Will the XM25 replace the M203 Grenade launchers - Essay Example

The military denies the rumors, but perhaps it might be better to consider the criteria of reliability, durability and affordability of both systems to prove that the XM-25 grenade launcher will not replace the M203. The reliable old M203 Grenade Launcher has proven itself in just about every corner of the world. Over twenty countries friendly to the United States employ the M203, or a variant thereof. Manufactured by Colt, the M203 has seen combat with the US from the humid jungles of Viet Nam right on through to the present day in the Middle Eastern deserts, along with its newer counterpart, the M203A1 (for the M4).

The launcher has proven extremely reliable in all manners of weather conditions and weigh in at light 3 pounds. On the other hand, the XM25 Counter Defilade Target Engagement System shows its reliability in its characteristics. It is currently being manufactured by German arms giant Heckler and Koch, in partnership with the US based Alliant Tech Systems (ATK). The weapon does indeed resemble something futuristic and at fourteen pounds with rounds it is much heavier than the M203. Yet the modern advances of the launcher are incredible.

For one thing it has an interchangeable magazine that holds up to four rounds, so single shot is no longer an obstacle. For another, instead of the old-fashioned quadrant sights on previous grenade launchers, the XM25 is fitted with a thermal sight device resembling a scope, with night capabilities. The M203 has showed its durability since it replaced the M79, which was a stand-alone weapon and the grenade launcher was its singular purpose. Recognizing that the grenadier was vulnerable during a firefight, the US Army developed the M203.

Its “over and under” style fit under the standard M16 rifle (and later under the newer M4), therefore giving the soldier the ability to fire grenades at a range of up to 350 meters and still having the small arms capability and reassurance offered by the M16. The grenadier’s rate of fire for the launcher was hampered only by his own ability to load the weapon, as it fires one round at the time. Its large bore makes cleaning relatively easy and the unit armorer can do most maintenance on the weapon, including disassembly and removal.

Eight different forty millimeter grenade types have been developed for the launcher. 1 However it is what the sights are fitted into that makes the XM25 so durable and has the Army gushing as to its valuable assistance in the GWOT. The Target Acquisition Fire Control System (TAFCS) allows the operator to send the round down range with radio controlled precision. For example, grenadier can take out an enemy firing from inside a window, adjusting the range so that the grenade can go through the frame, explode, and still maintain the integrity of the building.

The XM25 uses a 25 millimeter grenade system that even includes a thermobaric grenade specific for use in caves, particularly useful in Afghanistan and the launcher is accurate at ranges of up to 700 meters. Finally, the cost of the M203 is very affordable in comparison to the XM-25. The M203 is only $1800.00 dollars. If combat tests work out with the division, the Army plans to buy 12,500 units of the XM25 in 2012, one for each squad. At over $30 thousand a copy the XM25 is expensive, as are the rounds at $25 apiece.

The cost almost doubles from one to the other. This alone is a serious increase in budget cost, and can be a huge dilemma for the economy. Even after all the aforementioned, the XM25 will not replace the M203. Although the 101st grenadiers are so impressed with it they often carry no extra weaponry. Indeed, both weapons will