Covan!
I certainly can understand why we never saw the illumination-ammunition, as just as "SS" and you yourself wrote, it is...."somewhat hazardous" for the one disscharging the weapon. Also, Thank You for informing me, regarding when US Armed Forces took in the Carl Gustav reciolless weapon. I thought that it was used to a very limited degree, by "unconventional units" of US Armed Forces, during the late 1960s and early 1970s, but was not certain. I do however know that the M/45 submachinegun was used during this time, though to a very small degree, by US Armed Forces "unconventional warfare units". Then generally referred to as the "Swedish K". Very reliable weapon, as far as functionality is concerned. At least that is my own personal experience of the M/45 submachinegun.
Regarding the AT4.... Thank You for informing me of when it was that the US Armed Forces adopted the weapon. This was something I did not know. SwArmy begun to introduce it more widely to our/"my" Defense Forces, beginning by the year of 1987, which was the year I first came in contact with it personally. Some years later, there came a yet new "prototype" of it, called "M/95", which was developed to be strong enough to penetrate tank-armor by "frontal shot". But the project was later abandoned however, and I have not heard anything about it being re-initiated again, since then. Instead, it transformed so to say, in to the "MBT-LAW", which instead is a "missile"-system so to say. But that happened well after I had left active service.
T G C!
Sincerely
A.B
|