SHAH ALAM: The Army is getting delivery of a batch of Nammo M72 anti structure and anti tank (LAW) shoulder fired weapons. The batch, supposedly the second one, is awaiting delivery, most likely in Norway, as the Defence Ministry has just issued a tender for a multi modal transport operator (MTO) to deliver it to Malaysia.
Nammo produced the M72 LAW – made famous in the Vietnam War – at its plants in Norway and in the US.
From the Defence Ministry’s tender website.
PELANTIKAN MTO BAGI MENGANGKUT LAW DISPOSABLE M72 ANTI STRUCTURE DAN LAW DISPOSABLE M72 ANTI TANK UNTUK TENTERA DARAT MALAYSIA
The advertisement did not mention numbers, its current location or the final destination. However if you have the proper documentation to bid for the tender you will get the full details.
I assumed this is the second batch as Shepard News reported during DSA 2016 that the Army had taken delivery of the same weapons in late 2015.
The M72 light anti-tank weapon has already been delivered by Nammo in Norway to Malaysia along with all ammunition with the exception of BDM. Malaysia has also taken delivery of the M72 ASM RC (anti-structure munition reduced calibre).
The spokesperson said the most recent deliveries to Malaysian forces took place within about six months.
‘They have a long term plan to buy M72 for training and inventory and add future improved variants as they become available,’ the spokesperson added
I cannot confirm the veracity of the delivery of the M72s or the interest on the other variants of the LAW as reported. AFAIK there have not been any announcement of the contract for the M72s in the first place though it was likely that these were ordered in 2014.
I have no idea whether the M72s are replacing the Instalaza C90s – which has a 90mm warhead compared to 66mm of the LAW – completely or it is just to complement them. The C90s have also been mordenised with anti structure and recently, a reusable version.
soldiers with their RPG-7 launcher as they walk in formation to the parade ground in February, 2017.
Anyhow both the C90s and M72s were not featured at the Army Firepower Exercise in May (not during the public day anyway) though the RPG-7 were demonstrated this time around. Personally I prefer the M72s or C90s due to their compact size compared to the RPG-7, the third unguided AT weapon of the Army.
I admit this is just a personal preference only as I dont have any combat experience with any of them though I fired the C90 and RPG-7 – a single shot each – during a media excursion previously. From what I saw during live fire exercises, however, it is certainly much easier to fire the C90 (and likely the M72 as well) as the weapon is already prepared to fire (after cocking) unlike the RPG-7 which needed to be loaded on the firing line.
It will be great if we could add the Javelin ATGM to the inventory but it is unlikely due to the threat environment and budgetary reasons. We already have the Bakhtar Shikan and METIS ATGMs for anti-tank duties though these are with the mechanised units, which are also issued with RPG-7s.
— Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
View Comments (29)
The first batch was delivered years ago to replace the C-90s. Was used at Lahad Dato. I took a photo of one (the bunker buster variant) which you posted. An issue with the RPG is its 15 metre distance before it arms itself; fired prematurely the round will bounce off the target. It is telling that we are still retaining the Carl Gustavs in the Support Companies.
This is what we bought over the years.
1. M-20s. - In service until the late 1970's. Not sure if the army museum has an example. I've never seen a pic of it.
2. Energa grenades launched from SLRs - not a shoulder launched weapon but I've included it.
3. Carl Gustavs - recently worked on by Saab. Heavier and bulkier than disposable weapons or RPGs and needs a crew of 2 but more accurate.
4. RPG-7s - we later bought warheads from Romania and RUAG.
5. C-90s - time expired and replaced by M-72s. We only bought the standard version.
6. M-72s - 2 different versions. The army displayed an anti-structure version which it said was used at Lahad Dato. It may have been part of a quantity we received or bought for evaluation before placing an order.
- Back in the mid 1990's it was wrongly reported that we bought the FT-5, a South African copy of the LRAC. After seeing the report in ADJ I asked a Denel guy at one of the DSAs; he said ''no comment''.
- I've been told that we had small quantities of Armbrust in the 1980/90's. Have yet to see a pic of it.
- Given that Gerak Khas displayed an AT-4 many years ago, we probably bought a small quantity or received a few for evaluation.
- Have no idea how the M-72 really compares to the RPG-7 when it comes to penetrating performance and the distance it needs to arm itself but it is a smaller, more compact weapon.
- Also have no idea if the army was ever offered or looked into Panzerfaust. The price tag is probably a put off.
At the end of the day it matters not if it's RPG-7 or M-72 or Carl Gustav. It'll be the training, tactics, the availability of reloads and as always, luck that counts and makes the difference. The standard tactic against shoulder fired weapons will always be maneuver and suppressive fire. Contrary to popular opinion RPGs were used against helicopters long before Somalia; in Rhodesia, Angola and Vietnam.
Reply
You left out the Eryx bought for the Bosnia UN mission and were later issued to GGK. The only guided shoulder fired ATGM we had so far as it had expired already
That 15 meter distance is because it's a rocket propelled while Carl gustaf is a recoilless rifle
If not mistaken the Eryx was used by 10Para, not GGK.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_En-sxfOkXP8/SeqNPl-Fx7I/AAAAAAAAAn0/IfPJhZmclog/s400/Eryx+MP.jpg.
BTW is the M72 only be used by specialized formations like GGK, or to be supplied to regular battalions?
Reply
GGK troops were the ones that hump the Eryx during Bosnia mission. I am assuming that the number of M72s we are getting are big enough for it to be issued to various units including the GGK
The 2 variants we bought from norway in 2015 might probably be m72 asm rc and m72 ec law mk1 or mk 2.
The 2nd batch might be add in numbers or might be the new fire from closure(ffe) variants with less backblast.
Just my estimation.
this is why we should choose M72 in the first place as BIS main bunker buster and anti armour weapon. it has the cool tactical look, power and much compact compared to the RPGs
Ask for French MMP or Ingwe infantry, get M72 LAWs... not even the new N-LAWs (which Indon is reported to operate), sigh... oh well I suppose anti-tank is not the priority.
All shoulder launched rockets have to fly for a minimum distance before their warheads arm themselves. Carl Gustavs, like the section level 60mm mortars, are also used to lay smoke and illumination. Laying smoke is something the Milkors also do.
Thus the question : given the dfficulty in lugging a 60mm mortar and its ammo at section level; is there still a need for 60mm mortars? Note that many armies no longer see a need for section level mortars.
The question to ask is, if the 60mm mortars are not worth the burden they impose, and especially if they are not often carried in practice, why does it it take so long for us to learn that lesson and remove them?
Yes all lessons take time and all armies, even the best resourced "tier one" armies as some say, find themselves unprepared. But what exactly is the point in this case?
Reply
I think the question is whether its there the 60mm mortar remained for the sake of nothing better or it's actually needed even as the infantry units especially the BIS comes under manpower pressure. It is hard to get answers to these questions as the Army is reticent to talk about this things
Chua,
Ingwe is too bulky and heavy for use by infantry units. Like TOW (which it wa based on) it's intended to be used by mechanised and motorised units, not lugged around.
...,
Way before the 2015 date cited by Shepard a M-72 used at Lahad Dato was displayed by the RMR. Given that it be
C-90s are gone and that the RPGs have gone to only certain units; it's a certainty that the M-72s will be widely distributed.
A lot of what Gerak Khas did in Bosnia was outside the remit of UNPROFOR and remains rahsia including the circumstances the led to the death of a Gerak Khas man.
Reply
I used a picture of a GGK FIV with a number of C90s during Army Day parade in 2013, it was lost when my server went kaput last year. Likely training rounds though