PS, the US Army’s Preventive Maintenance Monthly has this reminder:
Too many M320A1 grenade launcher sight supports are being cracked or broken. The only fix is to order the entire leaf sight assembly kit, NSN 1005-01-564-2663, for $55. And sometimes it can take a long time to get the kit.
But much of this damage is preventable if Soldiers and armorers just exercise a little care. The most critical thing to remember is don’t stack anything on top of an M320A1!
In the arms room, armorers often store M320A1s on shelves and then pile equipment on top, including other grenade launchers. Laying grenade launchers on shelves is fine. Just don’t put anything on top of them.
Same thing goes for trips to the field. Don’t pile equipment on M320A1s and don’t let them bounce around in the back of a truck. A good investment is a sturdy container for transport that protects launchers from equipment and feet. You can probably find containers around the unit that will work.
A weaponsight that fails/breaks under normal benign neglect? Sounds like a design fail to me. Maybe whoever approved/signed off on it should be dragged back from wherever they are, and be made to do it over again.
“Too many M320A1 grenade launcher sight supports are being cracked or broken.”
Okay, that’s a design flaw then.
I am surprised that the US has never looked at the Meprolight grenade sight. It is fiber optic and extremely intuitive to use. I never saw one break while in service over there, you just set the range, lined up the dot, and off you went.
At least it’s better than the M203………
How many people have recieved NJP for breaking the sights? Obviously a weak point and should be replaced with something more GI proof.
It is a fairly weak design in the flipped up position. Flipped down it’s not bad at all. Quite frankly, it sounds like that they transport their rifles with the launchers mounted in a fucking pile in the back of a truck. That’s not on the soldier, that’s not the design- that’s a organizational and leadership problem.