# Becoming a Grenadier



## Blunt Object (29 Nov 2004)

When I'm in the Army how do I go about becoming a grenadier? do i just go to a specific training after basic, sq and moc or something?


----------



## foerestedwarrior (29 Nov 2004)

if by grenedier, you mean M203 gunner, then you have to take your BIQ, or Basic Infantry Qual. You will learn how to use the m203 on that, unless there is a specific course for it that i dont know about.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (29 Nov 2004)

If you are not sure if a specific course is required then why post?


----------



## 48Highlander (29 Nov 2004)

The M203 doesn't require a seperate course, it's taught on the BIQ.  Wether or not you are tasked as a "grenadier" at the section level once you're back at your unit depends on how your section commander likes to do things.


----------



## Da_man (29 Nov 2004)

The M203 looks really cool... until you fire a C7 with it.  It makes the rifle very heavy and unbalanced.


----------



## dangerboy (29 Nov 2004)

As 48th highlander mentioned there is no crse you are assigned it. There are two per section and after the C9's the most important. Myself I like having one in Alpha team and one in Charlie team


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (29 Nov 2004)

I agree with da man.The M203 looks good on paper, but id rather have the old grenade launcher any day.Sling it over your back like all secondary weapons and keep the c7.That would have saved money. Just another american thing bought into I guess.Its really awkward to fire, the rifle gets heavier and harder to fire accurately, and its a lob weapon, as opposed to the old one that just fired straight.Point and shoot.You didnt have to worry about angles and such.I dunno, imo i think we shoulda just kept the old one and made it a secondary weapon for the grenadiers, like how the breacher in urban combat carries a shotgun or a maul on his back.Same idea.


----------



## McG (30 Nov 2004)

48Highlander said:
			
		

> The M203 doesn't require a seperate course, it's taught on the BIQ.


It is also taught on the Cbt Engr Sect Mbr course.


----------



## foerestedwarrior (30 Nov 2004)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> If you are not sure if a specific course is required then why post?



Like I said, i was positive I was correct, but if i wasnt, someone could correct me. If I am not supposed to be polite, i can edit my post to make it less welcoming.


----------



## 48Highlander (30 Nov 2004)

jmackenzie_15 said:
			
		

> Its really awkward to fire, the rifle gets heavier and harder to fire accurately, and its a lob weapon, as opposed to the old one that just fired straight.Point and shoot.You didnt have to worry about angles and such.



   I don't know what you're smoking, but when firing ANY ranged weapon, you need to "worry about angles and such".  What the hell do you think the sight on your C7 is for?  It corrects the angle between the rifle and the target to make it effective at diferent ranges.


----------



## foerestedwarrior (30 Nov 2004)

I think he means that it was a more direct fire weapon than the M203, iv never fired the old one, so take this as you will.


----------



## 48Highlander (30 Nov 2004)

In that case, he must be talking about the M72 in which case he's right out of 'er


----------



## Sh0rtbUs (30 Nov 2004)

jmackenzie_15 said:
			
		

> I agree with da man.The M203 looks good on paper, but id rather have the old grenade launcher any day.Sling it over your back like all secondary weapons and keep the c7.



Are you talking the older American M79? Did Canada use these at one point,a nd if so was their designation the same as the Americans (M79)??


----------



## 1feral1 (2 Dec 2004)

jmackenzie_15 said:
			
		

> ... id rather have the old grenade launcher any day.Sling it over your back like all secondary weapons and keep the c7.That would have saved money. Just another american thing bought into I guess.Its really awkward to fire, the rifle gets heavier and harder to fire accurately, and its a lob weapon, as opposed to the old one that just fired straight.Point and shoot.You didnt have to worry about angles and such.I dunno, imo i think we shoulda just kept the old one and made it a secondary weapon for the grenadiers, like how the breacher in urban combat carries a shotgun or a maul on his back.Same idea.



Over the past 10 years, I have used and carried the 40mm US M79 on numerous occasions, where here it's known as the 'wombat gun'. It is a robust wpn, and resembles a single shot shotgun in many ways. I have also performed many rebuilds on such too. Its been around for avery long time.

However, there is many disadvantages to carrying it, firstly you still must carry your rifle. The updated M203PI fitted under the SA1 version of the F88, or under the M4, is by far better to carry, and is just as practical in the hands of trained soldats.

I have fired 40mm HEPD rds out of both, and with the reflex sight on our rifles, it is easier to use than the generic iron sights on the M79. 

The M79 is being removed from service sooner than later, but I class it as an 'old reliable'.

Regards,

Wes


----------



## zerhash (2 Dec 2004)

48Highlander said:
			
		

> I don't know what you're smoking, but when firing ANY ranged weapon, you need to "worry about angles and such". What the hell do you think the sight on your C7 is for? It corrects the angle between the rifle and the target to make it effective at diferent ranges.



about the m203
arent their mod plans or a new launcher in the works that fixes a lot of the weaknesses in the m203 (such as making it easier to aim?


----------



## Fusaki (4 Dec 2004)

One of the biggest problems with the M203 is the lack of training on it. The 203 is neglected because it cannot be fired on a regular rifle range like a C7 or a C9. But that doesn't take away from the fact that there are x2 M203s per rifle section and they have potential to compare to C9s in terms of firepower. 

It looks like a money issue to me. To be proficient on the weapon an M203 gunner needs to shoot at different targets at different ranges over and over again. But the powers that be can only afford to fire either some 5.56, or even less 5.56 and a little 40mm. Its about getting more bang for your buck, and its a delicate balance that folks who get paid more then myself get to figure out.


----------



## Byerly (9 Dec 2004)

Problem: "the rifle gets heavier and harder to fire accurately" 

Solution: More time at the gym.

Problem: "its a lob weapon, as opposed to the old one that just fired straight.Point and shoot.You didnt have to worry about angles and such"

Solution: Have you actually fired the M-203?  The leaf site is very straight-forward and simple to use, it is not difficult to be accurate with.  

Stu


----------



## Britney Spears (9 Dec 2004)

> One of the biggest problems with the M203 is the lack of training on it.



Well, I think it would be a good idea to invest in more SAT M203s. I'm sure they'll pay for themseles in verry little time.


----------



## 48Highlander (10 Dec 2004)

You kidding?  We have plenty of them alredy, the problem is that the SAT is one resource we have which is massively under-utlized.  Nobody ever seems interested in organizing training on it.  Luckily for me I know how to run the system and am allowed to do so on ocasion, so I get to use it a lot more than most, but I've still only fired 60 or so m203 rounds on the system.  It makes a massive difference, everyone should get the chance to do it.  Unfortiunately 90% of the soldiers in my unit have never fired an m203 on the SAT, and it's deffinitely not because of a lack of resources.


----------



## Britney Spears (10 Dec 2004)

Good point. See, I automaticaly assumed that the lack of usage was due to the lack of kit, and not organizational friction. Silly me.


----------



## Kendrick (10 Dec 2004)

The SATs problem is general I think.  It's the same in my regiment.  We have SAT m203s, but there's never anyone running that thing.  I've been pushing to get qualified to run the SATs range but it's not getting anywhere.  As if it seems not worth it up there to use the SATs... so it's just gathering dust.  But with good calibration, it can provide good training.  I've never fired the m203 with live explosive rounds, but I did fire plenty in the SATs.


----------

