| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:China Lake Launcher
Why does the Ramo RT-37 redirect to here? They don't appear to be related. --Funkychinaman (talk) 17:35, 22 December 2012 (EST) They arn't related at all. the China Lake Launcher is closer to the M79 than anything else.Rockwolf66 (talk) 23:26, 22 December 2012 (EST)
Additional Images
Why no renewed interest in this?
Seems like with the transition back toward standalone grenade launchers like the M32, a platform like this with significantly less bulk would be looked at as an alternate option. Even with the lower round capacity, I'd personally take this over an M32. If I'm not mistaken, there's a company building modernized versions of the China Lake. Anyone seen any evidence of them being used? Spartan198 (talk) 02:56, 17 November 2013 (EST)
- Putting reliability problems aside (I seems to remember they were very temperamental and prone to jamming) a pump action with a tube magazine is not very practical for a grenade launcher. First off, it could only function to any degree of reliability using standard HE grenades so couldn't be used for speciality ammunition like flares, smoke or buckshot. Secondly, supposing you could make a pump action that could feed irregularly shaped grenades if you wanted to select a different ammunition type it is a lot harder with a pump action rather than a drum which you can either spin to the correct position, or just open and replace the grenade in the top chamber. The ammunition capacity would also vary depending on what ammo you were using, and if you wanted to design it to use medium velocity rounds you would loose capacity even with standard HEDP. An M32 is a much more practical weapon in my opinion as it is more reliable, simpler to operate, has a higher ammunition capacity, and can feed a wider range of ammunition. --commando552 (talk) 17:29, 17 November 2013 (EST)