Mk153 SMAW Rocket Launchers In Ukraine
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.พ. 2025
- In this video we'll look at the first sightings of the Mk153 SMAW in Ukraine. We'll explore what the SMAW is capable of and examine the first footage of the weapons in theatre.
Small correction: I misspoke at 3:30 - 68th, not 66th, Jaeger Bridge.
Be sure to check out our accompanying article for this video here -
armourersbench....
If you enjoy our work please consider supporting us via Patreon, TAB is a viewer supported channel and any help is very much appreciated! We have some great new perks, check out our Patreon page here: / thearmourersbench
You can also now support us with one-time donations via ko-fi.com/armo...
Ever wished all the best gun history content creators were gathered in one place? Check out - surplused.com - we're on there!
Where to find TAB:
armourersbench...
/ armourersbench
ko-fi.com/armo...
/ thearmourersbench
/ armourersbench
utreon.com/c/A...
imgur.com/user...
/ discord
Thanks for watching, check out the accompanying article for this video here: armourersbench.com/2023/04/09/mk153-smaw-in-ukraine/ - Matt
Great video and article. I don't get it? Why train people to stand up and shoot? They should be in simulated cover and use a tree, post or log to steady the tube.
Thanks for watching! Probably a matter of familiarisation with the weapon before considering how to use it from cover.
The spotting rifle is a carry over from the old British LAW94 disposable. It uses a 7.62x51 cartridge case necked up to take a 9mm tracer bullet. The interesting part is the .22 Hornet cartridge shoved in the other end that uses John Garands primer actuated extraction. The Hornet cartridge case contains the propellant and telescopes out of the back of the 7.62 case upon firing and kicks the working parts open. As they move rearward they then catch the rim of the 7.62 case and extract the whole cartridge case assembly.
I don’t get it. Do you fire a bullet round first to ensure your objective is targeted correctly? Then, if your round strikes the object, you then fire the rocket?
@@The_ZeroLine you do exactly that, the spotting round even shares the trajectory of the rocket.
@The_ZeroLine yes, exactly that. They're 'ballistically matched' so the 9mm fires with the same 'drop' (gravity) as the rocket. It's an older, but very reliable system. Obviously not as reliable as laser guided or TOW missiles, but it does the job, especially on targets that are already under suppressing fire. They have no idea that the 3rd or 4th round is going to be a rocket 😂😂😂
BF3 veterans will remember this beast.
Goated game
Read my mind buddy. Getting a headshot with one always got me giggly.
Bf 4 too
Crap, I was so scared when I saw a dude with one of em’
Marines in the GWOT remembers this.
5:15 that’s because the US Army typically keeps things returned well before they expire, not only for good upkeep, but also so that way it’s easier to audit and record everything, it also says a lot about how well built the SMAW systems are
Lmao not until Biden!!!! He left thousands upon thousands of pieces of equipment and weapons over there. Blows their record keeping out of the water just like Biden's gelatinous brain
@@Riorozen You can match up new optics to the system, hence the rail system. There is also a method to match the rocket to a laser aim point that had a 95% first shot hit, but of course that requires some sort of night optic devise to see the laser, and really only good at night. But yeah, the spotting riflr rounds failed to burn around 50% of the time.
By the 2010’s the SMAW optic was replaced with an ACOG which was excellent. Also never saw a spotting rifle round not burn. Some feeding and ejecting issues with the spotting rifle but usually due to poor maintenance which was always swiftly corrected.
@@Mavrick121 I think they bought new production after 9/11. They introduced the NE warhead in 03/04, so by 2010 it was most likely newer production
Slight correction. Each round consists of a special 9 mm projectile which contains a tracer compound, crimped into a 7.62×51mm NATO casing with a .22 Hornet primer.
9x51 essentially.
@@TheArmourersBench2 for 1 ammo deal 😅
What’s the reason for the frankenstein-like nature of that round?
Out of everything I fired in the service, walking on target with a SMAW's spotting rifle, then flipping the switch and going full send was, by far, the most entertaining.
Likely the most underrated channel on the tube.
Too kind. Thank you for watching!
Using potentially compromised rounds for practice is better than having no rounds to practice with.
Yeah, that might indeed be what's going on. They seem to be working.
It depends what the consequences of firing "potentially compromised rounds" are. Are we talking 'it's a dud, so you just throw it away', or are we talking 'it blows up in the launcher'?
@@jic1 if you are operating one and there's a catastrophic failure then it's suddenly not your problem anymore.
SMAW is the clasic USMC has to be different. Carl G was around and combat proven, in stock with more variant ammo. Now USMC is adopting the CG, FINALLY.
It’s because the USMC has a different fighting doctrine than the other branches, hence why they’re using the HK M27 IAR; the Carl Gustaf is a welcome addition, it’s primarily because we were still figuring out how to acquire the plans to domestically produce the CG as we we’re doing with the SMAW
It usually has more to do with budget than the "different."
Sometimes the "different" is important though. Not every Army system works well under the conditions and with USMC doctrine.
Usually it's budget, or it's a case of a manufacturer not having the capacity to fill a USMC order because they're filling someone else's order.
At the time when the SMAW was introduced (mid 80s), the SMAW had several advantages over the Carl Gustaf. It was lighter, more compact, had a more penetrative anti-tank round, and benefits from sealed ammunition containers that are loaded directly into the weapon.
However since the SMAW only has a few principal users who didn't see fit to upgrade it, it basically stayed the same over its service.
Thus leading to the situation today where the latest Carl Gustaf variants are now superior to the SMAW.
Have fired both, the cg is so far ahead it's hardly comparable
@@Riorozen There was a system to use the standard USMC laser attachment with the smaw that was almost guaranteed a first round hit without the spotting rifle if done right, but the USMC never really had a need to use it, so it never got widespread,and it was only efdective at night when the laser was visible with nods.
Great work as usual!! Your videos continue to inform and entertain! Thanks !!
Thank you! Really appreciate it!
USMC may well have given them a shipment of SMAWS that were exposed to moisture at sea and so could not be used per USMC regs but are known to mostly still be reliable. I would see that in a positive light as it shows a willingness to help however possible.
The SMAW always seemed so complicated when I researched it in the past, this video finally helped me understand how all of its components worked. I really appreciate the in depth explanation!
Thanks Jared, glad you found it helpful. Thanks for watching!
The rockets they are shooting are HE dual purpose, with only a few inches of armor pen, BUT they are designed to penetrate several feet of dirt/sandbags before exploding. The antiarmor rockets have a black/yellow band and cone shaped cap. The blue banded rockets are inert practice rounds designed to ballistically match a HE rocket.
I didnt even need a permit for my SMALL-D.... I mean SMAW
Can't wait to see the trick shots with this masterpiece on zavod 311
Here's another thing how it's Reloaded it's on the back via a cannister as compared to the Airtronic RPG-7 which is reloaded from the front like a German Panzerfaust 3 in some games. Basically it needs one for the Gunner himself then the other is a mule armed with M16 family assault rifle in 7.62x39
Great video!
I wouldn't look much into pink humidity indicator, from what I've googled, rocket tube with humidity indicator comes packed inside another outer transport container, we don't see any such containers in the video, rocket tube could be laying on the (damp) ground for hours before fired, these moisture indicators change color in a matter of hours if not faster...
Mhmm, just pointing it out. We see what we see. The one rocket we see seems to do fine. Thanks for watching.
0351s stand up!
It's been a while but from what I remember in school, the smaw at the time was the loudest man portable weapon in the US arsenal at 183 decibels. This video made me miss the ol' girl
Good to see. Excellent video, thank you. 🙂
Thanks for watching!
The loudest thing I've ever fired
I'm thinking that the paper used to indicate moisture probably is only reliable in storage conditions. As opposed to not being susceptible to ambient moisture, which would be reliable in the field.(it's exposed)
Once u unsealed it for use it would change color quickly otherwise, especially in Ukraine's current conditions.
Could well be yeah, seem to work fine. Thanks for watching.
Good video :D
Yo this vid is good reference and information for an animation I am doing thanks!
Anyone else see that clip of a russian failing to shoot a trophy AT4 and then saying "this is why NATO weapons are shit" 😂
yeah....sour grapes!
Yeah, beat him up!
As one Ukranian solider said. "We're lucky they're so fucking stupid"
Meanwhile the eastern side of Ukraine is covered in tank turrets. 🤣
He ish shooting at4,is Swedish. Sweden is not even part of the NATO now
Thanks!
This was my MOS during my time in USMC
I think these videos coming out indicates that the well telegraphed counter attack is being trained for in these infantry units, which training would justify the use of these rockets.
I was a SMAW gunner
Crazy watching them shoot those amx 13s and ebrs
One small correction, the 66th is considered a mechanized brigade. The only Jaeger brigades are the 68th and the 71st.
Oh did I say 66th, it's definitely the 68th as that's what I've written in the accompanying article. Thanks!
@@TheArmourersBench No worries, I'm kind of a nerd when it comes to unit naming.
Stuff like that us important. Thanks for watching
Hope they have the novel explosive rounds.
Hello, where is the Grot (MSBS) video?
Good channel!
😎👍🇺🇦🇺🇸🇬🇧
That’s cool it shoots a bullet to get on target just before “The Main Event” 😎
A nice bit of kit
Shoulder fired Multipurpose Assault Weapon: SMAW
A perfect home defense weapon.
I wonder if anyone has ever been wounded (or killed) by the USMC SMAW spotting rifle?
Aah yes the smaw Reminds me of teenage years..the pc game demo I had called "damage inc"🤣
*Sad Assaultman noises*
Has the mos been changed to "Assaultperson" to be PC or is it abolished under the new doctrine?
Funny enough, they actually changed the name to Assault Marine back in 2020ish.
@@TheLazyLabrador They changed it in like 2018. Despite the fact that I have never seen, nor heard of a wook Assaultman.
I remember this from bf3 and possibly BF bc2.
I have seen it in training, but I have never seen anyone in the field actually use the spotting rifle. I wounder if it is commonly used. Kind of shows me where all the 9mm tracer ammo comes from that you that you find in the field though, ha. Sounds like a great idea in concept, but I guess in use most soldiers do not feel they have the time to mess around with it.
I suspect you're right. I would imagine we'll see Ukrainians use it like an RPG-7
Maybe it depends on range? At shorter ranges maybe they feel it's not worth the time but it still might be useful for extreme range shots. Otherwise you'd expect them to remove the spotting rifle entirely to save weight and cost.
i figure its more something you would use if you have time at either the beginning of an assault right before everyone opens up or preparing a defense such as how tanks will lase multiple landmarks to keep note of ranges
Those rounds would also be useful for suppressing anyone on the other end.
Biggest threat is someone who is behind a machine gun at the other end.
@@TheArmourersBench short distance we’d rapid fire tracer rounds but would take our time long distance for accuracy.
I wonder how come we haven't seen rpg 29 vampire used by either side so far in the war !??
Good question, would expect to have seen it in use with Russian forces. 30 has been used fairly widely but not seen any sign of 29. Can only assume it hasn't been issued at scale yet.
@@TheArmourersBench since the beginning I always wondered, I mean it has in Iraq and Syria but I yet to see a single soldier carrying one. I always thought of it as a great weapon but I doubt soldiers that carry it and it's ammo would think likewise after a few days login that thing around. Nevertheless from a defense position point of view I would take that over a lot of unguided AT weapons. ✌
I do miss the *"blast shields"* the Germans used on their recoiless rifles in World War 2 but other than that *WAY* over the top amazing system in a Battle where speed and surprise are everything I think I'll go with an AT4 as I'm not a *"feature rich"* guy when it came to combat load out as I used to be an M203 user.
Against Russian Military inside Ukraine which is effectively static at the moment though this item is absolutely *DEVASTATING.* It's no good without a proper Transportation System such as an M113 tho so again I'm going with the AT4. Certainly worked with guys who loved their Carl Gustav's tho but I don't recall ever firing that system though certainly trained on it. Russian RPGs are darn good too and have seen a lot of footage of that as well and probably goes very well with the BMP troop system. Drones have been the most devastating weapon deployed in this War by far and overwhelmingly by Ukraine tho. Just stunned at both the ability of Russians to continue to launch assaults and then yet again launch another wave of assaults. *"Digger Phelps"* Pegrhozin that guy needs his head examined.
Absolutely love seeing Ukraine using these against russia. Wonderful, just what they were designed for.
0:27 hey it’s just cold ok
They've obviously segregated the potentially compromised rounds for practice / training.
Indeed, that would make sense. Thanks for watching.
What does the Ukrainian officer say when he spots a suitable target ?
*BRING UP THE [S]PIAT[/S] SMAW !*
Kind of a weird system to be honest, it's a newer system then the RPG-7 but it didn't adopt any of the advantages the RPG-7 had. It's a much smaller caliber so it's not as powerful, it lacks thermobaric warheads, doesn't have a tandem HEAT warhead, weighs about the same and has a much lower velocity which matters a lot with such systems. I think I would rather have the RPG-7 instead to be honest.
I’d take the Airtronic personally
Any launcher is better than no launcher though.
I need to do a video on the Airtronic
Did you not watch the video? He literally said it features aluminized explosive for enhanced blast lethality. Which is just another way of saying it has a thermobaric warhead
@Robert Taylor objectively false. The SMAW has the looks if nothing else. The spotting rifle feature is pretty dope too. Also, aren't thermobaric weapons generally a bit of a no-no?
Is that a bloody Panhard EBR at front right in 1:12? It belongs in museum not on training ground! Nooooo
That is one of the loudest weapons I've ever heard. Made me jump like a little B😂
1:02 : French Foreign Legion !
Looks like a demo US soldier perform for french army (maybe Canjuers training ground).
After they shoot at old french tanks (AMX13, AMX10P, Panhard EBR ...).
It seems they are shooting French LRAC89 in that particular footage.
Yea any idea what tank is at 1:53 at the back near the truck?
@@niekbeentjes8849 AMX13, cannon removed
@@niekbeentjes8849 maybe an old S35 some D2 / B1
@@docteurlowbat Thank you so much, I just found out myself Its indeed a AMX13 chassis with a M24 Chaffee Turret with gun removed for drivers training DTT. Maybe only one remaining!!
How does this compare effectively with an AT4?
for anti-armor ops, the SMAW slightly outperforms the AT-4. SMAW HEAA penetrates up to 24 inches of armor compared with 16.75 for the AT-4. for bunker busting, there’s no comparison. SMAW can destroy bunkers that AT-4 simply cannot.
America's answer to the RPG-7.
I’ve shot SMAW rounds in combat in Iraq. I was a Marine 0352 but retrained as an 0351. It’s a clunky clumsy weapon to carry. The rockets/spotting rounds are heavy and bulky and so is the launcher. It is great at busting bunkers. Never shot any of our AT rounds but did shoot HE and the “novel explosive” or thermobaric rounds.
Guess it's a SMAWl world after all...
Wow
This another example of what Americans don’t understand. A lot of the equipment we’re giving is literally expired stuff our guys couldn’t, by regulations, even use without at least costly reconditioning. They think we’re sending suitcases full of cash. 🤦♂️
What do these offer over a Carl Gustaf M4?
At the time they were lighter than the M2 CG but now the modern M4 is much lighter and has a wider array of munitions capable of more than the SMAW's family of rockets.
almost completely different from BF2...
‘Enhanced Blast’ AKA Thermobaric. Probably called that to avoid the negative press associated with TB weapons.
Many days of my life were spent trying to boresight this bastard in . Spotting rifle / acog/ and the launcher plus irons slight headache !
What a fine toy, shame it has no home use value.
What?
It only shoots as far as a 9mm?
Depending on the rocket type, it's range is 500m ish.
Yes. Rockets and recoilless rounds are huge and the blast is already bad enough. You don't need to fire them over 3-400 meters, that is when you use ATGMs instead.
It's a 9mm *projectile,* but it's not 9x19. It's a special spotting cartridge with a trajectory matched to the main munition.
The American Carl Gustaf😅😅
why are spotting rifles a thing? they seem rare, the only example I can come up with are some US recoilless-rifles so that seems relevant?
is it a high-end feature? and is this actually used as intended by US troops who get these? i suppose they aren't there for nothing but it feels clunky and complex when other systems are fine without them? i just can't place what is up with the practicality, considering at 4:10 the guys in the war don't even use it.
They're intended to improve first hit probability but in reality the tracers often don't extend out far enough and they can also give away position. They are definitely issued but they are increasingly rare on modern systems.
I've seen it being used and going from the video and what others have said it jams all the time. It's generally a waste of time unless you can sit around out of cover for a minute or two before you can fire. Frankly it's better to exit cover and fire, see where you hit if you missed, back into cover to reload, exit cover and fire again and hope you hit. It's also pointless against a moving target like a tank generally does. An optical sight with a sighting table would be quicker.
I think we might see Ukrainians using them just like RPG-7s, I don't think they'll be using the spotting rifle much.
A spotting round was a feature on the British LAW94. I trained on an indoor simulation training facility in Germany as a teenager. It was fun. The computer would work out if you hit or missed and show it on the screen. I took a couple spotting rounds before switching to main armament.
That was 1991
@@Punisher9419 Please be quiet fella. Its getting embarrassing now watching you make this stuff up.
the Battlefield 4 launcher
*Battlefield 3
@@stevemc6010 perhaps
Oh wow, that's a game isn't it?
Bang-bang.
So cool.
@@kiereluurs1243 yeah
it won't be enough
On its own sure. It’s not the only price of kit they have however.
Essentially an old-school bazooka dolled up by the Israelis for the USMC.
Assaultmen and combat engineers carried them back in the day.
Still hits hard enough, though sort of a desperate choice for anti-MBT work.
Semper Fi
It doesn't have to stop a T72 it only has to stop a BMP. That frees up more expensive munitions like the NLAW or Javelin that are needed for tank hunting.
By the Israelis? Was not aware of that
@@josedorsaith5261 It's got far more in common with late cold war disposable AT weapons than a Bazooka. It's basically a reloadable LAW94.
@@zoiders I'm sure there's plenty of bunkers and machine gun nests for it to take out too.
@@jic1 Drones seem to have rapidly taken over the role of clearing sangars but you are right- bang is bang no matter which system you use.
Mk 153 probably the best for anti-infantry weapon, all you need is just one rocket and send them to heaven in instant, i knew it because how effective this thing in BF4.
Russian have no chance with this
Smaw d
Here's our SMAW-D video th-cam.com/video/3DPFCwcC5_8/w-d-xo.html
algorithm
Appreciated Mike!
@@TheArmourersBench You're welcome.
Don't really see the point of this system. Why not just use Carl Gustaf? The CG has many benefits compared to this. A wider range of different rounds and it's reusable. They both kinda do the same thing but I think the CG is just more versatile and in wider use and probably more cost-effective in the long run. Since they're around and they're quite old already so why not use them in Ukraine, I guess.
Because they are free and any AT weapon that can take on a BMP is better is better than no AT weapon. The BMP is probably the single greatest threat to Ukrainian infantry on the ground because they are simply so prolific and you can't stop one with small arms.
Two reasons. 1. The USMC will do anything they can to not use US Army equipment if they can help it.
2. The SMAW is easy to operate and fire as a single person and the ammunition is lighter. the CG really benefits from an assistant gunner for loading and carrying ammunition.
Overall the SMAW is ideal for when an AT4 is too small and a Javelin is too big and you happen to be a marine.
I’ve read there are US Army units equipped with the Carl Gustav. That may or have not means the USMC will adopt it replacing their own SMAW
@@LordOceanus why marines don't want to use general american stuff?
@@tetispinkman9135 Because the Marines are special and very proud of being different.
Why does the USA like disposable rocket launchers?
Not really disposable as you can reload the smaw
Traditionally they’re lighter than reloadable systems.
Ease of use. When the need arises, you can just hand out M72/AT-4 to any old rifleman without much, if any, training. Point and shoot, in the case of the AT-4 it even has instructions on the tube.
This isn't that, however. The rounds come self contained and the tubes are disposable, the more "complicated" firing unit, however, is now.
Interesting video. *However.* I was amazed it wasn't pointed out that this is a perfect, ironic example how the U.S. here mimics the dishonest Chinese copy-concept by outright pirating the ingenious (in this case) *_Swedish Carl Gustaf 8.4 cm recoilless rifle._* The brilliant Carl G was invented in the 40's, whereas this plagiaristic attempt of securing U.S. revenue was copied in the mid 80's. It would've been appropriate to *at least mention* the blatant plagiarism of the Swede's original innovation.
Thanks! Well the SMAW is a rocket launcher not a recoilless rifle, they just fill a similar role. As I mention the original design comes from Israel's IMI. Thanks for watching!
It's amazing how confidently incorrect you are.
It was the Israeli B-300 that was copied and turned into the SMAW, not the Swedish Carl Gustaf 84mm.
Even then, SMAW is a licensed and highly modified copy, not an unlicensed carbon-clone.
On a technical level they aren't even similar.
@@ndx6779 Even if you show signs of having a slight learning disability it's still reasonable to expect that you can read and understand e.g. basic texts from the two weapons' official information.
@@TheArmourersBench
I'm a bit stunned here to be honest, but I have respect for your channel as other videos have been interesting and accurate.
*However.* My friend, you'll have to prepare better for next video. I'm sorry to tell you that this "MK153" *most certainly* IS categorized as a 'recoilless rifle' or 'recoilless rocket launcher'. Without question the Carl Gustaf and Mk 153 go under the same weapon category. Don't get fooled by meaner-sounding lingo that _the manufacturer_ chooses to market the weapon under, rather *always* delve beneath and understand the weapon's functionality. I do *not* intend to sound patronizing, but just use your favorite search engine to view the weapon and it can't escape anyone with even just broad military weapon understanding that it *IS* a typical *_recoilless rifle._* Or the more fancy _recoilless rocket launcher_ if that's what you or the producer prefer.
Now, I suspect you've been fooled by the term _"rocket launcher"_ when researching. Regarding this I assume the Americans and Israelis want to set their product apart and somewhat shuffle the deck by adopting the perhaps more impactful and badass-sounding _ROCKET_ component. Evidently both weapon shoot precisely the same type of rocket-propelled munitions, which for some unimportant reason the "rocket" component is more emphasized when reading product information about this weapon online. The ammo used are almost identical (obviously different caliber), even if the Carl Gustaf according to official records have a much wider selection of ammo types beyond "standard" _HEDP, HEAT rocket-assisted projectiles_ and the fancifully Americanized or Israelized _"SMAW-Novel Explosive"_ anti-structure munitions. [The last fancy denotation had me giggling as SAAB naturally and simply names it _anti-structure munition._ Even if it of course also has a delayed fuse-setting.]
Now the main take-away or advise I suggest you consider, is to consciously always try *not* to get fooled, distracted or buy into the typical American or perhaps Israeli marketing-trap by being impressed by all their countless, badass-sounding and almost pathological acronyms and mumbo-jumbo.
Instead *always* go for the hard facts and dig into *how the weapon performs and functions in real life.*
@@ph6560
It's so deliciously ironic that you insult me and declare that I have a "learning disability" but you can't even demonstrate a Wikipedia-level understanding of these weapons.
"basic texts from the two weapons' official information", My brother in christ, have *you* even read their information? In what ways is the SMAW a plagiaristic copy?
You took an entire novella to explain that because the SMAW and Carl Gustaf both shoot rockets and blow stuff up, that the SMAW must be a copy because it was invented later. Kindly sod off and go look in the mirror, then you'll see the one with the learning disability.
🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺 all those men are dead
Seek help.
@@TheArmourersBench but be real with yourself they really are look at the current situation or are you blind by that too Young men are dying left and right
If you'd commented without a dozen Russian flag emojis we could have a conversation about the futility of war and its enormous human cost but I honestly don't think you'd get it.
@@TheArmourersBench oh I get it but do you. Ukrainian has no future joe Biden and Hunter Biden will pay for all they shit they started
@@righthand2571 sure thing Vatnik.
Yup they getting ready to kick Russias ass back into Russia. 😂
Wasn’t this a Israeli weapon clone ??
Yes it's based on the IMI B300.
It is garbage
Finally someone says it. F*ck that archaic, gangly ass, 500m max engagement, ten second time on target, piece of sh*t.