Which type of rocket launcher does /k/ like better? The conventional

>>33042206
Better question: rockets vs recoilless rifle.
Is there even a good reason for rockets to still be a thing? I think a recoil-less rifle could do everything better.

>>33042425
Shouldn't the rocket propelled weapons have more effective range though? Recoilless rifles fire artillery shells, which are propelled by the primary charge alone.

>>33042206
Most of them are both. A propelling charge with a sustaining rocket motor igniting a safe distance from the launcher.

Guided munitions will make the gains in accuracy moot, so I guess investing in a safe launch system is better long term, plus shooting from confined spaces is useful.

>>33042425
Some countries are heavily invested in them. The Norks, for example have thousands.

>>33044776
They have the confined spaces issue solved, you just toss a mass of shredded plastic or water out the backside instead of hot gas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nOkO8Sh2xs

Shoulder mortars is the way to go

>>33042206
Until recently, rockets had a fairly significant weight advantage over RRs at the man-portable level. The extra fuel needed to counterbalance the shot was considerably greater than what was needed if you left the propulsion attached direct to the warhead and let the whole thing fly itself out of the launcher.

However, thanks to modern materials and manufacturing, the latest model of the old Carl Gustav is actually quite competitive with rockets; while it's still heavier (15lbs for just the launcher), it also has a longer range than most man-pack rockets, and of course a significant warhead flexibility that Western disposable RLs lack.

Now, will something like the Pike, which makes up for its grenade-sized warhead with laser guidance out to 2km, eat its lunch against unarmored targets? Remains to be seen.

>>33050427

>while it's still heavier (15lbs for just the launcher)

That's 2 lbs lighter than the SMAW launcher.

>>33050991
It may not seem like much, but it becomes an issue for soldiers who not only have to carry upwards of 30lbs of gear, but tote it around for long stretches of time.

>>33051167

Trust me I know, I did 2 tours as an 0351 SMAW gunner/a-gunner. Im just pointing out that the Carl is actually lighter.

>>33051181
I misread, my bad.