The Army just awarded a $31 million contract to the Swedish defense company Saab for more Multi-Role Anti-Armor Anti-Personnel Weapon Systems, UPI is reporting.
Also known as the M3 Carl Gustaf, the 84mm recoilless rifle has long been a favorite of Special Operations Forces for its ability to destroy enemy targets out to 1,000 meters.
The Army fielded 58 M3s and 1,500 rounds of ammunition to units in Afghanistan late last year after commanders complained that their disposable AT4s were ineffective at engaging the enemy at long ranges.
It’s still unclear how many M3s and ammo the $31 million will buy.
“This is another great milestone for Saab and the Carl-Gustaf system,” said Tomas Samuelsson, senior vice president and head of Saab’s Dynamics business area Dynamics business area, according to UPI. ”This new order demonstrates the continued belief by the customer in the capabilities and versatility of our product.”
The M3 has enjoyed success with units such as the 25th Infantry, 10th Mountain and 82nd Airborne divisions in Afghanistan. The launcher weighs approximately 22 pounds with each round of ammunition weighing just under 10 pounds. There is an effort to lighten the load of the rifle by five to six pounds, Army officials say. By comparison, the AT4 weighs about 15 pounds and the Javelin’s launcher with missile and reusable command launch unit weigh roughly 50 pounds.
{ 58 comments… read them below or add one }
Such an awesome piece of kit, I hope they come to good use.
A smart buy a M-3 is a great AT and infantry support weapon a good buy.
Totally! The Goose screams “I AM AWESOME! PULL MY TRIGGER.”
Why do even use the AT-4s and LAWs anyway? one time shot launchers are so outdated! Plus everyone knows that it could take more than one or two rounds to take out a tank or enemy APC
Greg, the logic behind it is training and weight. The AT4/LAW are very simple, light, one type round weapons.
One Goose and round is 32lbs. Two AT4′s weigh 30lbs.
Every Infantryman is trained to fire the AT4. Not so for the goose. The AT4 is also an individual weapon so it doesn’t require a change to the unit’s organization. When you add a crew served weapon to the Infantry platoon you’re adding some more complexity.
You could teach them.
Sure anyone can be trained (or almost anyone) but it’s not that easy. You have to maintain that qualification. “Trained” isn’t just going through a course and firing a couple of rounds. One has to maintain a level of proficiency.
BTW, depending on the vehicle it may only take one hit.
I’m just trying to answer your question.
Saw a great pic of a trooper w/ a goose who had an Action Figure Therapy sticker on it. It said “I will Buttf**k your soul”. Enough said.
Is this what you are talking about? http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/c67.0.403.403/p403x403/156224_**********264_1279340650_n.jpg
I did a calculation using the webflis nsn database and used its NSN(NATO stock number) found a price of around 16,400-16,700 depending on the year. I divided that number by 31 million and got around 1800+ Carl Gustafs entering service.
A word of caution about getting too excited over the purchase of Swedish arms. If they are produced under licence in the US, then that is fine. If they are manufactured in Sweden, then maybe not so good.
During Vietnam word has it that the Swedish refused to supply ammunition or spares to any purchaser that was going to use the Carl Gustav in Vietnam. At least one country the had troops in Vietnam got caught out and had to revert to using the old M20 3.5inch rocket launcher because they couldn’t get either ammunition or spares from Sweden. It would be a shame to see that happen again just because the Swedish govt decided that it didn’t agree with the war its customers were fighting.
Except Sweden has troops in Afghanistan and their Gripen NG relies upon the GE 414 engine.
Being a Swede myself I know our current government doesn’t have the balls to stand up the US, or to Saab for that matter. They’ve just decided to spend all of our defence budget for the next 30 years on 50 Gripen NG. Which in reality only gives us a couple of hours of fight time if attacked by a similar force.
After that we have 20 000 home guard soldiers with the Goose as their heviest weapon. So it better work…
I’m proud our past governments had more ethics. Vietnam was a dumb war, so is Afgahnistan.
My point exactly. Swede. Regardless of whether you agree with Vietnam or not, many Americans and Allies lost their lives there doing their duty as soldiers, sailors and airmen. Or are they not worthy of consideration because you didn’t agree with the war they were sent to fight? I will let you in on a little secret. Many of them didn’t agree with the war they were sent to fight, but did their duty regardless. The profession of arms is honourable, even if politics isn’t.
It seems that if Sweden agrees with the war we are fighting, then we get all the spares and ammunition we want. If it doesn’t agree with the war, then it’s back to the AT4/LAW or whatever is left in stores. That is no way to equip a fighting force and no way to fight a war. Who cares how wonderful or reliable a weapon is if the ammunition supply is unreliable. If the generals have forgotten that lesson, then they need to dig out their history books.
It is all very well to extol the virtues of the Carl Gustav when it is working, but it just becomes a waste money and a liability to the men who have to use it if the next Swedish government decides that it doesn’t agree with the next US war.
And Paralus, what is US government going to do? Ask for the engines back from Saab? Take the Swedish government to the WTO? That would probably keep the lawyers busy (and rich) but won’t help grunts on the front line.
One should never forget that strategy and tactics are inextricably linked! If one forgets that, then one might just find oneself in some God-forsaken sandpit in a faraway part of the world without ammunition because the general responsible for logistics missed history class at West Point the day that day.
As for the limitations of the Gripen, there is a price to be paid for neutrality and independence of weapons platform and that price cuts both ways. We don’t get your ammunition unless you like our war. You go it alone if Russia decides one day that it wants something you have badly enough. Besides, as I recall it, you design your aircraft to be remotely distributed and work from converted roads in remote locations. I am no aeronautical engineer, but I can’t see many mainstream fighters being able to put up with those conditions, except maybe the UK Harrier.
My $0.02 worth. Not sure what the current exchange rate is for the Krona.
If your scenario really does come to pass, we would probably just reverse-engineer the Gustav and build our own; unethical, but expedient…..
Maybe the Swedish gov considered both sides if the Vietnam conflict and didn’t think the Goose was designed to kill peasants on the other side of the world.
Seems like a lot has changed since then…
As someone mentioned, you could probably make your own ammo for the Goose. It’s basically just a tube and a trigger.
Sweden has no production of armaments for the Gripen and we don’t keep much in stock so if we don’t sell you grenades the US can make our airforce pretty tame.
And when it comes to the Gripen: yes it was designed to use a road base system but these days we just keep them in steel sheds on two well known bases. Really cheap but not very smart.
So guess who’s gonna have to save the Europeans all over again after the EU collapses and Russia runs out of oil and gas?
“So guess who’s gonna have to save the Europeans all over again after the EU collapses and Russia runs out of oil and gas?”
Not the US. LOL.
Well be simultaneously entangled in another foreign war while dealing with a economic collapse due to declining energy supplies. Nobody will save anybody because they cant.
I like that line “The profession of arms is honorable, even if politics isn’t.”
Afghanistan wouldn’t be so dumb if 3000 swedes had been killed.
it wouldnt. 3,000 americans murdered by cretins in our own government is never acceptable.
9/11 was the US government’s fault? As in how?……
oh you didn’t hear? oh….
you must still believe the 9/11 commission report.
Ehh?
Don’t really know what to respond to that.
As a Vietnamese person I’m offended by the fact you would call the war in my homeland “Dumb”. My relatives died thanks to the VC killing them. I can’t stand when I hear about people talking about how we(Vietnamese) didn’t want the war or did we want the Americans there. Guess what right on the first part, wrong on the second. First off Uncle Ho invaded the South and slaughtered his own people(my relatives included). Second the Americans came to our aid and sacrificed for our freedom. No war is perfect and innocent lives where lost, but that “dumb” war was about freedom for the people of the South. Besides we now want the Americans there to help deter the Chinese who are making rediculous land claims against us.
So thanks for not helping supply the Americans during the war and allowing Vietnamese and Americans to die… By the way my favorite hockey player is Daniel Sedin so not all Swedes are bad!
After the French were defeated in Vietnam free elections were supposed to be held to establish a government form the entire country.All indications were that Ho Chi Minh and his party were going to win in any election,so the West never allowed the vote to take place.The US has only itself to blame for the Vietnam War,we didn’t allow elections and set up a series of governments that had little legitimacy and respect among the Vietnamese.
Imagine what the reaction would have been in the 13 colonies if after our war of independence the British had reneged on the pledges they had made during the peace conferences at the end of the war and established some puppet government to rule part of the US.
yeah, it will be a huge problem! ****!!!
except the united states is the world’s largest arms exporter and has the largest defense budget. we can produce recoilless rifles if necessary.
Well Swede, looks like it will be up to the US once again to save EU’s assets… then forgive all the debt EU will incur, so the EU can once again find the next agressor and take up an appeasement/@$$kissing role (because it worked oh so well the first couple times).
Pacifism is really great… if EVERYONE were a pacifist. Until then, you keep not fighting, and Uncle Sam will keep putting the dirtbags who don’t agree with you in the ground. You pray for peace. We’ll make sure you continue having the right to do so. When tyrants agree that pacifism is the way to go, the whole world will be a better place. Until then, someone has to protect the rights of folks so we have a chance to make it that long (cuz you know there are several countries who have already stated they are dedicated to the complete annihilation of all non-Muslim countries and their citizens… I mean, annihilation of all non”Peaceful Religion” countries….)
that would be true if the world was indeed after the west, which it ISNT.
There is a difference between fighting for you freedom and becoming entangled in wars that only benefit the armaments industries. The swedes are well aware of the difference. The US is except we make immense profits in anything war and resource related.
Of course, its easier to scapegoat the Muslims and create phantoms to chase. The Soviets didn’t cut it anymore.
So Muslims behead journalists, burn our flags, brutalize our ambassadors, and ram airliners into our towers and the Pentagon, and it’s actually all the armament industries’ fault. Nice reasoning. Maybe we should declare war on the defense industry, NOT……
So the American government instigates gunboat “diplomacy”, wage wars for profit to secure corporate interests (as colorfully described by Former Major General Smedley Butler, United States Marine Corps), instigate drone assassinations, spy/wiretap/harass fellow citizens under the provisions of the Patriot Act and 2012 NDAA, plots a horrific terrorist attack to justify securing resources in the Eurasian Continent, and economically sabotages developing countries with endless debt and youre worried about muslims!? ****!!! get real.
yeah. It happened to Australia, but we made do anyway.
yeah man i dont see that happening. already got it for the duration of my deployment. pretty sweet. plenty of rounds and parts
That’s great news. Our platoon got one half way through our deployment last year and its a great asset. Talk about a show stopper.
A common sense solution.
I love it!
Gotta love “The Goose”
I still like how Rangers and SF and other special operations troops have had the Carl Gustav since the late 80s/early 90s, and now, 20 years later (at the tail end of a 10 year long war in which the CG was used to great effect in the units that had them) Big Army is only now deciding its a cool toy and buying it for the conventional infantry. Don’t get me wrong, its a smart buy and should’ve been made years ago!
We have a winner! Big Army can sure be pretty thickheaded and slow to learn.
By the time we have a new carbine, our new camouflage and the Carl Gustav, we’ll have withdrawn from Afghanistan.
Lets buy a weapon that is great, reloadable w/ different rounds and effective now that we were sold on these expensive disposable weapons systems. LAW sized weapon is OK but these bigger more singularly designed weapons are too pricey, heavy and may be great on helicopters or vehicles but manpacking in Afghanistan is impossible. I remember in the 80′s 3d Ranger Batt haveing a show down inspection and we could see the KGs lined up ouside their barracks. This was a great weapon designed in the 1970s and is like the M2 .50 cal, timeless! Next they should by the ARES M-16 belt fed upper for the ARMY!!
Ausies have been using the ‘Charlie Gutsache’ from the dot in Afghanistan and still do. They seem to like it and manage to lug it around. Has a handy round that explodes over the target for those nice people hiding behind things. A round that size makes said people very unhappy.
Nice to hear… good people + good weapons = bad people unhappy. Just the way life should be.
The ARES would save much on the new SAW, IAR problem allowing units to add/subtract heavy barreled belt fed SAW type weapon with M-16 compatiobel lowers, not much training needed. Pul l2 pins and you either can have a belt fed/mag fed LMG or go back to the original upper for your M-4 or M-16!What a money savings and since the lower is the BATF issue, you can have as manny uppers as needed!
How come us Americans don’t create anything like this? Why are we outsourcing our military tech to other nations when we spend so much money on research alone? Isn’t this country supposed to be the gun “nation”? Pathetic.
Time to start buying American if we want to help our economy.
Most of our weapons are built or at least designed by European companies…
There’s nothing wrong with just buying what works.
Well put. As I see it, why re-invent the wheel. If somebody has something that fits a need for us then I don’t see why we should waste time and money trying to copy what somebody else has done when we can just simply buy it from them. Now if we have a need for something that doesn’t exist or nothing out there doesn’t meet our needs/requirements then we should and do design and build it ourselves. Besides, no matter where the original design comes from the end product is always, by law, built in the US by American workers even if the company that originally designed it isn’t American.
Since so many are concerned about the Swedes pulling support, why not just field the SMAW? It weighs less. It has diverse abilities. It’s not foreign.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/smaw.htm
Yeah, that’s what we’re supposed to buy!
Its an Israeli system.
Ok, didn’t really look too hard, thought it was US. Still though, why not field it in the Army? I never used the system, so I can’t personally vouch for it. Has anyone here used it recently, operationally? Even better, has anyone here used both the Gustav and the SMAW operationally? I’d be very interested in hearing an experienced opinion on that.
Whatever happened to the 90mm that I humped in Infantry AIT in the early 70′s. Don’t remember the range but I do recall that after about 3 days it was getting kind of heavy.
There have been some M67 90mm’s that deployed to Afghanistan with the 101st in 2011, but I’m guessing that ammunition stocks are low and have zero chance of starting up the production line whereas the Carl Gustav is still in widespread use and ammo is plentiful.
Plus, interoperability with other ISAF Gustav users and a wider array of munitions makes the Gustav much more attractive.
the 90 was a great system except for it’s weight. the goose is an awesome wpn system. yea, it’s heavier than a at4, but the tradeoff for what you bring to the fight is, IMO, worth it. As far as the issue of being crew served, yes, that is a consideration, but depends on your mission requirements. The goose has been used for decades now and is a combat proven system. I think it’s a good buy, but why just now?
Old kit, the good ‘old Charlie G. I was ******* around this heavy piece of **** in the ’80s. Looks like the sighting system has improved as it was hard to hit anything. I fired both practice and live rounds with it. This used to continually misfire and you have to wait 12 seconds with a misfired round 2 inches from your head before actions. I have had better days. However I really wouldn’t fancy being on the receiving end as a 84 mil round makes a bit of a mess. I imagine this would be a fairly useful toy against compounds and the like. Certainly used to make sheep disappear on ranges in Wales lol
Just for the record, don’t lump Brits in with all the European passiveness ********. I have stood shoulder to shoulder with you Americans in “two way ranges” and we have lost a lot of guys, and friends, doing it. Turning the other cheek just gives them another target to slap.
My Swedish friend, there is no such thing as freedom that is free, only freedom of speech and this comes at a price. Be glad there are those out there who pay that price for you.
I liked the AT-4 but to me it was dumb to have a single use weapon, by that I mean fire and discard the tube. Our rifles weren’t meant to be thrown away after every shot so why should our AT weapons be? The old M1A1 recoilless anti-tank rifles weren’t throw away weapons so why did the services do that with the LAWs and AT-4s? To me ammo is cheap but a whole new weapon isn’t? I’m not sure how much the new AT-4s cost but lets say they run $3,000 each and an M-3 launcher runs $2,000 each and each round only runs $200 each. You have an enemy tank column coming at you lets say 8 T-72s with the AT-4 at $3,000 each that’s $24,000 to kill all 8 tanks with AT-4s. Now you have those same 8 T-72s and you have an M-3 that’s only $1600 to kill those 8 tanks. Hmm what’s smarter and cheaper? Now my prices are more then likely off but still would you want to waste money or save it? The less you spend to do the same job the better off you are.
The ‘throw away’ philosophy is an artifact of Vietnam, where the disposable magazine was also ‘invented’. The idea was that conscripts were too lazy/incompetent/indifferent/high to keep their kit well maintained in the tropical climate and the M-16 had too many stoppages from poor maintenance. So someone invented the disposable magazine where you firedvthe contents and then just threw away the mag when you were finished. The AT4 was just an extension of that philosophy. After all, why would you want to lug around an empty tube after you had used the important part -the contents?
The problem was that no one stopped to think about what happened to all those plastic mags bad used tubes. The idea was that you were supposed to stomp on them to destroy them/prevent reuse. That just didn’t happen because people forgot in the middle of an ambush to call time out while they stood up and stomped on their empty plastic mags, etc. So more than one of those disposable weapons were reused by the enemy to kill Americans.
So what did we learn from all of that? Well in this war, we dont have conscripts. We also bring our own mags because we don’t trust what is issued. We are still using weapons platforms designed for a war more than half a century ago in another part of the world with different terrain and a completely different climate fought predominantly by conscripts, not professional soldiers. We are still relying on the goodwill of suspect foreign governments. We still cant work out how to camouflage our soldiers until the war is nearly over. But most importantly, we haved learned that our generals haven’t learned a thing from history.
why not just use the M67 90mm recoilless rifle? I was firing one and using the Anti Personell rounds with it. we have and manufacture these weapons why go to external sources?
the Taliban love to use the recoiless. devastating, effective and in the scheme of budgets…cheap
this is a good call. the Gustave should be MTOE for every light platoon, at least one.
if I’d had a bigger weapons squad…I would have had dedicated two of my guys to crew it.
as it was..we got them late in the tour, winter 2011? and didn’t get much time on them.
glad to see an order for a weapon that will do some good.
to be able to respond in kind to. talib recoiless attack…would be great.
When is the last time you tried to carry a 90 mil recoiless. An 84 mil is just as heavy. These thing are back breakers to the typical grunt. We need to invest in our own version of hte RPG!
Great to see this lovely weapon is still in service with the US armed forces. Certain things never get too old.
Sweden has quite strict export rules, as is our right. US-Sweden relations are in no way comparable to how it was back then though. For good and for bad, only time I would be worried about a similiar situation to Vietnam was if our Green party got into the government, they want to disarm our entire country and ruin our arms industry ;)
Swedish companies have worked with american ones on several occasions, excalibur(artillery shell) is one good example. It’s made by Raytheon Missile Systems and BAE Systems Bofors.
Swedish-American relations are probably the best they have ever been at the moment, both civil and military, with Sweden being quite closely attached to NATO(without actually being in NATO) through programs like the PfP and PARP, we even have a few PfP Training Centres here now, including one in Lapland where both the Nordic countries as well as the US and other NATO forces practise on a regular basis.
Anyways, just found this site by accident and wanted to say grats to a great procurement. It’s still one of our standard squad weapons here still(we do use the NLaw etc as well though).
Finally, something to compete with the time tested Soviet RPG. Can this be found on youtube?