (TDPs) that came from Colonel Chinn, and benefitted from employees who worked the original Saco and General Dynamics programs. In their arrangements with General Dynamics and the U.S. government, US Ordnance contracted to be the manufacturer of the MK19 Mod 3 grenade machine gun. They are the official U.S. government contractor for this system, as well as for foreign military sales (FMS) and sales to allied buyers. SADJ toured the manufacturing facility recently, and with the new U.S. government contract to supply all MK19 Mod 3 and repair parts, US Ordnance is preparing for a full mil-spec live-fire test, which we will participate in and bring the report to our readers. There is a complete upgrade program that should be available to most longtime users of the MK19 Mod 3 system. Rather, it is available, but many end users are not aware of it. I have participated in several over the years, but US Ordnance is the primary on this type of project. They can gauge your existing guns, recommend the upgrades, perform them in the factory or set up on site programs. This will not work on the MK19 Mod 1, Mod 2, or the “Mod 2.5” as can be seen in the history of the development, they are different guns from the most prolific and reliable Mod 3. Contrary to some advertising and “internet wizards,” the parts of those other models do not interchange with the MK19 Mod 3 40mm Grenade Machine Gun, and it is our sincere hope that this guide will help identify what systems are in place, and how to upgrade, repair, and maintain them.

Meanwhile, in the USSR…

While the U.S. was developing the 40x46mm and 40x53mm grenade machine guns, the Soviets were designing, as well. In 1965 the AGS concept was born and by 1971, production had begun. The AGS-17 30x29mm Grenade Machine Gun is a lightweight, tripod or vehicle mounted open bolt grenade launcher. It’s quite effective, and the smaller diameter, longer grenades have an almost spear-like travel to target. However, at 1700 meters range the time to target is very long, due to the high trajectory arc. Typically, the AGS is drum fed with 29 linked rounds per drum. SADJ has covered these extensively in the past and the analysis can be found at our websites.

Grenade Launcher Ammunition

40x46mm HE Fragmentation Hi-Low pressure, low velocity cutaway round for the M203/M79/M320 type launchers. The multiple fuses are in the front, the fragmentation ball is in the center (without energetics), and the base shows how the Hi-Low pressure system works. The primer is fired, igniting propellant in the central chamber which expands. When it reaches X pressure, it blows out through the vent holes into the sides into a much larger expansion chamber, creating a lower pressure that “pushes” the grenade into the barrel and downrange. Range is 350-400 meters.

At center is the 40x53mm Hi-Low pressure, high velocity cutaway round for the MK19/GMG and other Grenade Machine Gun systems, it is evident from the thick walls of the spherical chamber that there is much more pressure involved here. The cartridge case is 9mm longer than the 40×46 low velocity (M203) round, and the 40x53mm round cannot be chambered in the shoulder fired launchers. Range is out to 2200 meters, depending on firing platform.

Right is the VOG-25 40mm grenade, a “caseless” round that is front loaded into the barrel of the GP-25/30/34 underbarrel launchers. When the primer is struck, it ignites the propellant in the chamber at the very bottom, the expanding propellant gasses vent out into the base of the launcher forming the secondary low-pressure chamber and drive the grenade down the bore and downrange. There is no cartridge case left, it has all left the launcher downrange. Range is 350-400 meters.

During World War II, the basic weapons of the U.S. infantryman were the rifle, light machine gun and fragmentation grenades. Hand and rifle grenades were used for short-range area targets. Hand-thrown grenades have a realistic range of 30 to 50 yards. The maximum range of rifle-launched grenades was approximately 100 yards; both were ill-suited for engaging targets with accurate indirect fire. Light mortars were used for ranges from 300 to 900 yards. The same weapons and limitations were fielded during the Korean Conflict by U.S. infantryman.

The Rifle Grenade Launcher

During the late 1950s, the M7A3 grenade launcher adapter was being issued for use on the M1 rifle. After the M14 rifle replaced the M1, the M76 grenade launcher was adopted. For accuracy, the M15 tilting-bar sight, designed to be attached to the M14 rifle’s stock, was issued for use with the M76 launcher. Special “grenade launching cartridges” were used. Rifle grenades could also be launched from the M16 rifle, but no special adapter was needed; grenades could be slipped over the NATO standard 22mm diameter flash suppressor. Disadvantages of launching grenades from rifle barrels included: short range, inaccuracy and heavy recoil that would sometimes break buttstocks.

Clearly, a new weapon was needed, one that could provide accurate direct and indirect fire to fill the gap between the rifle, hand grenades and the light mortar. During the 1950s the United States Ordnance Department began development of a weapon that could fire high explosive munitions, multiple projectile anti-personnel rounds and smoke and illumination rounds.

40mm Ammunition

During the early 1950s the Ballistic Research Laboratories at the Aberdeen Proving Ground developed a 40mm high-explosive, fragmentation projectile. The goal was a range of 400 meters at the relatively low velocity of 250 feet per second, with a recoil force no more than that of a 12-gauge shotgun. The new projectile used a high-low pressure system, which was developed by the German firm of Rheinmetall-Borsig during World War II for their 8cm 8H63 anti-tank gun. The advantage of the high-low system was that a lightweight barrel could be used, reducing the overall weight of the weapon.

The M79 Grenade Launcher

The concept of a lightweight weapon capable of projecting a grenade further than could be thrown by hand and could exceed the range of rifle-launched grenades was coordinated by the Small Arms Development Branch, headed by Colonel Studler. Jack Bird, a deputy to Colonel Studler, took an interest in the project; he built a crude launcher and brought it to the Pentagon to demonstrate. The device was comprised of a short length of tubing with the same inside diameter as a golf ball. To operate the “launcher,” a golf ball would be placed inside the tube and compressed against a spring. The golf ball was secured in place with a nail. Upon removing the nail, the golf ball would be launched. Bird, an avid golfer, suggested the name “Project Niblick” after the number nine iron, a high lofting golf club.

During 1953, the Project Niblick grenade launcher was under development at the Springfield Armory under the guidance of Cy Moore, with Dave Katz, a design engineer. The Picatinny Arsenal provided 40mm practice grenades for firing in the prototype launchers. There were three types of launchers being developed: a crude shoulder fired test fixture, a pistol and a three-shot semiautomatic launcher. The fixture was primarily a means of testing the ammunition to get an idea of the range and accuracy. The weight of the projectile was approximately 5.3 ounces. When launched with a quadrant elevation of 35 degrees, it had a range of 400 meters. Development commenced at the Springfield Armory. Proposed designs were identified by a letter “S” representing the Springfield Armory. Many of the designs never made it any further than the drawing board.

The Infantry Board at Fort Benning stated that they preferred a three-shot grenade launcher. A barrel length of 14 inches evolved as the length to make it unlikely that the gunner could get his fingers in front of the muzzle while firing. The three-shot launcher achieved semiautomatic operation through the use of a clip made up of three side-by-side chambers, each long enough to house a cartridge about 3.5 inches long. The clips would move to the left after firing by a constant force of a negator spring. As each round was fired, a latch detected the launching of the projectile and allowed the clip to move over until stopped by the next projectile, lining up that cartridge with the barrel. Although the basic concept was simple, the mechanism proved to be complex and unreliable. Continued misalignment between the projectile on the bore created gas leakage and a loss of accuracy. Special purpose rounds, such as CS gas or signal flares with a longer overall length, could not be used. The simplest design, designated as the “S-5,” was a single-shot, break-open type weapon. The S-5 evolved into the XM79 in 1959 after the three-shot S-6, T148E1 project was canceled.

After the idea of a multi-shot, semiautomatic launcher was scrapped, it was replaced by a simple, single-shot weapon, patterned after a break-open type shotgun. One launcher was ordered from Dave Mathewson, who operated a local fabrication shop, often used by the Springfield Armory. To keep the weight at a minimum, the weapon featured a hard-coated aluminum barrel. The odd shape of the stock was designed so that the bottom edge would be aligned with the line of recoil; the top or comb is contoured to keep the grenadier’s head upright owing to the line of sight relief when firing at low angles. To reduce the effects of the recoil on the shooter, a rubber recoil pad was fitted to the butt of the stock. The Infantry Board suggested a folding leaf sight mounted on the barrel with a bead front sight just above the muzzle. The XM79 launcher was sent to the Infantry Board in 1956 and was recommended for type classification in 1957.

To load the weapon, the operator simply moves the barrel-locking latch counter-clockwise to open the breech. Moving the release latch automatically puts the weapon into a safe position; opening the breech cocks the weapon. After closing the barrel, the safety must be pushed forward to fire. The weapon is easily field stripped by removing the front sling swivel screw and removing the forend. The barrel can then be disengaged from the fulcrum pin and separated from the receiver group.

The weight of the loaded launcher is 6.45 pounds; overall length is 28.78 inches. The stock and forearm are made of walnut. The rest of the weapon, except for the aluminum barrel, uses steel parts phosphated for corrosion protection. The original contract price for the M79 was $318.00 each. The M79 was issued with a small arms accessory case, which included a bore brush, plastic oil tube, combination tool and cleaning brush. Early carrying cases for the kit were made of canvas, later changed to vinyl.

During testing by the Infantry Board in June 1960, it was recommended that a new rear sight for the M79 launcher be designed and fabricated. The new sight was completed in October 1960. The early ladder-type sight was replaced with an adjustable, single crosspiece-type sight with a correction for azimuth. All launchers produced up to June 1960 had to be retrofitted. Confirmatory tests in December 1960 revealed requirements for additional windage adjustment on the rear sight. The additional sight modification was incorporated in the first production run. R&D continued in order to improve the reliability and function of the weapon. The launcher was considered acceptable by the Continental Army Command (CONARC) and was subsequently type-classified as the Launcher, Grenade, 40mm, M79 on December 15, 1960. By the first quarter of 1961, the new adjustable rear leaf sight was in full production, and several mandatory changes were implemented on the barrel locking lug, trigger spring and front sight.

The heat and humidity being experienced in Vietnam were causing problems with the warping and swelling of the wooden stocks of the M79. As a result, work began on designing a plastic buttstock and foregrip for the weapon. By 1964, a suitable plastic buttstock was available; General Tire was the primary contractor. There were no plastic foregrips adopted.

Although the M79 grenade launcher was designed and developed at the Springfield Armory, the majority were manufactured by civilian companies. Contracts awarded to private industry included: Action Manufacturing Company, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Contract DA-11-1199-ORD-736 and Exotic Metal Products, Pasadena, California, Contract DA-11-199-ORD-730. Other contracts were subsequently awarded to the Kanarr Corporation of Kingston, Pennsylvania, and Thompson Ramo Wooldridge (TRW) of Lyndhurst, Ohio. The decision to have private companies manufacture the M79, resulted in a lot of resentment with the civilian employees of the Springfield Armory. Series production ran from 1961 to 1971 with an estimated 350,000 M79 launchers produced.

Despite being replaced by modern grenade launchers, like the M320A1 and the M32A1, the M79 is still being fielded by the U.S. military.

The China Lake Grenade Launcher

Developed for the U.S. Navy SEAL teams was a limited production, pump-action 40mm grenade launcher, fed from an under-barrel tubular three-round magazine. The launcher was fitted with M79 front and rear sights and a shotgun-style stock. There was no official designation other than “The China Lake Grenade Launcher.” The weapon was developed at the Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, California, during 1967-1968.

The XM148 Grenade Launcher

While the adoption of the M79 grenade launcher solved one problem, it created another; it reduced the number of riflemen in a squad, the man carrying the single-shot M79 was usually armed with only a pistol for self-defense. To address the problem, the concept of the rifle-mounted launcher was studied. The 40mm XM148 launcher, first issued in 1967, was designed for mounting under the barrel of an M16 rifle. The weapon was developed by Colt Firearms to allow each rifleman in an infantry squad the ability to launch 40mm grenades, rather than one man equipped with an M79. During field testing in Vietnam, a number of problems were encountered. The XM148 launcher was not considered reliable or safe enough for type classification, and the launchers were pulled from service; most were destroyed.

The M203 Grenade Launcher

After the XM148 grenade launcher was scrapped, the concept of a rifle-mounted launcher was not. The Army initiated a competitive program for a new 40mm rifle-mounted grenade launcher. Designs were submitted by Aircraft Armaments Inc., Ford Aerospace and Communications Corporation and Aerojet Ordnance and Manufacturing Company. During August 1968, the Aircraft Armaments (AAI) design was type-classified as the XM203 grenade launcher. A small lot was manufactured and shipped to Vietnam for field testing. AAI’s XM203 40mm grenade launcher was found to be simple, safe and reliable. After successful testing and evaluation, the Aircraft Armaments design was type-classified as the Launcher, Grenade 40mm, M203 in 1969. Ironically, Aircraft Armaments, who developed the weapon, did not have the capacity to produce the number required by the Army, and a contract to manufacture the M203 was awarded to Colt Firearms. The U.S. M4 Carbine version of the M16 was adopted in 1994. The M203 launcher would not fit on the shorter M4. The M203 GL was modified into the M203A1, which is functionally the same as the M203 but is designed to fit on the M4 and M4A1 carbines. The quick-release M203A2 was designed for M4 carbines with a rail system and with M16A4 rifles that have the M5 adapter rail. Currently, there are at least seven U.S. companies manufacturing the M203 grenade launchers and its variants.

The M320 Grenade Launcher

During 2004, the U.S. Army issued a requirement for a new technically advanced grenade launcher with improved accuracy, ergonomics, safety and function as a stand-alone weapon. Development of the XM320 single-shot launcher, based on the HK AG36, began at the Picatinny Arsenal. The 40mm M320, which can also be attached under the barrel of a host weapon, was adopted in 2016 to replace the M203 under-barrel launcher.

The M32A1 Multi-Shot Grenade Launcher

While fighting in Iraq, the U.S. Marines requested a grenade launcher with a rapid rate of fire. An off-the-shelf, multi-shot revolver type, semiautomatic launcher was submitted by Milkor USA based in Arizona. The weapon was tested in 2006 and was eventually adopted by the U.S. Marine Corps as the M32A1 Multi-shot Grenade Launcher, and by the USSOCOM as the Mk 14 Mod 0.

40mm launchers are commonplace for tactical teams.

By R.T. Wyant, M.S.

With the current political climate and increased scrutiny of police departments, there is an expectation that at least one less lethal option be available to moderate use of force scenarios. Since the late 1980s, the 12 gauge beanbag shotgun has been a prevailing extended range less lethal option. This force option was intended to inflict blunt injury, like a baton strike, but from a safer standoff distance. 12 gauge less lethal impact munitions have provided tactical teams and the patrol officer a bridge between batons and firearms with minimal cost and training. With issues of safety, accuracy, effectiveness, and ammunition confusion, some agencies have reconsidered this platform choice as negative outcomes have led to significant settlements. Progressive departments are opting to toss the beanbag and adopt a more accurate, versatile and albeit more expensive 40mm platform to address their less lethal needs. This assessment has been echoed through scientific testing that proves to be helpful when justifying additional costs to a department risk manager.

Evolution of the Beanbag

The initial design of the beanbag consisted of a square Cordura bag filled with #9 lead shot. Dubbed the “ravioli” round as it sat rolled in the shot shell, it didn’t take a physics degree to predict potential problems with a square shaped projectile unrolling as it flew downrange. There were dozens of documented serious injuries including lacerations and broken bones. At least eight fatalities occurred when the square tipped on edge and penetrated the chest cavity. As injuries and deaths occurred, so did changes in design. The next generation of beanbags, called “sock” rounds, hit the market with claims of increased safety and effectiveness. The sock round is typically a lead shot filled Kevlar bag with a tail, which forms a uniform flight profile striking the target with a spherical shape, reducing injury potential. As with the ravioli round, the sock round begins as a cylinder shape and it expands in flight as it travels toward the target. Injuries were reduced as the sock had no sharp edges to penetrate skin. Other types of 12 gauge less lethal ordnance began to emerge with varying degrees of effectiveness versus sock rounds.

Beanbag Troubles

The police slide-action shotgun, such as the Remington 870 with a smoothbore, was the reigning long gun of choice for many years. As shotguns in the patrol setting were gradually phased out by some departments and replaced by patrol rifles, many of these shotguns were assigned to a less lethal role. Personal testing and published research has demonstrated that a rifled bore will increase accuracy and performance of beanbag rounds, but police agencies infrequently endure the extra expense. High-speed video validated that the tail of the “sock” often does not have enough mass to truly stabilize the round and it will regularly fly end over end out of a smooth bore. The unstable round will miss point of aim and occasionally fly wildly. In addition, over load and over powder wads will not always drop off and will fly with the sock downrange, sometimes striking the target. These additional projectiles can cause additional injuries. Furthermore, the standard shotgun can be loaded with either less lethal ammunition or traditional 12 gauge ammunition. A large metropolitan police agency recently reached a significant settlement after a man was shot mistakenly by buckshot from a less lethal shotgun.

The 40mm

As with the 12 gauge, the 40mm offers several types of launchers, including single, double and multi-shot platforms. For the single aggressor, foam or sponge rounds are particularly accurate as the round engages the rifling creating a gyro-stabilized spin, much like a traditional bullet. The wounds inflicted are generally consistent and predictable as they strike the subject. Due to their design, there is no change in shape as it leaves the barrel or as it flies downrange. There are no additional projectiles from wadding to unintentionally strike the target. In addition, a multitude of ordnance is available for the 40mm platform including multiple projectile, chemical irritant, and barricade penetrating rounds for a variety of tactical and crowd control applications.

Energy Density

Much like the difference between the ravioli and the sock beanbag rounds, where and how a round strikes the body can govern the severity of injury. A key advantage of the 40mm over the 12 gauge is that its large size allows dispersion of the impact energy (reduced energy density) over a greater area. Distributing the energy of the round over a larger surface lessens the injury potential (penetration, broken bones) and also excites more nerve endings on the skin for more pain stimulus. More pain stimulus increases the likelihood of compliance.

Considerations

When studying the capabilities and performance of the two platforms, it becomes obvious why some police agencies are choosing to switch from the 12 gauge to the 40mm for their less lethal applications. In addition to increased accuracy, safety and effectiveness, agencies eliminate the risk of ammunition mismatch. There is also the psychological effect of gaining compliance from an unruly individual as an inch and a half sized bore is pointed at him. As with any tool used by police, it should be stated that the 12 gauge platform can be an effective tool if one fully understands its capabilities, limitations and the operators are properly trained. Tactics and training must be heavily considered. Some less lethal deployments have incurred negative results simply because the operator did not fully understand the effects of the round. Subjects have been struck in the head by a second shot as they have bent over reacting to the first shot. From a risk management point of view, the added costs to outfit a department with 40mm could easily offset the liability incurred from an unintended outcome from a less lethal deployment. With either firing platform, the key to a successful less lethal program and limited liability comes with smart deployments and thorough documentation.

(About the Author: R.T. Wyant, M.S. is a supervising forensic scientist for a ballistics crime laboratory in the state of Washington. He has studied less lethal weapons for over a decade has provided scientific analysis, product research, training, and expert witness work for all over the U.S. and abroad. He has also served as a level-one reserve deputy for a major Washington county for 14 years. Recently, he was the principle author of the text: Risk Management of Less Lethal Options.)

The US Army’s programmes for developing two different 25mm grenade launchers – the shoulder-fired XM25 from Alliant Techsystems and the crew-served XM307 ACSW (Advanced Crew-Served Weapon) by General Dynamics – are probably the most ambitious small arms projects in existence. They are meant to revolutionise the effectiveness of small-arms fire by detonating HE/fragmentation grenades directly over the target, thereby greatly increasing the number of casualties, not just of standing men but also those hiding behind cover. Such rounds are known as HEAB (High Explosive Air Burst) or ABM (Air Bursting Munition).

To achieve this requires some sophisticated technology. The XM307 is fitted with a day/night sight with a laser rangefinder, a ballistic computer and a fuze-setter. The gunner first lases the target to establish the range (this can be overridden if the target is at a slightly different distance than the aiming point); the system then takes atmospheric conditions and weapon tilt angle into account before indicating the aiming mark in the sights. The gunner can set the fuze mode for airburst, PDSQ (point detonating super-quick), PD delayed-action or deactivate; it also contains a self-destruct element. The projectile fuze measures the distance by counting the number of rotations: its spin rate is 21,000-28,000 rpm. The XM25 uses the same technology, with a shorter, lower-velocity cartridge limiting the range to around 700m rather than 2,000m.

The XM307 was originally intended to replace most of the .50 M2HB and 40mm Mk 19 AGLs, while the nearest comparators to the XM25 are the much bulkier six-shot revolvers chambered for the low-velocity 40mm grenade round, such as the Milkor MGL, adopted by the USMC as the M32. Adoption of the XM25 might therefore be expected to lead to a reduction in the use of the 40mm LV (low velocity) weapons, if not their eventual disappearance.

The manufacturers of 40mm GLs and ammunition are not taking this lying down, however, and have come up with a range of new developments to keep their products attractive.

Ammunition for Shoulder-Fired Grenade Launchers

The 40x46SR low velocity (LV) grenade round has now been around for almost half a century, originally chambered in stand-alone single-shot guns like the M79, but subsequently in underbarrel grenade launchers (UGL) such as the M203, and more recently the six-barrel revolvers mentioned above. The muzzle velocity is only 250 fps, limiting the maximum range to about 400m.

The original round fired was the M406 HE/fragmentation type, and High Explosive Dual Purpose (HEDP) rounds have also been available for some time, enabling these launchers to be used to tackle light armour. Some recent developments have considerably extended the versatility of this round. From Arcus of Bulgaria comes the AR476 “Anti-Diver” grenade which has a time fuze which is set on impact with the water, detonating the HE at a stated depth of between 5 and 12 metres and with a claimed lethal radius of 12m. They have also introduced the AR466 “Bouncing” ABHE grenade which on impact is kicked back up into the air by a small nose charge before detonating, to increase the lethal radius – not a new idea, but a very much cheaper way of providing some of the effectiveness of the sophisticated HEAB systems. A similar RLV-FJ “Jump” round is offered by Arsenal, also of Bulgaria – a country which appears to be innovating with enthusiasm in this field.

More effective conventional ammunition has also been developed, with the latest trend being Medium Velocity (MV) rounds, with the muzzle velocity increased to between 350 and 410 fps, thereby doubling the effective range. Recoil is claimed to be similar to that of a 12 gauge shotgun, and well below that of a rifle grenade, and they are designed to be used in many existing LV systems. At a range of 150m the mid-range trajectory will be halved to about 3m and flight time is reduced. The first in the field was Martin Electronics’ “Mercury”, which is significantly longer than standard 40mm HE rounds to make room for a larger HE charge, doubling the destructive power as well as the range of the conventional M433 HE grenade. Nammo Raufoss, Heckler & Koch and now Denel of South Africa are also developing MV ammunition, while Arcus have developed “extended range” versions of their HE and ABHE products, capable of about 600m.

IMI and STK are even developing High Explosive Air Burst LV rounds to deliver the same effects as the XM25, although these do of course need to be used in conjunction with special sights with a laser rangefinder and fire control computer, and also a launcher modified to include an electronic fuze setter. IMI have developed the compact and lightweight Orion sight which offers these facilities and can be fitted to any rifle in conjunction with a modified UGL.

Martin Electronics have also introduced a thermobaric round, the DRACO; a type of explosive which is proving particularly popular in some larger weapons in use in the Middle East because of the effectiveness of its high blast overpressure in enclosed spaces such as buildings and caves. The round is very expensive, however, so attention is now being focused on the much cheaper Hellhound.

The peacekeeping roles which armies frequently have to adopt have generated growing interest in Less-Lethal ammunition for riot control and similar policing activities. Many manufacturers now offer a very varied range of irritant chemical, impact, combined and paint marker ammunition too extensive to describe here. Although such munitions have traditionally been used in specialised 37/38mm riot guns, they are increasingly available for the 40mm LV grenade launchers – and, in a few instances, for the 40mm HV AGL as well.

Other types of rounds which are not directly lethal include various smoke and flare types. There are also some novel developments, most notably the observation rounds containing parachute-borne video cameras that send pictures directly back to the operator, providing an instant view of what lies over the hill or around the corner. Both STK (with the SPARCS) and Martin Electronics (with the HUNTIR) have developed such rounds for 40mm LV grenade launchers, while the Rafael Firefly, still in development, is equipped with folding “wings” rather than a parachute.

Many of the new rounds are longer than standard, at up to 5.5 inches. In contrast, ammunition for the semiautomatic XM25 is limited in size (the maximum length is only about 3.5 inches), and cannot hope to emulate the variety of types now available for the 40mm LV GLs, which will be with us for the foreseeable future.

40mm AGLs

The success of the original 40mm LV grenade rounds rapidly led to the development of fast-firing weapons chambered for them, but almost as quickly the need for greater range was realised, so the 40x53SR high velocity (HV) cartridge was developed. This had the muzzle velocity increased to around 800 fps which, in conjunction with a heavier grenade (about 240g compared with 180g), increased the effective range out to 2,000m. The first automatic grenade launchers (AGLs – also known as grenade machine guns or GMGs) chambered for this round were externally powered and designed for installation in helicopters: the M75 and M129 both seeing service in Vietnam. Far more important, however, was a self-powered design, the Mk 19. This was developed in the late 1960s as a USN project but was subsequently adopted by other services, as well as achieving substantial export sales.

Since then, and particularly since the 1990s, a number of rival AGLs have emerged from several different countries: the Spanish Santa Barbara (now General Dynamics Santa Barbara Sistemas) LAG 40 SB, the Singapore Technologies Kinetics (STK) 40AGL and Light Weight AGL, the Heckler & Koch HK40 GMG (recently bought by the British Army), South Africa’s Denel Y3 AGL, and other weapons from Romania, Poland, Turkey and Pakistan. Of most significance to the USA is the CG40, a joint project between three companies, commencing in 1995: Nammo (ammunition), General Dynamics Canada (Fire Control) and Saco Defense (now a part of GD) who developed the gun and dealt with system integration. Some 400 are in service with US special forces, ordered between 2001-5, under the designation Mk 47 Striker.

The HV ammunition used in these guns has not shown the variety found in the LV rounds, partly because of the narrower range of uses of the AGLs and partly because the need to function in an automatic mechanism restricts the characteristics – and particularly the overall length – of the cartridge. However, a great deal of attention is now being paid to the development of the same kind of airburst technology as that being tested in the XM307.

The way is being led by Nammo Raufoss, who have developed HEAB ammunition as a part of the CG40 project, under the designation PPHE (Programmable Pre-fragmented HE). The gun was designed for this from the start, the necessary systems being integrated into the weapon. These include an image-intensifying video sight linked to a laser rangefinder and incorporating a ballistic computer to indicate the exact aiming point, and an electronic fuze setter by the gun breech. When used with the appropriate ammunition fitted with the Mk 438 programmable time fuze, the system sets the appropriate time delay on the fuze while it is in the chamber (the gun fires from a closed bolt) so that the grenade bursts directly over the target. The gun can also use conventional point-detonating 40x53SR ammunition, with which the advanced sights are still useful in providing a high level of accuracy. The Mk 285 HEAB projectile produces fragments which are mainly distributed sideways and backwards to catch troops behind cover, rather than forwards as with a conventional grenade. An initial order for 39,000 of this round has been placed for use in the Mk 47 Striker, with deliveries expected to be completed by early 2008.

Nammo are also working on a variation of this system for guns, such as the HK40 GMG, which fire from an open bolt. The chosen system is radio frequency programming, the fuze being set about 4 to 5 metres after the grenade has left the muzzle. Since all of the system requirements are contained within a single sight/fire-control/programming unit, this can be fitted to any gun able to mount the unit.

There is yet a third HEAB system, from STK of Singapore; the ABMS (Air Bursting Munition System), which can also be fitted to existing 40mm AGLs. This was developed in conjunction with Oerlikon-Contraves Pyrotec AG of Switzerland, who adapted the technology developed for their 35mm AHEAD cannon ammunition. As with AHEAD, the fuze-setting system is attached to the muzzle and sets the fuze as the grenade leaves the barrel. Like the Nammo systems, special grenades are used with an all-round fragmentation pattern, so they throw fragments behind them as well as in front and to the sides; the Oerlikon/STK type contains 330+ tungsten balls, each weighing 0.25g and intended to penetrate at least some grades of body armour. The effective range of the system is 40 to 1,600m.

In the rush to airburst systems, the value of the conventional (and much cheaper) ammunition has not been forgotten. Nammo have developed a ‘product improved’ M430 HEDP round at the request of the USMC, who have asked for a mechanical self-destruct fuze, a modified (NICO type) propulsion system, insensitive munition (IM) properties using a PBXN-11 main charge, additional incendiary after-armour effect, penetration improved from three to four inches of RHA, and a reduced safety zone to prevent the base of projectile from being blown back towards the gunner (the current limitations being 310m in peacetime, 75m in wartime). Internal Nammo qualification of this round is expected in spring 2008.

While the 25mm XM307 offers certain advantages, notably gun and ammunition weight plus a much flatter trajectory and shorter flight time, the 40mm AGLs clearly have a lot of life in them yet. Their ability to fire inexpensive standard ammunition as well as sophisticated HEAB rounds means that they are likely to remain popular long after the XM307 enters service.

(Anthony G Williams is Co-editor of Jane’s Ammunition Handbook, and maintains a website at http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk)

High Explosive

The most common HE rounds were the M406 and M433 . The 406 contained a spherical bomblet with a lethal radius of 5 meters. The 433 contains a shaped charge of RDX, with a lethal radius of 5 meters but a penetration capability of up to 2 inches of armor.

Pyrotechnic Rounds

Pyrotechnic rounds were used for signaling and illuminating.

The cluster type was made in white, green and red. It contained 5 stars that burst at 550 feet and burned for 7 to 11 seconds.

The parachute star type came in white, green, red, and orange. Its single candle ignited at 550 feet and burned for 40 seconds.

Smoke Rounds

These rounds were typically used for spotting targets, locations and conditions of landing zones.

Ground marker smoke was produced in red, green, yellow, and violet. These had a range out to 400 yards and ignited on impact with a burn time of 20 to 40 seconds depending on type.

Canopy smoke rounds were used when jungle cover would hide a normal ground burn. These were fired up through the trees to burst above them.

Gas and Shot

Two additional rounds that saw limited tactual use were the M651 CS gas and the XM576E1 shot (designated multiple projectile)

The CS gas had a range of 400 meters, and burn time of 25 seconds. It did not arm itself until it reached 10 to 30 meters.

The XM576E1 shot round contained 20 buckshot sizes pellets in a plastic sabot. Its maximum range was 50 yards and effective range of 35 yards.

Initially with the Teams, the primary round of ammunition used with the M79 was the M406 high explosive round. The large, heavy, projectile of any of the 40 mm rounds could be easily seen by the gunner as they lobbed through the air. Being able to actually see the projectile in flight was a bit disconcerting at first, as the projectile’s large size and low muzzle velocity made it appear the wobble through the air without the ability to hit anything accurately. Confidence with the new weapon came with training. SEALs during pre-deployment training would practice extensively with their weapons, M79s among them. Even with its high, arcing trajectory and apparently slow travel, grenadiers soon learned that the 40mm grenade could be almost amazingly accurate.

Experience with the weapon is what developed skill in an M79 grenadier, and the Teams made certain some of that experience was with their men right from the start. As part of their combat preparation, SEALs would spend hours on the range practicing with their chosen weapons. A skilled M79 grenadier could often drop a grenade right onto a target that was 150 meters away by simply pointing his weapon and looking along the barrel. This kind of shooting was considered instinctive, very quick, and didn’t employ the fairly complex rear sight of the M79 at all. When using the sights and aimed carefully, the accuracy of the M79 was such that a good operator could consistently drop grenades into a garbage can at 150 meters.

Working against the accuracy and effectiveness of the M79 was the fact that it was a dedicated, single-shot weapon. Any SEAL who carried an M79 was very limited in what he could do with the weapon during a close-in encounter of less than 15 meters. The minimum arming range of the grenade, combined with its bursting radius, made the round ineffective and dangerous when used close-in during a sudden eyeball-to-eyeball encounter with the enemy.

becomes a non-issue and the SEAL would open fire with whatever he had in his hands. When a 40mm grenade struck a target in an unarmed condition, it would still act as a very large bullet. A dead VC struck with an unexploded 40mm grenade might become a problem for explosive ordnance disposal, but the SEAL would still be around to report the incident.

Prior to the SEALs sending direct action platoons to Vietnam, Marine and Army units had been in combat in Southeast Asia and had reported the drawbacks of the M79 for close-in combat. New rounds were developed for the M79 and sent over to Vietnam for combat testing. The first of the close-combat rounds for the M79 was a flechette round loaded with 45 finned steel flechettes carried in a plastic sabot. The 10-grain flechettes resembled sharp finishing nails with fins stamped into the head and were effective immediately after leaving the muzzle of the launcher.

When fired, the plastic sabot holding the bundle of fletchettes would break away soon after the projectile left the muzzle of the weapon and the flechettes themselves would spread into a widening pattern. But, as with most of the small-arms flechette loads used in Vietnam, the little finned needles were not stable at the muzzle of the weapon and usually weren’t flying straight and point first until they had traveled about 15 to 30 meters through the air. Close-in, as many as half the flechettes would hit a target sideways or backwards as point on, severely limiting the effectiveness of the round.

Two types of buckshot round were developed for the M79 in the 1965-66 time period to replace the fletchette load. The XM576E1 and XM576E2 rounds were both loaded with #4 (0.24 inch) hardened buckshot. The two cartridges differed in the plastic sabots that were used to launch the buckshot payloads. These rounds began arriving in Vietnam during the SEAL’s first deployments but were not widely available.

Higher command thought the new rounds for the M79 may have too short a range and be ineffective because of that. SEALs in the field did not hold such an opinion and thought highly of the new ammunition. The XM576E1 round was not as effective as the E2 design, which was later adopted as the M576 Multiple-projectile round, but both rounds turned the M79 into a very large shotgun. One of the reasons shotguns were so popular among the SEALs was that the buckshot loads had a great deal of stopping power, especially at close range. Flechette loads, though lethal, didn’t transfer their energy into the target efficiently and never had the knock-down power of buckshot.

With the new multiple-projectile rounds, the M79 became effective at close range. But the basic weapon was still a single-shot design. Once the M79 had fired its round, the grenadier was out of the action until he had reloaded. In the sudden combat environment of the SEALs, this situation could easily lead to men being killed because they had an empty weapon. Without there being any way to speed up the reloading of an M79, SEAL grenadiers simply took to carrying more than one weapon. In the US Army and Marine Corps, grenadiers were normally armed with an M1911A1 pistol in addition to their M79, SEALs preferred considerably more firepower.

Ammunition counts were always high when SEALs went into combat. The larger the SEAL, the more ammunition he would carry. Though the individual round count for 40mm ammunition might be low, the rounds themselves were fairly large and each weighed about half a pound. Depending on the mission, a SEAL grenadier might carry a very heavy load of 40mm grenades along with his additional equipment.

Development of new ammunition types was considered a primary means of increasing the usefulness of the M79 in general. Literally dozens of new rounds were experimented with during the course of the Vietnam war. Some of the rounds, such as the XM576E2, eventually reached standardization, others never went to combat and were only produced in small number for testing. From the very earliest operations of the SEALs in Vietnam, new types of 40mm ammunition was desired and obtained whenever possible.

•Excerpt from SEAL Team Two, 2nd Platoon’s Vietnam operations, 30 January to 30 May 1967

Weapons and Equipment

6. If flare rounds and canister rounds were available for the M-79, the weapon’s versatility would be increased tremendously.

7. Mk 8 Very pistol rounds can be fired from the M-79.

The primary mark against the M79 was still the fact that the weapon was single shot. That had been a concern back in the mid-1950s when the design was first considered. The relatively low recoil of the 40mm ammunition family, combined with its low firing pressure, allowed another approach to solving the single-shot problem.

In September, 1964, Karl Lewis and Robert E. Roy applied for a patent on a grenade launcher attachment they had designed for Colt Firearms. By October 1966, the patent was granted but Colt had already been marketing the new weapon since 1965 as the CGL-4 (Colt Grenade Launcher), part of their CAR-15 weapons system. The CGL-4 could be mounted underneath the barrel of an AR-15 (M16E1) and operated independently of the rifle. The CGL-4 had its own controls and sighting system and used the rifle solely as a support and to supply a buttstock for firing.

To mount the CGL-4 on a rifle, the standard handguards would be removed and the CGL-4 clamped in place on the barrel. A new handguard would be placed on the barrel of the rifle to protect the operator and the grenade launcher would be ready for use. As long as there was sufficient barrel length, a CGL-4 could be mounted on any of the AR-15/M16 weapons including the short CAR-15.

A small pistol grip underneath the CGL-4 allowed an operator to unlock and slide the 40mm barrel forward, automatically extracting and ejecting any fired casing that might be in the chamber. Slipping a loaded round into the barrel and using the pistol grip to pull the barrel shut and lock it in place was all that was necessary to load the CGL-4.

A large knob on the rear of the CGL-4 receiver would be drawn back with the fingers to cock the weapon. A trigger bar extended down the right side of the supporting rifle and ended just in front of the trigger guard. Extending the end of the trigger and rotating it in place put the trigger of the CGL-4 just below the trigger of the supporting rifle. The dual trigger allowed the operator to fire either the M16 or the CGL-4 by simply moving his finger to the proper trigger.

The US Army found the CGL-4 a possible “off-the-shelf” answer to the limited firepower of the M79 in 1966. With minor modifications, the CGL-4 went into limited production in November 1966 as the XM148. Both the US Army units in Vietnam and the Navy SEALs received the new launchers in early 1967. Now for the first time, a weapon was available that had both a point target effect (the rifle) and an area target effect (the grenade launcher). The concept was new and reactions from the men in the field were carefully examined. For the SEALs, this reaction was enthusiastic.

Though the XM148 was well received by the SEALs, they were not blind to the drawbacks of the weapon. The XM148 was a lot more fragile than the simple M79, and had a great deal more parts to get out of order. There was no guard for the XM148’s trigger bar that extended down the right side of the carrying rifle. Any piece of brush, equipment, or even a finger that got between the trigger bar and the receiver of the rifle would push the bar out and jam the XM148 so that it couldn’t be cocked. In addition, the bare trigger bar could hang up on some material during a crawl and fire the XM148 if the weapon was cocked and the safety off. It was this drawback that caused the recommendation to go out that the XM148 could be carried with a round in the chamber, but that the weapon should not be cocked until just before use.

The final Army report on the XM148 was written in May, 1967. A number of the Army users liked the XM148 but the weapon was found to be too fragile and unsafe for general issue. The reporting team concluded that “the XM-148 in its present configuration is unsatisfactory for further operational use in Vietnam.” Recommendations were that the XM148 be removed from service until another design was available. By the fall of 1967, all of the Army’s XM148s had been turned in. The SEALs found the effectiveness of the weapon offset the bad parts of the design and retained theirs until the end of the Team’s involvement in Vietnam.

The XM148 had some unusual aspects to its action that were discovered and used by many of its operators. The sear lever of the XM148 was exposed at the rear of the receiver to the weapon. Operators in both the Army and the SEAL Teams found that you could fire the cocked launcher by pressing on the upper part of the sear lever with the thumb of the left hand without letting go of the pistol grip to the M16 with the right hand. Though not officially recommended, gunners found they could move through the undergrowth with one finger on the trigger of the rifle and the thumb of the other hand on the sear bar of the grenade launcher. Either weapon could be fired immediately without changing hands.

The Teams liked the XM148, but still wanted the firepower of the grenade launcher system increased. SEAL Team One examined at least one of the Springfield Armory produced T148E1 repeating grenade launchers for possible adoption early during their Vietnam war commitment.

•SEAL TEAM ONE – COMMAND AND CONTROL HISTORY – 1967

NWC ORD TASKS…. A listing of special procurement actions completed is summarized below:
[item 9] 40 M Grenade Launcher T148[E]1

It has not been reported that the T148E1 launcher examined by SEAL Team One was ever tested in combat in Vietnam. Though an interesting approach to the semiautomatic grenade launcher problem, the action of the T148E1 was too open and vulnerable to dirt to operate well in the jungle/mud environment of Vietnam. The sliding harmonica magazine has several open chambers that would pick up dirt and debris like scoops as the weapon was moved through the jungle. The sliding operation of the magazine, along with its coil-type driving spring, would also be easily put out of action from dirt and debris. Lastly, the accuracy problem from the shot-to-shot difference in muzzle velocity had never been completely corrected and varied not only from weapon to weapon in the T148E1, but also from magazine to magazine in the same launcher.

The Navy Special Warfare Groups (Pacific and Atlantic), which included the SEAL Teams and UDTs, had been recognized as having unique problems in the field of weapons and equipment by the Navy command. The Special Operations Branch of the Naval Weapons Center at China Lake, California, was structured to address the equipment needs of the SEALs and UDTs on a very rapid basis. Non-standard ordnance and hardware required by the Teams would be acquired by China Lake, modified if necessary, and shipped out to the users as quickly as possible. When a necessary item was not available in any form “off-the-shelf”, China Lake was set up to design, develop, and put into limited production, such items as necessary. In three years of operations during the Vietnam War, China Lake put out some 375 items on a quick-reaction basis for the Teams.

China Lake looked into the question of increasing the firepower of the 40mm grenade launcher. Taking the direct approach, the China Lake engineers applied the pump-action operating principles from civilian sporting shotguns to the problem. Production of a tool-room prototype weapon was completed rapidly and the design was ready for testing and examination. The general design was considered acceptable and a small production quantity was produced at the China Lake facilities. Development of the pump-action grenade launcher was so rapid that it reportedly took longer to make a set of production drawings from the tool-room gun than it did to produce the first weapon.

The China Lake pump-action grenade launcher resembled a very large, short-barreled shotgun and retained the same range and accuracy of the M79. Considered one of the most significant small arms produced as part of the Naval Special Warfare Projects at China Lake, the pump-action grenade launcher was ready to be issued to the SEAL Teams for combat in Vietnam by mid-1968.

•SEAL TEAM ONE – COMMAND AND CONTROL HISTORIES – 1968,

Enclosure 3, SPECIAL TOPICS, (a) Performance of Weapons Systems

The 40MM grenade pump weapon has proven to be a good weapon and is being used by SEAL detachments in Vietnam…

Though a fairly large weapon, the 40mm pump-action grenade launcher was very well received by some of the SEALs in the Teams. Reports on the actual number of China Lake pump-action grenade launchers made are difficult to confirm. Between 20 and 30 weapons were put into SEAL hands during the Vietnam War with only one or two additional launchers going to the Marine Corps Force Recon units and Army 5th Special Forces Group. A receiver with the serial number “50” has been located but it was found in a stripped condition and may never have been assembled as a complete weapon.

The pump-action grenade launcher was one of the most successful of the shoulder-fired 40mm designs, but it was not the only one to come out of China Lake. During the calendar year 1966-1967, NWC China Lake designed and built several prototypes of a 3-barrel 40mm grenade launcher. Instead of developing a multi-shot grenade launcher that would be a dedicated weapon such as the M79, China Lake went with a much smaller design that could be mounted underneath an M16 in the same manner as an XM148. To minimize the size of the 40mm repeater, each round was given its own barrel.

The double-action firing mechanism has a trigger that fits underneath the trigger guard of the M16 in a sliding mount. The trigger bar extends along the right side of the M16 receiver in the same manner as the XM148 but with the trigger in a firm mount, there is much less probability of jamming up the bar with brush as could happen with the XM148. The fairly complex firing mechanism cocks, advances the hammer in a circular motion to the next barrel, and fires the round when the trigger is pulled once. This allows the operator to fire up to three grenades as fast as he can pull the trigger.

To keep the 3-barrel compact enough to fit underneath a CAR-15, the barrels are only six inches long. The short barrels are long enough for the fired grenade to pick up enough velocity and spin to arm and stabilize in flight. But the short barrels also reduced the effective range of the 3-barrel at least 15% less than that of an M79. A large housing covered the rear of the 3-barrel to protect the firing mechanism with the entire package ending up being about 4.25 inches wide.

At least one of the two or three prototype 3-barrel 40mm launchers was sent to the Marines to be tested by the Force Recon units in Vietnam. All of the other examples were sent on to the SEAL Teams for field testing. One grenadier from SEAL Team One carried an M16 with the 3-barrel launcher to test and evaluate it under combat conditions. The one operation where the SEAL carried the weapon took place on 13 April 1968 and was the only operation where this individual carried the weapon. To put it simply, the SEAL reported that the weapon was heavy, unbalanced the rifle badly, and simply did not work.

The complex firing mechanism of the 3-barrel could not stand up to the dirt and mud of the Vietnam environment. When the trigger was pulled, the weapon had as good a chance of not firing as of going off. The wide open muzzle of the three barrels were also very hard to keep free of debris when crawling through the jungle. The weapon was not adopted by the Teams and only the few prototypes were ever made.

The failure of the Colt and China Lake underbarrel grenade launcher attachments did not eliminate the idea for combining the point fire of a rifle with the area effect of the 40mm grenade launcher. The US Army put out the information to the firearms industry that they were interested in another underbarrel grenade launcher design. Seventeen different firms were spoken to during a conference on 18 July, 1967. Seven of the contacted firms reported a serious interest in the project.

AAI (Aircraft Armaments Inc.) had experience in developing a number of underbarrel grenade launchers as part of the Special Purpose Individual Weapon (SPIW) Program. AAI already had an idea in the mockup stage for a new grenade launcher in July of 1967 but the Army felt their estimated production schedules may not be possible to meet. By September, three companies, AAI, Philco-Ford’s Aeronutronics Division, and Aero Jet General had all received contracts to develop grenade launchers as part of the Army’s new Grenade Launcher Attachment Development (GLAD) Program.

The Aero-Jet design for a delayed blowback operated grenade launcher was declined by the Army and dropped from the competition. Twenty each of the Philco-Ford and AAI designs were set for testing on 1 May 1968. “Unanimously selected based on superior performance and predicted lower cost in production,” the AAI design was awarded a contract for further development on 2 August 1968. By early November of that same year, the AAI design was officially identified as the XM203 40mm Grenade Launcher.

A contract for 500 XM203 grenade launchers was awarded almost immediately after AAI received the designation for their design. By December, the XM203 launcher itself was considered complete by the US Army, though further work had to go forward on a selection of sight designs. This work was quickly completed and the construction of the first 600 XM203’s finished by AAI. In April 1969, 500 XM203 grenade launchers were sent to Army units in Southeast Asia for a 3-month combat evaluation.

The XM203 grenade launcher is a single-shot, manually operated, pump-action grenade launcher intended to be installed underneath the barrel of an M16 rifle. The barrel of the XM203 does not extend much past the front sight assembly on a standard M16 and so can be mounted underneath the barrel of any of the CAR-15/XM177 versions of the same weapon. A flip-up ladder-type leaf sight in attached to the handguard of the M16 so that the normal front sight of the rifle can be used to aim the grenade launcher. In addition, a complex quadrant sight is attached to the carrying handle of the mounting weapon for more precise long-range use of the grenade launcher.

To load the XM203, the unlocking lever above the barrel on the left side of the weapon is pressed in with the thumb and the barrel slid forward. Any empty cartridge case will be automatically ejected and the operator can load a single round of any of the standard 40mm grenades. Pulling the barrel shut locks the breech and completes loading the grenade launcher. There is no pistol grip for the XM203, the operator grabs the magazine of the M16 with his firing hand and pulls the trigger of the grenade launcher just in front of the magazine well.

The safety of the M203 is a curved metal flap that will extend in front of the trigger when on. The operator can easily move the safety forward with his trigger finger when ready to fire. One drawback of the M203 is that the spring metal trigger guard, which locks against the front of the magazine well of the carrying weapon, can be slipped up excessively during assembly and block the trigger so that the weapon cannot be fired. This is a minor, but common, error that can be corrected quickly by the operator.

The XM203 was well received by all of the units who used it. AAI was unable to build production quantities of the XM203 and Colt received the contract to produce the accepted M203 grenade launcher for all of the US services. By 1986 Colt had manufactured over 250,000 M203 grenade launchers. The SEALs began receiving the M203 grenade launcher by 1970 and have continued using the weapon to this day. After the end of the Teams involvement in Vietnam, the XM148 grenade launcher was phased out of use and replaced with the M203. In the Teams the M203 was usually mounted underneath the barrel of an XM177E2, replaced today with the M4A1 carbine.

•SEAL TEAM TWO COMMAND AND CONTROL HISTORY, 1970

Enclosure 1, VI. NEW EQUIPMENT, pg 12

1. (U) During the year, SEAL Team TWO received ten new XM203 grenade launcher attachments for the M16 rifle. The XM203 replaces the XM148.

In some combat situations today, whole 16-man SEAL platoons, less automatic weapons men and snipers, have been armed with M4/M203 grenade launchers. The flexibility of the weapon, combined with its firepower, has made it one of the most successful weapons developments to come out of the Vietnam war.

Due to its greater inherent accuracy, the M79 is still found in the SEAL Teams today. The M79 is issued primarily for backup use by a SEAL who is armed with another primary weapon that cannot accept an M203 launcher.

Instead of developing a fully-automatic grenade launcher, the Honeywell engineers suggested that a mechanical repeater be done instead. Instead of trying to adapt a standard automatic weapons design to the characteristics of the 40mm grenade, a hand-cranked repeater would be much simpler to produce in a very short time. The idea was moved forward as an in-house development with no government contract pending. By 1965, the first launcher was ready for demonstration.

In place of a normal chamber, the new launcher had two rotors the length of the cartridge case. Each rotor had six semicircular grooves cut in its length, each half the circumference of a 40mm round. The two rotors were geared together so that a 40mm round would be held in a complete chamber made up from the two rotor halves. Since the chamber formed around the cartridge, the normal functions of chambering and extracting didn’t have to happen. This gave the Honeywell a very simple operating system with relatively few parts.

The two rotors were driven by a side-mounted crank handle, much the same as an old Gatling gun. The rotors were locked into place by a cam driven rod as the firing pin was cocked and dropped by another cam. Rotating the crank handle fired the Honeywell when the handle was at the top or bottom of a rotation, launching two grenades for each full revolution. Depending on how fast the operator turned the handle, the Honeywell would fire at rates of 1 to 250 rounds per minute.

Ammunition for the Honeywell was placed in a plastic belt, spaced out at proper intervals. The initial belts were nothing more than fiberglass-reinforced sticky tape, with the rounds stuck between two lengths of the tape. Spacing of the rounds in the tape belt was done with two tape clinching wheels (large gears) in a special loading machine. The tape belt gave a great deal of trouble when the weapon was introduced and were quickly replaced by a stronger system.

The new belts for the Honeywell were made of Mylar-backed Dacron fabric with pockets between heat-sealed sections of the belt. The fabric belts were supplied in 24 or 48 round lengths and could be reloaded about five times before they wouldn’t hold the 40mm round firmly enough. Old fabric belts sometimes were seen in Vietnamese and other hands being used as 40mm bandoleers.

The Honeywell was examined by the Navy in 1965 for possible adoption as a small boat weapon. Testing proved the system and the Honeywell received the nomenclature assignment of Gun, Rapid Fire, 40mm Mark 18 Mod 0 on 10 December 1965. Between 1965 and 1968, when production ceased, about 1,200 Mk 18 launchers were produced, almost all production going to the US Navy.

Though the Mk 18 could produce a good deal of firepower, it was considered a temporary, stopgap weapon until a self-powered design could be developed. There wasn’t a secure seal between the cartridge case and the barrel so propellant gases leaked out, limiting the muzzle velocity. Accuracy suffered as a result. Volume of fire was considered the Mark 18’s main advantage.

The Mk 18 was able to fire an entire belt of 48 rounds as fast as a man could turn the handle. By carefully sweeping the weapon back and forth, starting at the longest range (400 meters) and working back, a football-field sized area could be covered with one 48-round belt of ammunition. Properly done, all of the grenades would impact at roughly the same time due to the high lobbing arc of the 40mm grenade.

•SEAL TEAM ONE – COMMAND AND CONTROL HISTORY – 1967

The performance of the MK 18 Honeywell has proved unreliable. The quality control must have been lacking since the engineering of certain vital parts is sub-standard. At the present time the MK 18 is unsuitable for SEAL Team operations.

Further testing and development of the Mk 18 continued on a limited basis. The introduction of the Dacron fabric belts helped eliminate many of the earlier complaints about the weapon.

The SEALs used the Mk 18 primarily from PBRs and other river boats. The Mk 18 could be fitted to the standard .30 caliber machine gun tripod for ground use, but the weapon was difficult to operate in such a manner. The SEALs only used the ground mount tripod when introducing trainees to the Mk 18 for familiarization.

Probably one of the most unusual mounts for the Mk 18 was also its most common one. The Mark 46 Mod 0 gun mount would cradle an M2 HB .50 caliber machine gun on a tall, tripod-like Mk 16 stand. This mount was often seen at the stern of the Mk II PBRs as they patrolled the rivers of Southeast Asia. The Mk 46 mount would also hold a Mk 18, or later Mk 20, grenade launcher above the rear of the .50 caliber. A gunner could switch from the point fire of the .50 caliber to the area fire of the grenade launcher by simply changing which grips he held.

THE MARK 20

The Mk 18 grenade launcher was still a manually operated weapon and considered not completely satisfactory by the US Navy. In August 1966, the naval Ordnance Station in Louisville, Kentucky was ordered to develop a 40mm machine gun, capable of semi automatic and full automatic fire, as quickly as possible. Henry Watson, the Engineer in Charge, Colonel George Chinn, and William Schnatter attacked the problem of the new design vigorously. By May, 1967, only nine months later, the first three weapons of the new design were ready for testing.

On August 6, 1968, the new grenade launcher received the nomenclature assignment of Gun, Machine, 40MM (Grenade) Mark 20 Mod 0. The item description on the assignment request read;

This is a lightweight, automatic, low-velocity, reciprocating barrel-operated 40mm weapon. It is 31” long, 9” wide and 9” high and fires M381, M382, M387, M406, or M407 40mm grenades belted with the M16 metallic links, at a rate of 200 -250 rounds per minute in either full or semi-automatic modes. It was designed for pedestal mounting, however, because of its recoilless action, it is adaptable for multiple mounting systems such as tripods and bipods.

The Mk 20 has a sheet metal receiver over a framework that holds the operating parts, A set of twin spade grips are at the rear of the weapon with a push-button trigger that can be depressed with the thumb of the right hand. A sliding safety switch is to the left of the trigger button. The cycling of the weapon is so slow that the trigger button is just quickly released for semi-automatic fire.

The operation of the Mk 20 is a unique combination of blow-forward and recoil. To cock the weapon prior to firing or loading, the cocking knob at the top rear of the receiver is pushed forward. Pushing the cocking handle forward moves the barrel forward, extending it out from the front of the receiver, where it locks into place. When the trigger is pushed, the barrel slides back over the 40mm round in the feed tray. The rifling in the barrel presses back on the rotating band of the grenade, driving the round back onto the firing pin which sets off the propellant charge.

The force of the grenade going down the barrel drives the barrel forward against the barrel spring. A lug on the barrel engages a ratchet cam underneath the barrel that rotates the feed mechanism to move the ammunition belt forward one round. The bolt also recoils from the force of firing, moving against several springs. As the bolt reaches the end of its travel, it moves forward under the power of the bolt springs and a mechanical connections helps the barrel rotate the ratchet cam.

The balance of forces in firing the Mk 20 results in the weapon having very little felt recoil. Though designed to be fired from mounts, the Mk 20 can be hand-held and fired for short bursts with no real difficulty. Accepted by the Navy and in limited production by 1970, the Mk 20 replaced the Mk 18 grenade launchers still in service. The Mk 20 could be mounted on any standard pintle mount or piggyback above a .50 caliber machine gun on the Mk 46 mount. Some 1080 Mk 20 launchers were reported as being made before production was suspended in April 1971.

After the approval of Form 1 from ATF you can acquire and attach a barrel to your new M-203 or M-79. Under no circumstances should you obtain a barrel before the Form 1 is approved, that would be “Constructive Possession of an unregistered Destructive Device”. That is a felony! Wait until you have that approved Form 1 before getting a barrel! Building your own has two advantages. The first is that you can avoid the hassle of finding a Type 9 FFL Dealer (Or Type 10 manufacturer, or Type 11 Importer) in your State that legally can transfer a registered Destructive Device. Most states don’t even have one. The second advantage of building your own is that it’s cheaper on the wallet or purse and you save $200.00 for one less transfer tax. Class 3 Dealers have been allowed by the ATF to transfer Destructive Devices on a very small scale, rumor has it to be 4 items or less per year but I have never come across the magical number in any publication.

One of the first challenges for the recreational shooter to overcome besides the initial cost of the Destructive Device which can range from $2,000.00 to $10,000.00 in today’s market is ammo. You will need to learn to tell the difference between Hi Pressure and Low Pressure 40mm ammunition, not knowing the difference can be fatal. One easy way to tell the difference is to look at the rotating band above the shell case… Hi Pressure rounds will have a copper rotating band, designed for the steel barrel of a Mark-19 40mm machinegun. Do not even attempt to chamber one of these rounds in an M-79 or an M-203.

The copper rotating band will stick inside the aluminum barrel and it will blow you and the weapon up when you pull that trigger. There is a major difference in propellants and velocities, as previously covered in SAR.

Some types of ammo that you can shoot are flares, smokes, gas, Flechette, buckshot, reloadable ‘Bee Hive,” practice, non lethal rubber pellets and bean bag rounds. Also there are 12 gauge adapter cartridges out there and your choices are unlimited. Many ask if they can shoot 37mm flares or gas rounds in a 40mm and that all depends on the thickness of the base of the 37mm… some of the new 37mm flare ammo have a base that is twice as thick of the 40mm cartridge and it will not chamber properly. If you find some old W.W.II flares, try wrapping masking tape around the case near the base about one and a half times and it won’t rattle.

From time to time some generous soul will sell off a case of 40mm practice rounds because they are leaking orange chalk all over the place. These practice grenades can be stabilized with a tube of super glue and a damp rag. Just run a bead of super glue between the blue ogive and the zinc rotating band and immediately wipe off any excess glue with the damp rag. It also helps to keep some acetone or the wife’s fingernail polish remover handy to loosen those glued fingers.

Most guys who try to reload the white nylon M-212 cases make the mistake once of buying the wrong box of blank cartridges. What you are looking for is 38 Smith & Wesson Blanks from Winchester coded “38BLP” on the box. They are shorter than the standard 38 Special Blanks coded “38SBLP,” the M-781 practice round uses only the short Smith & Wesson Blanks “38BLP” as a propellant. Please always remember to wear a pair of good shooting glasses when firing off practice rounds, some of the surplus is old and an occasional blue ogive may disintegrate upon leaving the barrel and leave you looking like the Great Orange Pumpkin, it will not hurt you -so protect those eyes! And laugh it off. I can assure you that all those around you will be laughing too.

Some of the misconceptions about recreational 40mm among the public is that all of the grenades are High Explosive, all are illegal to possess and all rounds must have a $200.00 tax paid on them. Not true. Only the HE rounds require the $200.00 transfer tax stamp on each round. Easily identified with a gold or orange ogive, these also require a Federal Explosive permit and fall under strict shipping and storage guidelines. That’s not even considering that you will need the signature of your local Law Enforcement and you have to report back to the ATF that you blew the silly thing up! There are just too many gun laws. Any other 40mm round is legal to own or sell. If you intend to manufacture 40mm rounds for other than your own personal use, you will need a Federal License to do so.

A word of warning on the ammunition- the M781 practice round has a heavy metal driving band in it- you should never point ANY firearm at another person, or at anything you don’t want to shoot, but these “Marking” rounds can be fatal if they hit a person- there have been many instances in the military of someone shooting a “Buddy” with a “Paint” round, and breaking an arm, or ribs, or even worse. While we have fun with these, they are not toys.

You will find in your search for shootable 40mm ammo that there are over a dozen different companies that currently manufacture new ammo. But you will find them reluctant to sell to the still Free American Citizen regardless of having paperwork that your 40mm is legally Registered with the Federal Government. Thanks to the work of a few liberals in Insurance Companies and the overzealous Jackboot, most will not sell to the public and limit their sales only to Law Enforcement Agencies and the Military. Sure is ironic that a manufacturer that is in the business to make a profit, would refuse a sale to a cash paying customer that has every legal right to possess their product and can provide documentation proving so. Rather Un-American, don’t you think? There is a problem with the Department of Transportation’s regulations, considering these to NOT be ORM-D small arms ammunition because of the caliber, and some manufacturers will sell and ship to individuals with a Federal Explosives license, or a licensee who will accept these for them.

So what does all this have to do with Recreational 40mm? Half of the Recreation is finding cheap shootable ammo, the other half is actually possessing and shooting a 40mm on a regular basis. One must learn the fine art of Kentucky windage, with a maximum range of around 350 yards, you need to be good at judging distances or own a rangefinder. Wind will negatively affect your accuracy as well as your barrel length, one instance where size/length does matter. It is essentially a hand held mortar and can be fired for effect from the ground, either direct or indirectly by using the marked sling method. On rare occasions you will find a couple of “Thumpers” or “Bloopers” or “Elmer Fudd” guns at a shooting match. Enjoy the fun, its only a gun.

SAR had the opportunity to visit the USS Bowfin Museum on Oahu recently, and considering that our theme this December is remembering the War in the Pacific some fifty years ago, we wanted to share the location of several museums in the Pearl Harbor area. The USS Bowfin Museum presents a rare opportunity for us landlubbers to enter and see exactly what the living spaces were like for the brave men who fought under the sea.

Of special interest to SAR readers are the “small arms” that are located here. I was especially struck by two pieces- the Oerlikon MK 20mm machine gun on the boat itself, and the quad 40mm Bofors gun. The Oerlikon had that special dramatic presence that a drum fed 20mm with shoulder supports can evoke. Not particularly useful against a Destroyer, but against small boats and shore problems- quite efficient. Used in an Anti-Aircraft role, they served up until Vietnam. The Bofors, well, that had just been re-painted and was a wonderful sight. Everything appeared correct, so these were a good set to bring to SAR.

Once again, we at SAR leave you with the following wish- that if you get the opportunity to go to these museums, take a kid, and leave a twenty in the donation jar, to help bring these wonders to future generations. – Dan

USS Bowfin Submarine Museum & Park

A non-profit organization operated by the Pacific Fleet Submarine Memorial Association11 Arizona Memorial Drive, Honolulu, Hawaii 96818-3145
Phone (808) 423-1341
Fax (808) 422-5201

Visit them on the web at: http://www.aloha.net/~bowfin/

* Located adjacent to the USS Arizona Memorial Visitor Center at Pearl Harbor

* Open daily from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., last tour of the submarine at 4:30 p.m.

* Closed only on Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year’s Day

* Children under the age of four are not permitted on the submarine for safety reasons, however are allowed to tour the museum and mini-theater at no charge.

* Submarine & Museum Adult tour is $8; child rate (ages 4 to 12) is $3

* Special $6 rate is available for military, senior citizens and Hawaii residents (with proper identification)
* Special school group or non-profit group rates are available with advance reservation. Call (808) 423-1341 or email them for more details at bowfin@aloha.net.