Throws like a girl.......

[Top Cat]

I almost literally got pounded into the ground like a tent stake by a 6'6", 300 lb instructor when I did grenade training back in Basic. :lol:

The guy told me before I threw the grenade, to duck down behind the berm immediately afterwards, and that he would tap me on the top of my helmet when it was time to get back up. If I got back up before that signal, he said he would - holding up a fist easily the size of a boxing glove all by itself - hammer the top of my head until I was flat on the ground. So... I threw the grenade, ducked like I was told to do, and waited for the explosion. I heard it go off, and I thought I felt the instructor tapping on the top of my helmet, so I stood up.

Apparently, I was mistaken. Next thing I knew, I was getting hammered on the top of my head until I was almost in the prone position. lol

Explains a lot.

 

[joG]

Another reason girls shouldn't be in combat.

GRENADE TRAINING 101


A hand grenade can go off in 4-5 seconds. Ever hear the saying "throws like a girl"?

In the (new) Marine Corps (with women in combat), this is what it looks like....filmed on location at Camp Pendelton, CA.

http://i.imgur.com/t3CF25z.gif

I don't think it politically correct to show that. Down right discriminatory.

 

[braindrain]

You throw like a guy who throws like a girl!!!


seriously though alot of people can not throw who join the military, I can not throw a football or baseball to save my life, but I aced grenade throwing. I knew too many male soldiers who did the same crap, but throwing a ball and throwing a grenade are two different things.

Throwing a grenade involves using your left arm pointed out as a sight like on a rifle to judge the angle,then you throw with your right, for left handed it is opposite. When throwing a grenade it is a matter of long arcing the throw rather than trying to throw it straight, and judging force, distance and arc of the throw.

I have thrown a large number of grenades both in training and a few in combat and in my opinion the way the Army teaches folks to throw grenades, as you described, is simply retarded. It is super unnatural and simply not really applicable to real world. Probably why I haven't thrown one like that in a very long time.

 

[spud_meister]

 

[Frank Apisa]

Funny...no matter what.

Just reminds me of:

READY ON THE LEFT!

READY ON THE RAHT.

COMMENCE...(shot rings out)...

...GODDAMIT WHO FARED THET SHOT. KICK THAT ASSHOLE IN HIS ASSHOLE AND WE'ALL START OVEH.

READY ON THE LEFT!

 

[beerftw]

I have thrown a large number of grenades both in training and a few in combat and in my opinion the way the Army teaches folks to throw grenades, as you described, is simply retarded. It is super unnatural and simply not really applicable to real world. Probably why I haven't thrown one like that in a very long time.

You are right, the way the army teaches it is impractical. It works great if your enemy is at a distance in a trench, but never translates well into other situations. But that does not even matter much for current wars, since grenade issues are few and far between, due to trying to minimize collateral damage.

If another war breaks out, and we go back to lenient roe, well we might end up with a bunch of soldiers who can't throw grenades.

 

[braindrain]

You are right, the way the army teaches it is impractical. It works great if your enemy is at a distance in a trench, but never translates well into other situations. But that does not even matter much for current wars, since grenade issues are few and far between, due to trying to minimize collateral damage.

If another war breaks out, and we go back to lenient roe, well we might end up with a bunch of soldiers who can't throw grenades.

Also I just can't figure out the Army's logic of not making use of 15+ or so years of throwing balls that the average male joining the military has. No it somehow makes more sense to come up with some new odd throwing movement rather then just go with what comes naturally.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Another reason girls shouldn't be in combat.

GRENADE TRAINING 101


A hand grenade can go off in 4-5 seconds. Ever hear the saying "throws like a girl"?

In the (new) Marine Corps (with women in combat), this is what it looks like....filmed on location at Camp Pendelton, CA.

http://i.imgur.com/t3CF25z.gif

So men have never done stupid things in training and combat?

You haven't seen Niece#1 throw. She's a champion softball pitcher, also throws fast-pitch in informal competition. I'd put her up against most non-professional men. She doesn't lose her nerve or flinch either.


If we were in combat and had one grenade, I'd hand it to her.

My daughter plays fast pitch - our pitcher is insanely fast and accurate. Would be terrifying if she were tossing grenades, her pitches are harsh enough and they don't explode.

 

[beerftw]

Also I just can't figure out the Army's logic of not making use of 15+ or so years of throwing balls that the average male joining the military has. No it somehow makes more sense to come up with some new odd throwing movement rather then just go with what comes naturally.

The grenade training has not changed much since ww1, problem is it is still geared towards trench warfare, not modern combat. If I was in a foxhole or behind sandbags and I wanted to throw a grenade, I would not stand up do the aiming procedure and throw because I would likely be dead before I threw it. It made sense if you were assaulting a trench at a distance, and even then it would not because people in a trench can shoot back and will likely hit the guy with his left arm forwards standing out like a sore thumb.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Also I just can't figure out the Army's logic of not making use of 15+ or so years of throwing balls that the average male joining the military has. No it somehow makes more sense to come up with some new odd throwing movement rather then just go with what comes naturally.

I cannot understand why the American military has not changed from the grenade it has to something more like the Germans used to throw...using the mechanical advantage of the lever.

The Germans could throw their grenades yards farther than the best of throws with ours.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Throwing a grenade involves using your left arm pointed out as a sight like on a rifle to judge the angle,then you throw with your right, for left handed it is opposite. When throwing a grenade it is a matter of long arcing the throw rather than trying to throw it straight, and judging force, distance and arc of the throw.

That is really only at a range. And yea, at the range you have instructors who are constantly harping on you if you do not throw "by the book".

But in real combat, standing or kneeling and getting into the "classic throwing position" would end up with the thrower getting a bullet in the head. When I first got to "The Fleet", the first time we went to a grenade range without the "Instructors", we were told to forget almost everything that we had been taught.

 

[MaggieD]

Another reason girls shouldn't be in combat.

GRENADE TRAINING 101


A hand grenade can go off in 4-5 seconds. Ever hear the saying "throws like a girl"?

In the (new) Marine Corps (with women in combat), this is what it looks like....filmed on location at Camp Pendelton, CA.

http://i.imgur.com/t3CF25z.gif

OMG. Hard to believe that's a soldier. Hard to believe it's serious footage. Come on, guys.

There'll be three of us...our girlie girl and two trainers. We'll pull the pin and hand this "recruit" a live grenade right out of the box...and hope she knows what she's doing. I don't think it's real.

 

[MaggieD]

I cannot understand why the American military has not changed from the grenade it has to something more like the Germans used to throw...using the mechanical advantage of the lever.

The Germans could throw their grenades yards farther than the best of throws with ours.

That's such an excellent point.

 

[Oozlefinch]

I cannot understand why the American military has not changed from the grenade it has to something more like the Germans used to throw...using the mechanical advantage of the lever.

The Germans could throw their grenades yards farther than the best of throws with ours.

Yea, but they were also far more dangerous.

To use a Model 24 Stielhandgranate, you literally had to strike a primer (using a friction ignition system similar to a match), then throw the thing before it went off in 5 seconds. And there were also a large number of duds in addition to those that did not get them thrown in tome for one reason or another. Pull the courd, and throw. Not pull hard enough to set off the fuse, to bad throw it anyways. Enemy fire starts to come in just after you pull the primer, get up and throw anyways or else it is going off in your face.

The US models (pineapple, then baseball) use a vastly different ignition system. It uses a spring loaded striker and a percussion cap, like a rifle round. Until the grenade is thrown and the spoon released (during the throw when it leaves the hand), it is completely safe. You can pull the pin, then hold it for 2 years and it will never go off. You can't do that with a Model 24.

And were you aware that the Model 24 was obsolete during most of WWII? The Germans had already replaced it with the Model 39, an egg shaped grenade but with the same friction primer as the Model 24. But these were used in much more limited numbers, primarily for boobytraps and special groups. It was not until after WWII that Germany finally adopted the percussion cap ignition grenade.

 

[braindrain]

I cannot understand why the American military has not changed from the grenade it has to something more like the Germans used to throw...using the mechanical advantage of the lever.

The Germans could throw their grenades yards farther than the best of throws with ours.

Thank god we haven't. The last thing I need on my kit is a grenade taking up that much space. For the amount of time that you not only use a grenade but also use one at the max distance a person can grow one, those are simply to big. Space on a Soldiers kit is a a premium and a big grenade like that is simply not worth it.
Besides if I need a grenade out a little further then I can throw it I will use my 320.

 

[Oozlefinch]

That's such an excellent point.

Yea, until you read what I just posted about the biggest shortcoming about the model 24 "Stalk Grenade".

Then there is another larger difference. During WWII, US grenades (Mk II "Pineapple") had a cast iron body to cause shrapnel to maximize the casulty range. In modern grenades this is accomplished by roughly a mile of wire wrapped around the explosive charge.

The Model 24 however was what would today be called a "concussion grenade".

Yea, there is how it looks. There is no shrapnel, simply a sheet metal wrapping around the explosive charge. With a Mk II, the effective blast radius was around 10 meters. With the Model 24, less then half of that (and much more likely to be stunned than badly wounded - killed).

If you are 5 meters from a Model 24, you will be stunned, your ears will ring, but you will more then likely survive. With a Mk II, odds are at 5 meters you would have that, if the ragged chunks of cast iron had not puctured you in vital areas of the body.

Today, the closest thing we use to the Model 24 is the "Flash-Bang". A grenade without shrapnel, designed to disorient and shock the enemy but not kill them outright.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Thank god we haven't. The last thing I need on my kit is a grenade taking up that much space. For the amount of time that you not only use a grenade but also use one at the max distance a person can grow one, those are simply to big. Space on a Soldiers kit is a a premium and a big grenade like that is simply not worth it.
Besides if I need a grenade out a little further then I can throw it I will use my 320.

Exactly! Could not have said it better myself.

I love the 203-320, literally a baby mortar right on your rifle. In modern combat, those kinds of grenades are much more likely to be used than the hand thrown style. Hand thrown grenades today are more likely to be used in house-trench clearing than on an actual battlefield. And in those conditions, you are only throwing it a couple of yards. Kick open the door, toss it in and take cover behind a wall until it goes off.

For some reason, people seem to think that modern Infantry uses the same tactics and doctrine as it used in WWII. They have not realized the huge jumps that it has taken, which in many ways leaves conventional hand thrown grenades obsolete other than in special circumstances.

 

[braindrain]

Exactly! Could not have said it better myself.

I love the 203-320, literally a baby mortar right on your rifle. In modern combat, those kinds of grenades are much more likely to be used than the hand thrown style. Hand thrown grenades today are more likely to be used in house-trench clearing than on an actual battlefield. And in those conditions, you are only throwing it a couple of yards. Kick open the door, toss it in and take cover behind a wall until it goes off.

For some reason, people seem to think that modern Infantry uses the same tactics and doctrine as it used in WWII. They have not realized the huge jumps that it has taken, which in many ways leaves conventional hand thrown grenades obsolete other than in special circumstances.

I think the problem is to many people get there ideas of what combat is from what they see on movies.
And I would bet that you are right that in houses as well as caves is where the vast majority of grenades have been used in both Afghanistan or Iraq. Not much need for a great arm there.
As to the 203/320 I agree it's a great asset to have. Though for the 320 I always use mine as a stand alone weapon and not on M4. Personal opinion but for me it just makes my rifle to poorly balanced and unwieldy. Put the 320 on a separate single point sling held down by the same retainer I use when I am carrying a breaching shotgun and it's always there when I need it but not in the way when I don't. Plus I think it is faster to operate and reload that way as opposed to mounted to my rifle.

 

[Oozlefinch]

I think the problem is to many people get there ideas of what combat is from what they see on movies.
And I would bet that you are right that in houses as well as caves is where the vast majority of grenades have been used in both Afghanistan or Iraq. Not much need for a great arm there.
As to the 203/320 I agree it's a great asset to have. Though for the 320 I always use mine as a stand alone weapon and not on M4. Personal opinion but for me it just makes my rifle to poorly balanced and unwieldy. Put the 320 on a separate single point sling held down by the same retainer I use when I am carrying a breaching shotgun and it's always there when I need it but not in the way when I don't. Plus I think it is faster to operate and reload that way as opposed to mounted to my rifle.

Well, the only one that was an issued weapon to me was the 203. When I was a team-squad leader the M-16A2-M203 combo was what I was always issued.

I have fired the 320 more recently, and always in a stand-alone configuration. The first time I saw one I thought "Well damn, they brought back the M-79". And I can see the advantages of both configurations. Mounted it is a much faster response time if you need it in a hurry. But unmounted it makes your indivudal weapon more effective.

Of course, I am also of the old generation that remembers firing the M576 "Multi Projectile Round". I loved going to the range and firing those things, basically a 40mm shotgun.

Fire a handfull of those things and your plastic IPSIC target looked like it had been out for a pistol range for a week. I do not think they use them anymore, something about the Laws of Land Warfare if I remember right.

 

[katzgar]

Another reason girls shouldn't be in combat.

GRENADE TRAINING 101


A hand grenade can go off in 4-5 seconds. Ever hear the saying "throws like a girl"?

In the (new) Marine Corps (with women in combat), this is what it looks like....filmed on location at Camp Pendelton, CA.

http://i.imgur.com/t3CF25z.gif

pointless thread, the world has moved on try and catch up.

 

[d0gbreath]

You haven't seen Niece#1 throw. She's a champion softball pitcher, also throws fast-pitch in informal competition. I'd put her up against most non-professional men. She doesn't lose her nerve or flinch either.


If we were in combat and had one grenade, I'd hand it to her.

I have a Grand daughter that made the varsity team as a freshman. She plays catcher and can throw head high to second base from the crouched position.

 

[DA60]

Another reason girls shouldn't be in combat.

GRENADE TRAINING 101


A hand grenade can go off in 4-5 seconds. Ever hear the saying "throws like a girl"?

In the (new) Marine Corps (with women in combat), this is what it looks like....filmed on location at Camp Pendelton, CA.

http://i.imgur.com/t3CF25z.gif

First...they are not 'girls'...they are women/gals/ladies/females/etc.. Girls are generally under 18. Last time I looked, you had to be over 18 to enlist.
Girl is to boy...and most guys I know do not like being called 'boy'. And if you don't, you should not call adult women 'girls'. It's hypocritical.

Second...not every American woman has low upper body strength. Try going to a hard core gym...wait long enough and you will see women that could FAR out throw the average guy, guaranteed.
Btw, try going up to one of these gals at this gym and calling them 'girls' over and over...I dare you.

 

[Patrickt]

I've known women who could perform just as well physically as most men. I've also know men who couldn't perform physically any better than most women.

The fact is, men will generally outperform the women.

 

[Oozlefinch]

First...they are not 'girls'...they are women/gals/ladies/females/etc.. Girls are generally under 18. Last time I looked, you had to be over 18 to enlist.

The enlistment age as far as I am aware has been 17 for over 40 years.

I knew more than 1 person who even went to boot camp at 17, between their Junior and Senior years (what that option was still available). I myself was only 17 when I joined (but was 18 when I went to boot camp).

 

[Oozlefinch]

I've known women who could perform just as well physically as most men. I've also know men who couldn't perform physically any better than most women.

The fact is, men will generally outperform the women.

But the issue here is what is the percentage?

I for one will never say that there are no women that can perform physically at the level of men. However, the question is what percentage of women that can, and what is the effectiveness in trying to find that small percentage.

Think of it as simple economics. Is it more effective training 100 people with an 85% pass rate that is all male, or 100 of mixed genders where only 60% will pass? And assuming 25% will fail for physical injuries, that is now 1 injured permanently in training as opposed to 4 permanently injured. How much do we devote to finding the small percentage that can perform at that kind of level for that kind of period of time?

I myself, I see it as a waste of resources, and a distraction to the actual mission that the Infantry has.

Consider this. At this time, there are no major Football, Hockey, or Baseball leagues that are either co-ed or female only. The closest we have is the WNBA, but this is still an exception. Not a single female has ever played in any major porfessional sports leages (not mentioning the publicity NFL instance) since they have been founded. In fact, I would like to know of more than a handfull of women that have played in such sports at even a college level, let alone a high school level.

So yea, go ahead and demand that the military do away with such "segregation". But first, let's see how the world of professional sports handles it. Demand that all College and Professional teams bring in females along with the males.

And for those that bring in segregation, realize that professional sports started to desgregate before the military did. By the time that Ike signed an executive order demanding that the military desegregate, the sports world had already been doing that for years (sometimes decades). So let's spin this the other way. Demand that women be placed onto pro sports teams, and see what their record is like.

In fact, let's make it simple. Demand that each top team in each league place 10% women on their starting rosters. They see after a few years how well that goes.

I am not one to ever put down the women's sports teams like the WNBA. But put the player sof the LA Sparks on the LA Lakers, and do not think for a minute that their playing will not suffer. And that is only a game after all, not a case where literally life and death is in the balance.