XBradTC

By

XBradTC

·

US Marines conducting live fire training with the AT4 rocket

The M136 Rocket Launcher (popularly known as the AT4) is a single shot disposable 84mm rocket launcher firing a High Explosive Anti Tank warhead. The rocket burns completely while still inside the tube, and then coasts the rest of the way to the target. It has an effective firing range of up to 300 meters…

The M136 Rocket Launcher (popularly known as the AT4) is a single shot disposable 84mm rocket launcher firing a High Explosive Anti Tank warhead. The rocket burns completely while still inside the tube, and then coasts the rest of the way to the target. It has an effective firing range of up to 300 meters against a point target such as a tank. It has a relatively high muzzle velocity compared to its predecessor, the M72 Light Antitank Weapon, and that results in a much flatter trajectory, and much better accuracy. Its much larger warhead also gives much better penetration versus armor. 

It's also quite a bit of fun to shoot. Normally, live rounds, since they're expensive, aren't fired very often. A training device exists. Basically an empty AT4 tube, it has a special single shot 9mm gun in the base of the weapon, firing a special 9mm tracer round that mimics the ballistics of the actual full up round. That isn't nearly as much fun to shoot, but hey, it's better than nothing. 

On the other hand, if someone lets you fire the real thing, against a real tank, heck yeah!

 

Tags:

Responses to “US Marines conducting live fire training with the AT4 rocket”

  1. Quartermaster

    Did the AT4 replace Dragon?

    Like

  2. Krag

    Javelin replaced Dragon. The AT4 is considered ammunition (not a weapon system) and is additional gear for riflemen.
    Dragon and Javelin were/are guided antitank missiles. Javelin also has antibunker capability.
    AT4 is unguided. No chance to penetrate a modern MBT anywhere except the rear. More useful against light armor and bunkers/emplacements.

    Like

  3. Esli

    AT4 replaced the M72 LAW (or LAAW,depending on your branch of service…).

    Like

  4. HalfEmpty

    What were the targets?

    Like

  5. EODBuellRider

    I hate nitpicking, but this is one of my pet peeves.
    The AT-4 is not a rocket launcher. There is no rocket motor involved. It’s essentially a disposable smoothbore Carl Gustav, which is a recoilless rifle.

    Like

  6. Xbradtc

    To pick a nit, the M136/AT4 IS a rocket. Other than sharing the 84mm size, it has no commonality with the Carl Gustav. Not even the warhead is the same. It only uses 84mm because Bofors already had the jigs and machinery for that size.
    Half Empty- the targets are suprlus M60 tanks. And you can tell the warheads were penetrating when you spot smoke billowing out of the gun tube.

    Like

  7. timactual

    Seems more like a recoilless musket, to me. What is the difference between a rocket and a recoilless gun? All the propellant is burned inside the tube, just like a recoilless gun or a conventional gun. Fins? APFSDS and mortar rounds have fins, too.

    Like

  8. SgtBob

    Looong time ago infantry AIT included firing the 3.5-inch anti-tank rocket. Fun stuff, even though we fired only one blue TPT round each.

    Like

  9. EODBuellRider

    There’s no rocket motor, so how is it a rocket? Would you call the Carl Gustav a rocket launcher?
    It’s often called a rocket launcher, but unlike the LAW, it isn’t. I compared it to the Carl Gustav because it was intended to be a cheaper disposable alternative to the CG, not because it was literally based on the same design.

    Like

  10. Xbradtc

    Because it HAS a rocket motor. It just burns very, very quickly. The entire burn time is less time than it takes for the rocket to travel the length of the launch tube. Just like the M72 LAW.

    Like

  11. Xbradtc

    Actually, upon further research, it IS a recoilless rifle. You’re right, I’m wrong, and I apologize.

    Like

  12. EODBuellRider

    No worries, it’s an extremely common misconception. Even the literature in an Army ammo handlers course I took a few months back classified the AT-4 as a rocket.
    And I get irrationally annoyed whenever it’s referred to as a rocket, which I should apologize for.

    Like

Leave a comment