I was given minimal training on the M-72 LAW in basic training, but one thing that they impressed us with was "BACKBLAST CLEAR!!" It amuses me how often that important rule is ignored by Hollywood. Loved seeing that woman get grabbed out the backblast area.
Also movies always show it as a little rocket flying through the air and wobbling for a few seconds and them hitting a target. The rocket actually comes flying out at about the speed of a 9mm pistol so it's going to be moving so fast you won't be able to see it and it's quite accurate.
The fact he consistently calls HEAT rounds "a focused particle jet" is honestly the best concise description of shaped charge warheads I've heard from any youtube channel without having to deal with going into the complicated nonsense of how superplasticity works. Good on you, JJ. You made a creative choice and I stand by it.
When you fire an M72 there is no trail of smoke from the rocket. The rocket motor has burnt out by the time the rocket leaves the tube then it uses its momentum to fly to the target.
In the movie Forrest Gump when I saw the M 72 on Forrest back I said to myself “ God for bid he doesn’t know how to use that or holds it the wrong way when he’s about to fire it”
Never seen a LAW used realistically on any movie or TV show. For one thing, nobody ever grasps the tube properly to extend it until it clicks into place. And BTW, no gamer has any real knowledge of military weapons unless they've served in the armed forces.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Yeah, Being a kid raised on 80’s action films it was a major let down that the M-72 & M-67 hand grenades don’t explode in a fireball 😢🤣
Extremely accurate? Complete bullshit. In twenty years I never once got a round on target past 25 metres, while I could hit 10/10 with the Carl Gustav at 500 metres every time. M72 existed to make you feel better. It wasn't designed to hit anything.
A major flaw in the movie representation is a visible rocket leaving a smoke and flame trail (and not flying very fast). The entire rocket burn is inside the tube so by the time it exits it's a simple finned projectile. Same deal with the bazooka. The only weapon that has the rocket burning is the RPG-7, and that's only after it is ejected from the launcher and far enough away to ignite without singeing the firer.
I was going to make that point, you beat me to it. I don't think I've ever seen a bazooka (or an RPG for that matter) depicted correctly, not even in Saving Private Ryan. When fired it would be more of a wump, rather than a whoosh.
exactly. its the same in games. i remember back in the good old days playing day of defeat and using the bazookas and even the piat to lay a smokescreen for cover. :D
Same as well with the German version of the US bazooka the Panzershrek of WW2, that’s why it had the face shield on the front due to the round being adapted to should launcher use and the burn time after the tube and it was German doctrine to wear NBC equipment while firing it, though that seldom happened.
They had a movie back in the eighties about a nuclear waste transport being hijacked, with the crew trying to reclaim the stolen plutonium. That has some scenes were the terrorists use LAW rockets, and the firing of them is actually very convincing. The movie is called Time Bomb and featured Morgan Fairchild, Billy Dee Williams and others.
Fun Fact: In Iraq and Afghanistan, US soldiers prefer the M72 LAW over the AT4 due to its lower cost and and portability. As such, it was popular in urban combat as an assault weapon with little need for anti-armor capabilities plus a soldier can carry two M72 LAW launchers as oppose to a single AT4.
i never understood why the US army wants to impose cumbersome heavier throw-able launchers of swedish origin instead of more practical american ones. Stupid logistic policy
@@daegnaxqelil2733 Because the American ones have a high failure rate against armour, cost a shitload more for a simple item thanks to the cost over runs and profit gouging of the Industrial Military Complex. Just because it's _Murican_ doesn't make it good.
- Is Disposable - A single-shot launcher - Used by many countries - Effective against tanks - A cheap and easy to produce It is basically a Panzerfaust of the Cold War era
@@TheMegaPingasMobile Well yeah, I'm just putting forward one possible use since sometimes a direct hit might be hard while it's easier to hit the track or engine
The $2000 price tag is for the M72A7 version. Some of the older but still in service weapons can be as cheap as a few hundred bucks. I've seen in some credible defense procurement documents as low as $200, but those were also older version.
One thing that is NEVER mentioned is just how LOUD it is. Fired one several years ago while in the US Army. Even though I was properly wearing ear plugs, my ears RANG after shooting it.
About Ukraine, Finland is sending 1500 units of older stocks onetime use antitank weapons. Most likely most of them are 66 KES 88 (M72A5). They might include other types like the older 66 KES 75 (M72A2) or the heavier APILAS.
In the army we got basic training with the M72A5 as a general purpose anti-armour weapon. Even got to see one fired at a thick steel plate at a range. All you see is a bright light lunge forth and a big pop on the target (like a big fire cracker). What's left is an ugly, quarter sized hole through the target plate. As for Ukraine, I believe our government shipped some over there, along with rifles and other stuff. The cynic in me believes it was probably stock of old M72A2s and Chinese AKs the government was going to get rid of anyway.
We've been sending them both Stingers and Javelins, both very effective weapons. The T-72s are equipped with reactive armor which is designed to defeat HEAT rounds like the RPG or LAW.
@@djolley61 Yes the T-72s are but many other vehicles aren't and reactive armor can be damaged fairly easily. Having extra bad launchers is very useful
US Special Forces based at Lang Vei SF camp were attacked on the night of February 6 1968 by NVA PT-76 tanks and infantry. The SF and their CIDG allies engaged the tanks with M-72's, but had many miss completely, jam, misfire, or simply fail to knock out the enemy tanks.
@@AudieHolland; no weapon system is prefect, but the early M16s had more than their share of teething problems. However, the M16 platform did eventually evolve into a fine service rifle.
And in nearly everyone of the examples you cited, the arming sequence is never shown correctly. Once the tube is extended and the sights are flipped open, you have to manually pull the trigger arming handle forward before depressing the trigger on top, or it won't fire. If you want to see what this is like, go back and look at roughly the 7:34 mark of the video. You will see the guy doing exactly what needs to be done; he pulls the arming handle forward. What many people don't know is, if you don't fire the weapon, it can be disarmed and the tube collapsed until it is needed, which is really a pain in the arse. I served in the USMC, trained on this weapon system. It was felt inexpensive portable AT systems would be needed if WARSAW Pact countries ever crossed the Fulda Gap into Germany to kick off a ground war for WW3. You were correct that they can be reloaded, for training purposes. It's actually not difficult to connect the wiring on the sub-cal rockets used, and although they were only sub caliber, they still produce a back blast.
Good informative and interesting video!! Grew up in the US Army during 1980s with this weapon system, was easy to carry and operate. Then came the AT-4 as its replacement - good enough weapon but heavy/bulky. You could carry a bunch of LAWS vs maybe 1-2 AT-4s. Anyways, working at a warehouse on a military installation, we made up a weapons cache consisting of various item(s) that soldiers were coming across in Iraq/Afghanistan and they would say that they were encountering the LAW. We just happened to have some old LAW trainers laying around and added them into the weapons caches - the soldiers seemed to appreciate seeing them and becoming familiar with them. I would show them how to put these things into operation and collapse them back down into the carrying configuration. Also, I would start rambling off various movies that this weapon could be seen in and ask the soldiers IF they ever saw any of those movies - usually just get a dumbfounded/bewildered look on their faces. Anyways, THANKS!!! for the memories!!
There's various Chinese and Soviet disposable AT weapons that may not be direct copies of the M72, but sure did seem to start showing up sometime after Beijing and Moscow had a few years to look at captured American equipment from Vietnam... But hey, no one ever copied a good idea they first saw in American hands, right, Raketenpanzerbüchse 54?
@@jacksteel1539 Indeed, though they largely developed the RPG-2 as a result of the Panzerfaust. Disposable launchers really only showed up in Soviet arsenals from about 1970.
Wow... Massive film buff respect for including "The Hidden" in this video. I randomly saw it on tv at like 3am one time and it quickly went on to become one of my favorite shlocky 80s sci fi films. So fun seeing Kyle McLaughlin in a pre-TP role. He's also wonderful in Blue Velvet which im sure you've seen already
I definitely prefer carrying around the M72 over the AT4. As for explosions Hollywood exaggerates that greatly for many things. The M67s I used were no where near as powerful as some movies would have you think.
Yea, Hollywood makes a hand grenade and a 40mm M203 round look like 25 lb of TNT going off. And every car crash has to have a 20 ft fireball. Oh well, that's Show Biz.
I’m glad the M72’s presence in _Tears of the Sun_ was briefly acknowledged. Key squad members could be seen carrying them as part of their kit for the entire film until they were used for suppressive fire/force multipliers. Their role was portrayed as secondaries rather than the primary weapon of a dedicated squad member.
I remember when that came out that scene got so much flak back in the day. So they can use them to take out some vehicles but they're in the middle of the jungle, heavily outnumbered and quite simply they are there and available. Why not?
@@CoffeeFiend1 To be fair, the entire team was loaded for bear on what was supposed to be a simple snatch-and-grab mission. But there was merit to carrying M72s because enemy reinforcements did arrive by vehicle. If the lead vehicle is disabled on a roadway, the entire convoy is stuck due to the impassable terrain around it.
the LAW was also in the movie Act of Valor (to take down a truck full of baddies) and Invasion USA, Norris used it to take out the lead baddie.....a bit overkill IMO.
Fun Fact: During the vietnam war after some years of using the m72 American soldiers noticed that the fired m72 was being used as booby traps so it became an unwritten rule/order to not dispose unless necesary
Beat me to it Lumber... The VC would pull the pin on a grenade or two and slide them into the used, empty LAW tube with the spoons still attached. The tube would then be hung in a tree facing up with a trip wire attached to it. When a GI walked past, "tripping" the wire... the tube would swing down allowing the armed grenades to fall out onto the trail.
Hollywood prop departments being what they are, I am suddenly wondering how many times the SAME dummy tube got used in different movies/TV shows. There may be a LAW out there worthy of a Best Supporting...uh, Prop Weapon award!
You got one thing wrong. Bravo Two Zero is not fiction, it was based on an actual SAS patrol in the first gulf war, from the perspective of Andy McNab (the pseudonym of Steven Mitchell, who is a real SAS blade. he used a false name because, of course, the SAS has to protect their identities as a matter of national security)
During Vietnam the Vietnamese would take spent LAWS rocket tubes stuff them full of grenades with their pins already pulled and set them as a booby trap.
Fired enough of those in my day, plus the subcaliber Viper version. They did the job back in the day, but have since been upgraded. The funny thing is however; if given the choice between the '72 and an RPG, I would go for the RPG.
Small side note. The hilltop in Korea where the commonwealth soldiers use the super bazooka on the capture Cromwell. The first time the Centurion fired at an enemy tank was at a tank under a bridge. After hitting the tank and moving towards it the british crew were surprised to find it had been a Cromwell captured by the north Koreans.
In Viet Nam, we were told to destroy the tube after firing. The LAW was 66mm and the mortar used by the VC/NVA was 62mm. The bad guys could put one cap back on and punch a nail through the cap. This would make a serviceable mortar tube. Without using a base or aiming device, mortar rounds could be dropped in and the tube was slowly moved forward, thus, walking the rounds through your position. Had that happen to me/us a few times, but we never knew what type of tube was used.
Please. I wouldn't buy that crap if it was on sale. Seriously, guy. In an absolute emergency, I might try that, charge zero and hope for the best. Having handled an M-72, there's no way you could launch mortar rounds from that sucker.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq I would also like to know how to compile footage into a video like this, maybe start my own clip channel someday. Not trying to steal your thunder. I would be interested in making a channel on different subject matter. Any resources you’d point me to, to learn? Thanks!
@@michaelj6392 I use a lot of the "internet movie vehicle database" and "internet firearms movie database" I also use a ton of Reddit and other TH-camrs. I particularly like Ian from Forgotten Weapons. Doing movie clips is tricky if you want to monetize your work as you can't use much more than a consecutive 12 seconds of footage and the majority of your video needs to be narrated. The majority of studios do grant me permission to use clips when I have copyright issues but it can still be a tricky process. Also don't feel like this is a competitive field. It's like having a TV network, any growth in the field is good for everyone so most TH-camrs are happy to help other people in my experience.
After seeing it in so many of your videos I chased down New Kids Turbo WTF! it is the most batshit bonkers movie I have ever seen although it does remind me of the Aussie shows Fat Pizza and Housos. So anyone considering watching it be warned.
Had a demilitarised one some 20 years ago, i wanted to convert it into a collapsable/folding bong at the time, but it was too much work, ended up using it to transport drawings/poster safely (it was way more solid than some cardboard tube XD )
I like it in Falling Down.. :) We have the Pskott m/86 here - as well as the more modern RB 57. But I had the m/86. Similar but bigger. Well, it fires a "grenade" unlike the LAw´s rocket.
Pansarskott m/86 is called the AT4 outside Sweden, I think. Sweden gave Ukraine 5000 of those the other day to fight against the Russian invasion. First time since WWII we did that to a country in war due to our stance as neutral country.
A few things... The way they load it in the movies it a bit too "easy" because you actually arm it while you "open" it. Which means you are pulling against something when you do. Which one does not on empty ones one just carry during training or similar. In this context there is a slight issue because there are two main variants, based on my experience. The more modern one has a metal slide that is pulled to arm and open the weapon. The older ones just had a metal string. I say string, but that is more accurate and yes, that did mean that if you opened it too weak, it wouldnt arm, too hard, the wire might snap and make the round inoperable. Another aspect is that if you look at movie version. They are all old or "not new". Armed M72s are ALWAYS new. They are fire and throw away. They generally do not leave the crate before they are used or used within short time afterwards or if used in a more occupation like situation. They are never opened anyway so they retain the "fresh" look on the barrel edges etc. While any back blast should be respected and they are dangerous. This one is not "that bad" and while you shouldnt have your head behind it, because that might kill you. Firing such in a regular room with an open window is not a huge risk. We even did that with 84mm RFKs, but you need at least 2 meters from the wall then to avoid burn damage. Ear protection is a given regardless... Tactically, you do use the HEAT against infantry as well, but only in cases were you can. For example shoot the HEAT charge so it would burry through the ground and penetrate into the foxhole or similar to create and expansionist explosion of atmosphere there. You woudnt shoot into a window, but on the wall next to the window for similar effect. Note that HEAT has less effect on areas that are not enclosed. Foxholes are often not enclosed enough to cause wide area affect, but if someone has build up a bunch of sandbags and is sitting behind it or hes single man hole is on a slight incline. You might blow the guys out of the hole. Not just remove hes legs... That said, they were considered light AT. Used only for specific units or situations. While the squad I commanded was not an AT squad pr say. We usually carried around 9x M72 and a ton of other weapons as well. I also think our nation sent like 4000 surplus of these to Ukraine. Aside from M109 and other stuff that is much larger of course.
I have fired a couple of training rockets on those and seen live ones fired during my concription in the Finnish defence forces. What most movies get wrong is that the rocket completely burns out in the tube so there's no trail of fire and smoke and the sound is a loud "bang", like a shotgun but louder, not a "whooosshh".
Having a spent tube myself I can attest that the LAW is reloadable and all it takes is a Philips screwdriver. It was never meant to be reloaded so there are not any reloads. But by simply removing the 2 rear end screws, remove the cap that covers the primer, insert a new rocket with flash tube and primer, and then it is now reloaded. There was a movie (I think it was called ) Toy Soldiers -- a bunch of bad guys take over a military school for kids. In one scene, in the bell tower where a bad guy was all set up, they accurately show a LAW with 3-4 reloads WITH flash tubes and primers which are attached to the rocket, which has NEVER been shown EVER before or since.
Another reason for destroying the tube after use arose in Vietnam. Remove the pin from a couple of hand grenades, and carefully slide them into the tube. Hang it in a tree with a trip wire. One end drops, grenades fall out activating spoon release. KABOOM!
All of these actors keep putting their hand over the end of the tube! Big no no. Pull the pins from the sides, and grip the tube itself from the left and right side, then extend it safely.
Making it a single-use disposable jobber proved to be incompetent since VC sappers would scrounge those discarded tubes and convert them into booby traps filled with grenades. Why would a First World country equip its fighting forces with a disposable rocket launcher when the Third World was being supplied with the RPG-2 and RPG-7?! Speaking of those, their greater versatility in munition types is due to their being front-loaded. That also allows them to have relatively slim (by rocket launcher standards) 40mm tubes. 0:22 That one right there is the sub-caliber reloadable training version converted for use with pyrotechnics. But it's playing the role of an M72. 0:46 That technique doesn't look right. 2:16 That's not her fault. That's his fault. He's the one conducting the test and knows the weapon's nature, including the fact that it produces backblast. She doesn't have that information, so he should have informed her. 2:26 Unfold that stock, greenhorn!
Bravo Two Zero is based on a true story of an SAS patrol team that was compromised in the Gulf War. Off the top of my head, one got killed, 2 got captured and tortured, and 1 made it out. The SAS soldier that made it out holds the world record for the longest distance someone has cover on foot to escape the enemy. Bravo Two Zero was their callsign.
Clint smith from thunder ranch on a podcast talks about how when first contact was had three guys would walk forward and shoot them at the first sign of resistance than the platoon would fan out
I have shot a couple live M72s and dozens of practice rockets, there is indeed some recoil especially if you have not braced the tube against something. The first time I shot a live one the rear sight would have hit me in the eye if I wasn't wearing eye protection.
Here's some other popular movies that were overlooked. DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR. DEATH WISH 4. FIRST BLOOD. LONE WOLF MCQUADE. PROOF OF LIFE. SWAT. THREE KINGS.
Great stuff JJ. And thanks for mentioning the bit about how it was not to be used in confined spaces. Something often missed or misrepresented. Give me a PIAT any day:)
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq I had a wee notion that it might be. There’s some spectacular BS talked about the PIAT. I think it came from one of those History Channel experts’ slagged it off. You know the type, “Hey! You’re a military history expert?” “Er, yeah. Civil War era. Yeah.” “Cool. Talk about the PIAT then!” “Er…. Well…..” “Military expert, yeah?” “Well, OK. Yeah. OK. So this PIAT….. it’s not German. It’s British. Therefore it’s shit.” Y’know the types.
Shot around 20 training rockets and one live during my army training. In finland we call them KES. Really light and super accurate. I think i missed only once during training.
Lol I shot a law at a cinder block wall once and it bounced off, twirled a barrel roll, and fell to earth without exploding. Was at a weird angle, tho The original night sights still had a little glow
Off-topic: I watched The Pacific and I was interested in the scene where the Browning M1919 MG overheated in the midst of a strong rain and a fierce Japanese night attack.
Was gonna shovel snow but I guess I’m gonna put a pin in that
Give it some time and it will melt.
I just bought some LAW rockets and blew up the snow.
I was given minimal training on the M-72 LAW in basic training, but one thing that they impressed us with was "BACKBLAST CLEAR!!" It amuses me how often that important rule is ignored by Hollywood. Loved seeing that woman get grabbed out the backblast area.
The Canadians still use them alongside the Carl G
Yeah, it's funny how Hollywood ignores basic physics all the time.
Also movies always show it as a little rocket flying through the air and wobbling for a few seconds and them hitting a target. The rocket actually comes flying out at about the speed of a 9mm pistol so it's going to be moving so fast you won't be able to see it and it's quite accurate.
@@TheMoose126 Still in US inventory as well. More compact and lighter than the At4.
Roger that !
The fact he consistently calls HEAT rounds "a focused particle jet" is honestly the best concise description of shaped charge warheads I've heard from any youtube channel without having to deal with going into the complicated nonsense of how superplasticity works. Good on you, JJ. You made a creative choice and I stand by it.
When you fire an M72 there is no trail of smoke from the rocket. The rocket motor has burnt out by the time the rocket leaves the tube then it uses its momentum to fly to the target.
In the movie Forrest Gump when I saw the M 72 on Forrest back I said to myself “ God for bid he doesn’t know how to use that or holds it the wrong way when he’s about to fire it”
You mean the LAAW?
Never seen a LAW used realistically on any movie or TV show. For one thing, nobody ever grasps the tube properly to extend it until it clicks into place.
And BTW, no gamer has any real knowledge of military weapons unless they've served in the armed forces.
Got to fire the M-72 in Tech school-1998 USAF (Security Forces) extremely accurate & easy to use.
Now that would be fun!
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Yeah,
Being a kid raised on 80’s action films it was a major let down that the M-72 & M-67 hand grenades don’t explode in a fireball 😢🤣
Extremely accurate? Complete bullshit. In twenty years I never once got a round on target past 25 metres, while I could hit 10/10 with the Carl Gustav at 500 metres every time. M72 existed to make you feel better. It wasn't designed to hit anything.
@@iatsd User error ma’am 🤷🏾♂️🤣
@@iatsd
I was thinking the same, it is a peace of shit!
A major flaw in the movie representation is a visible rocket leaving a smoke and flame trail (and not flying very fast). The entire rocket burn is inside the tube so by the time it exits it's a simple finned projectile. Same deal with the bazooka. The only weapon that has the rocket burning is the RPG-7, and that's only after it is ejected from the launcher and far enough away to ignite without singeing the firer.
I was going to make that point, you beat me to it. I don't think I've ever seen a bazooka (or an RPG for that matter) depicted correctly, not even in Saving Private Ryan. When fired it would be more of a wump, rather than a whoosh.
exactly. its the same in games. i remember back in the good old days playing day of defeat and using the bazookas and even the piat to lay a smokescreen for cover. :D
@@snakeplissken2148 haha, love your screen name!
Same as well with the German version of the US bazooka the Panzershrek of WW2, that’s why it had the face shield on the front due to the round being adapted to should launcher use and the burn time after the tube and it was German doctrine to wear NBC equipment while firing it, though that seldom happened.
They had a movie back in the eighties about a nuclear waste transport being hijacked, with the crew trying to reclaim the stolen plutonium. That has some scenes were the terrorists use LAW rockets, and the firing of them is actually very convincing. The movie is called Time Bomb and featured Morgan Fairchild, Billy Dee Williams and others.
Fun Fact:
In Iraq and Afghanistan, US soldiers prefer the M72 LAW over the AT4 due to its lower cost and and portability. As such, it was popular in urban combat as an assault weapon with little need for anti-armor capabilities plus a soldier can carry two M72 LAW launchers as oppose to a single AT4.
Please, soldiers don't give a rats about the cost.
@@josephking6515 they do when it comes to weight!
i never understood why the US army wants to impose cumbersome heavier throw-able launchers of swedish origin instead of more practical american ones. Stupid logistic policy
@@daegnaxqelil2733 Because the American ones have a high failure rate against armour, cost a shitload more for a simple item thanks to the cost over runs and profit gouging of the Industrial Military Complex.
Just because it's _Murican_ doesn't make it good.
@@josephking6515 the AT4s are still yet more costly and less accurate.
- Is Disposable
- A single-shot launcher
- Used by many countries
- Effective against tanks
- A cheap and easy to produce
It is basically a Panzerfaust of the Cold War era
The coldfaust
It is NOT effective against tanks. APC:s maybe but shooting at modern mbt:s with that will just get the tank angry and yourself killed
@@TheMegaPingasMobile I mean, one could argue that a mobility kill is still possible
@@AHappyCub well yes, but if I'm shooting at armor, I want to make sure it won't shoot me back anymore
@@TheMegaPingasMobile Well yeah, I'm just putting forward one possible use since sometimes a direct hit might be hard while it's easier to hit the track or engine
The $2000 price tag is for the M72A7 version. Some of the older but still in service weapons can be as cheap as a few hundred bucks. I've seen in some credible defense procurement documents as low as $200, but those were also older version.
We had the A2's in 1977, and they were cool, but Claymores were my favorite.
One thing that is NEVER mentioned is just how LOUD it is. Fired one several years ago while in the US Army. Even though I was properly wearing ear plugs, my ears RANG after shooting it.
About Ukraine, Finland is sending 1500 units of older stocks onetime use antitank weapons. Most likely most of them are 66 KES 88 (M72A5). They might include other types like the older 66 KES 75 (M72A2) or the heavier APILAS.
Denmark is also sending LAW's and Norway(that still produce them).
@@plainlake yeah we did buy some 66 KES 12 (M72 EC LAW Mk.I) from norway to replace the older 66 KES 88 (M72A5)
In the army we got basic training with the M72A5 as a general purpose anti-armour weapon. Even got to see one fired at a thick steel plate at a range. All you see is a bright light lunge forth and a big pop on the target (like a big fire cracker). What's left is an ugly, quarter sized hole through the target plate.
As for Ukraine, I believe our government shipped some over there, along with rifles and other stuff. The cynic in me believes it was probably stock of old M72A2s and Chinese AKs the government was going to get rid of anyway.
tbh if you're going to get rid of them you might as well give them to people in need
We've been sending them both Stingers and Javelins, both very effective weapons. The T-72s are equipped with reactive armor which is designed to defeat HEAT rounds like the RPG or LAW.
@@djolley61 Yes the T-72s are but many other vehicles aren't and reactive armor can be damaged fairly easily. Having extra bad launchers is very useful
@@jacksteel1539 I think they would work on trucks and BMPs
it's stupid to sell M72s to ukrainians
The M-72s we used "back in the day" had a real reliability problem with its ignition system. Sometimes we had more misfires than successful launches.
US Special Forces based at Lang Vei SF camp were attacked on the night of February 6 1968 by NVA PT-76 tanks and infantry. The SF and their CIDG allies engaged the tanks with M-72's, but had many miss completely, jam, misfire, or simply fail to knock out the enemy tanks.
@@MrDgwphotos; I don't know about the resent day M-72, but the M-72s we had in the '60s and '70s left a lot to be desired.
@@oldgysgt The M-16s they gave you also left a lot to be desired.
@@AudieHolland; no weapon system is prefect, but the early M16s had more than their share of teething problems. However, the M16 platform did eventually evolve into a fine service rifle.
And in nearly everyone of the examples you cited, the arming sequence is never shown correctly. Once the tube is extended and the sights are flipped open, you have to manually pull the trigger arming handle forward before depressing the trigger on top, or it won't fire. If you want to see what this is like, go back and look at roughly the 7:34 mark of the video. You will see the guy doing exactly what needs to be done; he pulls the arming handle forward. What many people don't know is, if you don't fire the weapon, it can be disarmed and the tube collapsed until it is needed, which is really a pain in the arse. I served in the USMC, trained on this weapon system. It was felt inexpensive portable AT systems would be needed if WARSAW Pact countries ever crossed the Fulda Gap into Germany to kick off a ground war for WW3. You were correct that they can be reloaded, for training purposes. It's actually not difficult to connect the wiring on the sub-cal rockets used, and although they were only sub caliber, they still produce a back blast.
Very current post...we are in the middle of delivering supplies to Ukraine...thanks for sharing this with us all, Johnny...E
Who is we.
@@ifv2089 figure it out you tosser...stay at home...
@@eamonnclabby7067 bruh.
@@ifv2089the NATO
@@ifv2089 It's better to leave the question unanswered, for opsec reasons.
I always looked at old dutch army manuals from my dad and i always thought this weapon looked super sci fi for the time.
Good informative and interesting video!! Grew up in the US Army during 1980s with this weapon system, was easy to carry and operate. Then came the AT-4 as its replacement - good enough weapon but heavy/bulky. You could carry a bunch of LAWS vs maybe 1-2 AT-4s. Anyways, working at a warehouse on a military installation, we made up a weapons cache consisting of various item(s) that soldiers were coming across in Iraq/Afghanistan and they would say that they were encountering the LAW. We just happened to have some old LAW trainers laying around and added them into the weapons caches - the soldiers seemed to appreciate seeing them and becoming familiar with them. I would show them how to put these things into operation and collapse them back down into the carrying configuration. Also, I would start rambling off various movies that this weapon could be seen in and ask the soldiers IF they ever saw any of those movies - usually just get a dumbfounded/bewildered look on their faces. Anyways, THANKS!!! for the memories!!
There's various Chinese and Soviet disposable AT weapons that may not be direct copies of the M72, but sure did seem to start showing up sometime after Beijing and Moscow had a few years to look at captured American equipment from Vietnam...
But hey, no one ever copied a good idea they first saw in American hands, right, Raketenpanzerbüchse 54?
Soviets had a lot of chances to see German disposable AT weapons as did the western allies as well
@@jacksteel1539 Indeed, though they largely developed the RPG-2 as a result of the Panzerfaust. Disposable launchers really only showed up in Soviet arsenals from about 1970.
You forget the Yugoslav M80 Zolja. a 62mm copy .
Firing procedure
1. Pull hate tab
2. Clear officers from area
3. Extended the long arm of the LAW
4. Giggle button
5. Make it rain
Wow... Massive film buff respect for including "The Hidden" in this video. I randomly saw it on tv at like 3am one time and it quickly went on to become one of my favorite shlocky 80s sci fi films. So fun seeing Kyle McLaughlin in a pre-TP role. He's also wonderful in Blue Velvet which im sure you've seen already
I definitely prefer carrying around the M72 over the AT4. As for explosions Hollywood exaggerates that greatly for many things. The M67s I used were no where near as powerful as some movies would have you think.
Yea, Hollywood makes a hand grenade and a 40mm M203 round look like 25 lb of TNT going off. And every car crash has to have a 20 ft fireball. Oh well, that's Show Biz.
I’m glad the M72’s presence in _Tears of the Sun_ was briefly acknowledged. Key squad members could be seen carrying them as part of their kit for the entire film until they were used for suppressive fire/force multipliers. Their role was portrayed as secondaries rather than the primary weapon of a dedicated squad member.
I remember when that came out that scene got so much flak back in the day. So they can use them to take out some vehicles but they're in the middle of the jungle, heavily outnumbered and quite simply they are there and available. Why not?
@@CoffeeFiend1 To be fair, the entire team was loaded for bear on what was supposed to be a simple snatch-and-grab mission. But there was merit to carrying M72s because enemy reinforcements did arrive by vehicle. If the lead vehicle is disabled on a roadway, the entire convoy is stuck due to the impassable terrain around it.
the LAW was also in the movie Act of Valor (to take down a truck full of baddies) and Invasion USA, Norris used it to take out the lead baddie.....a bit overkill IMO.
The M72 LAW doesn't go "Woosh." It makes a big bang and you get a face full of sparks.
Fun Fact: During the vietnam war after some years of using the m72 American soldiers noticed that the fired m72 was being used as booby traps so it became an unwritten rule/order to not dispose unless necesary
Beat me to it Lumber...
The VC would pull the pin on a grenade or two and slide them into the used, empty LAW tube with the spoons still attached. The tube would then be hung in a tree facing up with a trip wire attached to it. When a GI walked past, "tripping" the wire... the tube would swing down allowing the armed grenades to fall out onto the trail.
Nice! Some BRONSON on the thumbnail.
One cat not to be messed with.
Hollywood prop departments being what they are, I am suddenly wondering how many times the SAME dummy tube got used in different movies/TV shows. There may be a LAW out there worthy of a Best Supporting...uh, Prop Weapon award!
You got one thing wrong. Bravo Two Zero is not fiction, it was based on an actual SAS patrol in the first gulf war, from the perspective of Andy McNab (the pseudonym of Steven Mitchell, who is a real SAS blade. he used a false name because, of course, the SAS has to protect their identities as a matter of national security)
During Vietnam the Vietnamese would take spent LAWS rocket tubes stuff them full of grenades with their pins already pulled and set them as a booby trap.
Fired enough of those in my day, plus the subcaliber Viper version. They did the job back in the day, but have since been upgraded. The funny thing is however; if given the choice between the '72 and an RPG, I would go for the RPG.
Fun fact many countries still use the M72 to this day countries like Canada
Yo I remember watching Gangland or some shit on History channel, some biker gang blew up a rival clubhouse with a LAW
1:46 Glad you mentioned the falling down😆👍👍
Small side note. The hilltop in Korea where the commonwealth soldiers use the super bazooka on the capture Cromwell. The first time the Centurion fired at an enemy tank was at a tank under a bridge. After hitting the tank and moving towards it the british crew were surprised to find it had been a Cromwell captured by the north Koreans.
In Viet Nam, we were told to destroy the tube after firing. The LAW was 66mm and the mortar used by the VC/NVA was 62mm. The bad guys could put one cap back on and punch a nail through the cap. This would make a serviceable mortar tube. Without using a base or aiming device, mortar rounds could be dropped in and the tube was slowly moved forward, thus, walking the rounds through your position. Had that happen to me/us a few times, but we never knew what type of tube was used.
Please. I wouldn't buy that crap if it was on sale. Seriously, guy.
In an absolute emergency, I might try that, charge zero and hope for the best. Having handled an M-72, there's no way you could launch mortar rounds from that sucker.
@@jackstecker5796 Classic boomer fuddlore just like "5.56 was designed to wound not kill" BS
After 75, NVA managed to make them reusable. Because shoot-and-dispose is considered "toys of the rich kids". Or in other word, too expensive.
another great video, Johnny! Well researched and supported by terrific videos. How do you do it? Maybe a short video on how you put one together.
Well definitely a lot of help from forums and other youtubers. Maybe at a 100k once I polish my process :)
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq I would also like to know how to compile footage into a video like this, maybe start my own clip channel someday. Not trying to steal your thunder. I would be interested in making a channel on different subject matter. Any resources you’d point me to, to learn? Thanks!
@@michaelj6392 I use a lot of the "internet movie vehicle database" and "internet firearms movie database" I also use a ton of Reddit and other TH-camrs. I particularly like Ian from Forgotten Weapons. Doing movie clips is tricky if you want to monetize your work as you can't use much more than a consecutive 12 seconds of footage and the majority of your video needs to be narrated. The majority of studios do grant me permission to use clips when I have copyright issues but it can still be a tricky process. Also don't feel like this is a competitive field. It's like having a TV network, any growth in the field is good for everyone so most TH-camrs are happy to help other people in my experience.
After seeing it in so many of your videos I chased down New Kids Turbo WTF! it is the most batshit bonkers movie I have ever seen although it does remind me of the Aussie shows Fat Pizza and Housos. So anyone considering watching it be warned.
Falling down is by far the best representation of the m72 ever............. period
My step father gave me one to play with when I was a kid. He took it home from the gulf war.
Had a demilitarised one some 20 years ago, i wanted to convert it into a collapsable/folding bong at the time, but it was too much work, ended up using it to transport drawings/poster safely (it was way more solid than some cardboard tube XD )
I like it in Falling Down.. :) We have the Pskott m/86 here - as well as the more modern RB 57. But I had the m/86. Similar but bigger. Well, it fires a "grenade" unlike the LAw´s rocket.
Man, Kylie Minogue is cute in Street Fihgter! :D
Pansarskott m/86 is called the AT4 outside Sweden, I think. Sweden gave Ukraine 5000 of those the other day to fight against the Russian invasion. First time since WWII we did that to a country in war due to our stance as neutral country.
Are you by chance from Ex-Yugoslavian nations or Indonesia?
@@explainatorylore799 No
0:10: Terminator: Dark Fate (2019).
A few things...
The way they load it in the movies it a bit too "easy" because you actually arm it while you "open" it. Which means you are pulling against something when you do. Which one does not on empty ones one just carry during training or similar. In this context there is a slight issue because there are two main variants, based on my experience. The more modern one has a metal slide that is pulled to arm and open the weapon. The older ones just had a metal string. I say string, but that is more accurate and yes, that did mean that if you opened it too weak, it wouldnt arm, too hard, the wire might snap and make the round inoperable. Another aspect is that if you look at movie version. They are all old or "not new". Armed M72s are ALWAYS new. They are fire and throw away. They generally do not leave the crate before they are used or used within short time afterwards or if used in a more occupation like situation. They are never opened anyway so they retain the "fresh" look on the barrel edges etc.
While any back blast should be respected and they are dangerous. This one is not "that bad" and while you shouldnt have your head behind it, because that might kill you. Firing such in a regular room with an open window is not a huge risk. We even did that with 84mm RFKs, but you need at least 2 meters from the wall then to avoid burn damage. Ear protection is a given regardless...
Tactically, you do use the HEAT against infantry as well, but only in cases were you can. For example shoot the HEAT charge so it would burry through the ground and penetrate into the foxhole or similar to create and expansionist explosion of atmosphere there. You woudnt shoot into a window, but on the wall next to the window for similar effect. Note that HEAT has less effect on areas that are not enclosed. Foxholes are often not enclosed enough to cause wide area affect, but if someone has build up a bunch of sandbags and is sitting behind it or hes single man hole is on a slight incline. You might blow the guys out of the hole. Not just remove hes legs...
That said, they were considered light AT. Used only for specific units or situations. While the squad I commanded was not an AT squad pr say. We usually carried around 9x M72 and a ton of other weapons as well. I also think our nation sent like 4000 surplus of these to Ukraine. Aside from M109 and other stuff that is much larger of course.
I have fired a couple of training rockets on those and seen live ones fired during my concription in the Finnish defence forces. What most movies get wrong is that the rocket completely burns out in the tube so there's no trail of fire and smoke and the sound is a loud "bang", like a shotgun but louder, not a "whooosshh".
2:16 Evidently, that gal has NEVER before seen a rocket's tail spouting a spray of fire...
Law m72 is made at Nammo Raufoss in Norway 👍🇳🇴
Always follow Chuck Norris s advise. Always
Having a spent tube myself I can attest that the LAW is reloadable and all it takes is a Philips screwdriver.
It was never meant to be reloaded so there are not any reloads. But by simply removing the 2 rear end screws, remove the cap that covers the primer, insert a new rocket with flash tube and primer, and then it is now reloaded.
There was a movie (I think it was called ) Toy Soldiers -- a bunch of bad guys take over a military school for kids.
In one scene, in the bell tower where a bad guy was all set up, they accurately show a LAW with 3-4 reloads WITH flash tubes and primers which are attached to the rocket, which has NEVER been shown EVER before or since.
Thank you for adding this! I wish I had come across that clip.
still remember CSI Miami bad guy shooting one inside of a concrete truck it did not end well for him
Another reason for destroying the tube after use arose in Vietnam. Remove the pin from a couple of hand grenades, and carefully slide them into the tube. Hang it in a tree with a trip wire. One end drops, grenades fall out activating spoon release. KABOOM!
The RPG-22 is better in every regard. It’s both lighter and more powerful
Oh I loved it when Billy Rosewood got his hands on one... with that quip from Taggart! :)
the m72 law was use to anti tank but it's very bad ,even some light tank like the pt 76 still good after some hit
Pretty good against infantry positions however
All of these actors keep putting their hand over the end of the tube! Big no no. Pull the pins from the sides, and grip the tube itself from the left and right side, then extend it safely.
The rocket has a tendency to shoot the tailfin assembly backwards when it hits the target ^^ not fun when you're engaging stuff at under 100m ish :)
It's cool to see LAW rockets in the hands of Ukrainian fighters. This little launcher is still seeing lots of service to this day!
There's literally not a day that goes by that I don't "follow Chuck Norris' example".
It’s all well and good, but here’s the real question, could an M72 operator fire 3 rounds a minute in any weather?
You should do a video on the javelin
Not many movies with it except Tik Toks from Ukraine ;)
@@MichalKaczorowski indeed...don,t forget Afghan action...
5:14 Watch on DVD with English dubbed. They went back in time. 😆
1 best classic weapons m72 rocket.. I think should make one redouble type
If heavy armor shows up, run! It will just bounce off unless you attack from above.
Time to bring the LAW and justice to the Villains
(Carries a LAW to confront the Villains while they're in their fancy car driving down the road)
Making it a single-use disposable jobber proved to be incompetent since VC sappers would scrounge those discarded tubes and convert them into booby traps filled with grenades. Why would a First World country equip its fighting forces with a disposable rocket launcher when the Third World was being supplied with the RPG-2 and RPG-7?! Speaking of those, their greater versatility in munition types is due to their being front-loaded. That also allows them to have relatively slim (by rocket launcher standards) 40mm tubes.
0:22 That one right there is the sub-caliber reloadable training version converted for use with pyrotechnics. But it's playing the role of an M72.
0:46 That technique doesn't look right.
2:16 That's not her fault. That's his fault. He's the one conducting the test and knows the weapon's nature, including the fact that it produces backblast. She doesn't have that information, so he should have informed her.
2:26 Unfold that stock, greenhorn!
All excellent points.
The idea that you've watched new kids turbo is hilarious. A classic dutch shitpost
Norway and Danmark pledge to send thousands M72 to Ukraine.
somehow the movie set in sengoku era (GI Samurai) got it realistic (no rocket trail, throw after use)
I’m surprised that when you discussed backblast you didn’t show Rambo using one whilst sat in a Huey, with no Ill effect to the passengers behind…
The discussion of the M-72 is not complete until someone yells, "Back blast area CLEAR!"
The word “silly” could be used about most of Charles Bronson’s later movies.
"If it doesn't fire, you can always hit them with tube."
Anyone played with this on BO1 before?
"2 tubes inside one another"? Some 5th dimension stuff there!
Dredd: YOU BE BETRAYED THE LAW!
Rico: LAAAAAWWWWW!!!!!
Bravo Two Zero is based on a true story of an SAS patrol team that was compromised in the Gulf War. Off the top of my head, one got killed, 2 got captured and tortured, and 1 made it out. The SAS soldier that made it out holds the world record for the longest distance someone has cover on foot to escape the enemy. Bravo Two Zero was their callsign.
Yes I don't know why he believed it to be "mostly fiction".
Yes but the film is mostly BS and fiction the battle where they use the LAWS never took place !
No Shoujo Commando Izumi with her M72 LAW? Sad:(
Damn. That would have been good.
Just point, and shoot, it's not hard.
Great video.
Take care, and all the best.
0:47 Niemand komt aan Maaskantje!😂 Great video btw.
3:52 well, the movie IS called "True Liesx
New kids🤣
Clint smith from thunder ranch on a podcast talks about how when first contact was had three guys would walk forward and shoot them at the first sign of resistance than the platoon would fan out
I have shot a couple live M72s and dozens of practice rockets, there is indeed some recoil especially if you have not braced the tube against something. The first time I shot a live one the rear sight would have hit me in the eye if I wasn't wearing eye protection.
Can you tell me more
Nice to see the new kids..
I'm dutch 🇱🇺
It’s literally a 40 mike with a rocket on it
Here's some other popular movies that were overlooked.
DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR.
DEATH WISH 4.
FIRST BLOOD.
LONE WOLF MCQUADE.
PROOF OF LIFE.
SWAT.
THREE KINGS.
Man, this Rocket Launcher sucked in Zombies...
not after pack a punching.
Bro how much empty rockets does this litter lol
I have fired one, it is an accurate weapon.
Ukraine runs RPG-18 (copied and slightly more compact LAW) and RPG-26 (roughly an AT-4 equivalent but lighter) launchers of Soviet stock.
Used to buy these in 1982 from quartermasters store in london at 15 quid a time!!!
Dang. If only I could do that. I'd buy the store.
0:50 HEEEE YOU ADDED NEW KIDS TURBOOOOOO HAHAAAAA
In most movies back blast area not clear.
Great stuff JJ. And thanks for mentioning the bit about how it was not to be used in confined spaces. Something often missed or misrepresented. Give me a PIAT any day:)
Bring up the PIAT!!! Next video is for you.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq I had a wee notion that it might be. There’s some spectacular BS talked about the PIAT. I think it came from one of those History Channel experts’ slagged it off. You know the type, “Hey! You’re a military history expert?”
“Er, yeah. Civil War era. Yeah.”
“Cool. Talk about the PIAT then!”
“Er…. Well…..”
“Military expert, yeah?”
“Well, OK. Yeah. OK. So this PIAT….. it’s not German. It’s British. Therefore it’s shit.”
Y’know the types.
@@geordiedog1749 lol. I make my goal that if I never become an expert on anything I at least have a reputation for never pretending to be an expert.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Absolutely matey. I’ve got plenty of respect for someone who can just say “I don’t know this - I’ll need to look it up!”
Backblast was a MF,lol
Shot around 20 training rockets and one live during my army training. In finland we call them KES. Really light and super accurate. I think i missed only once during training.
Can you tell me more
are brvo 2.0 is not made up it was a uk sas petrel that was taken pow in the 1st golf war
It wasn't made up no but I believe that whole armored engagement was mostly fictional wasn't it?
Lol I shot a law at a cinder block wall once and it bounced off, twirled a barrel roll, and fell to earth without exploding. Was at a weird angle, tho
The original night sights still had a little glow
Off-topic: I watched The Pacific and I was interested in the scene where the Browning M1919 MG overheated in the midst of a strong rain and a fierce Japanese night attack.