Will the XM25 replace the M203 Grenade launchers Essay

Will the XM25 replace the M203 Grenade launchers - Essay Example The military denies the rumors, but perhaps it might be better to consider the criteria of reliability, durability and affordability of both systems to prove that the XM-25 grenade launcher will not replace the M203. The reliable old M203 Grenade Launcher has proven itself in just about every corner of the world. Over twenty countries friendly to the United States employ the M203, or a variant thereof. Manufactured by Colt, the M203 has seen combat with the US from the humid jungles of Viet Nam right on through to the present day in the Middle Eastern deserts, along with its newer counterpart, the M203A1 (for the M4). The launcher has proven extremely reliable in all manners of weather conditions and weigh in at light 3 pounds. On the other hand, the XM25 Counter Defilade Target Engagement System shows its reliability in its characteristics. It is currently being manufactured by German arms giant Heckler and Koch, in partnership with the US based Alliant Tech Systems (ATK). The weapo n does indeed resemble something futuristic and at fourteen pounds with rounds it is much heavier than the M203. Yet the modern advances of the launcher are incredible. For one thing it has an interchangeable magazine that holds up to four rounds, so single shot is no longer an obstacle. For another, instead of the old-fashioned quadrant sights on previous grenade launchers, the XM25 is fitted with a thermal sight device resembling a scope, with night capabilities. The M203 has showed its durability since it replaced the M79, which was a stand-alone weapon and the grenade launcher was its singular purpose. Recognizing that the grenadier was vulnerable during a firefight, the US Army developed the M203. Its â€Å"over and under† style fit under the standard M16 rifle (and later under the newer M4), therefore giving the soldier the ability to fire grenades at a range of up to 350 meters and still having the small arms capability and reassurance offered by the M16. The grenadier ’s rate of fire for the launcher was hampered only by his own ability to load the weapon, as it fires one round at the time. Its large bore makes cleaning relatively easy and the unit armorer can do most maintenance on the weapon, including disassembly and removal. Eight different forty millimeter grenade types have been developed for the launcher. 1 However it is what the sights are fitted into that makes the XM25 so durable and has the Army gushing as to its valuable assistance in the GWOT. The Target Acquisition Fire Control System (TAFCS) allows the operator to send the round down range with radio controlled precision. For example, grenadier can take out an enemy firing from inside a window, adjusting the range so that the grenade can go through the frame, explode, and still maintain the integrity of the building. The XM25 uses a 25 millimeter grenade system that even includes a thermobaric grenade specific for use in caves, particularly useful in Afghanistan and the laun cher is accurate at ranges of up to 700 meters. Finally, the cost of the M203 is very affordable in comparison to the XM-25. The M203 is only $1800.00 dollars. If combat tests work out with the division, the Army plans to buy 12,500 units of the XM25 in 2012, one for each squad. At over $30 thousand a copy the XM25 is expensive, as are the rounds at $25 apiece. The cost almost doubles from one to the other. This alone is a serious increase in budget cost, and can be a huge dilemma for the economy. Even after all the aforementioned, the XM25 will not replace the M203. Although the 101st grenadiers are so impressed with it they often carry no extra weaponry. Indeed, both weapons will

A research paper on the Ancient Panatheniac Olympic stadium

A on the Ancient Panatheniac Olympic stadium - Research Paper Example 3). The stadium was refurbished by Herodes between 140 and 144 AD in the present form after excavated in 1870. The length and width of the Panatheniac Olympic Stadium designed in horseshoe shape is 204.07 meters and 33.35 meters respectively. Herodes constructed another such portico at the front of the stadium. Herodes also repaired the Illissos river bridge at the Stadium’s gate to make it bigger by putting three archways on its base. The bridge was there till 1778 (Meander Travel par. 1-3). A semi-circular wall was added to the north of the Stadium parallel to the sphendone of the southern side (â€Å"Olympic-Legacy,† par. 2). The archaeologist Earnst Ziller found the Stadium during excavations of the 1869-70, which was rebuilt again in 1896 for holding the first Olympiad in Athens by G Averof. Anastase Metaxas helped in remaking the Stadium to the capacity of 69,000 seats. The same marble from Mt. Penteli, which was used 2,400 years before, was used again for making of the Parthenon on the Acropolis. The Stadium was adorned as if it was the Grecian temple, the outline of which was still intact with its porticos and colonnades (Olympic-Legacy,† par. 3-8). Lycurgos as head of the overseers’ team was conferred the title of â€Å"caretakers of the Stadion†. ... Lycurgos changed the valley not only into a Stadium but also circumvented the arena with a parapet, which straightway marked the place for the competitions. A line of stones was laid down to label the starting point and the finish of an ordinary route. A passage was constructed behind the parapet, which made the circumference of the route. Below the footpath a covered passage was running along to take the flow of the rain water out from the Stadium. Some remains of this passage are still there to be seen. During that period, inclines were not sheltered with marble benches as the audience seating arrangements were made on the ground. The place named â€Å"the first wood† was meant for VIPs of that time, earmarking their seats (Lambros & Polites, â€Å"The Olympic Games B.C. 776. — A. D. I896.† pp.35-36). There are inscriptions that inform the repairing of the Stadium dating Third Century BC by Heracleitos in a â€Å"befitting manner†. In the second Century after Christ the Stadium was totally refurbished by Herodes Atticus. Herodes Atticus was selected the â€Å"Athlothete of the Panathenaia† (Lambros & Polites, â€Å"The Olympic Games B.C. 776. — A. D. I896.† p. 36). Worth description by Herodes was the ship on wheels on whose pole people laid their offerings because the goddess there is depicted as sail. It operated through a secret method sailing beside the ground. While addressing the people of Athens, Herodes finished his speech of thanks giving by saying: â€Å"It will be in a Stadium of marble that I hope to receive you, oh Athenians, yourselves as well as the Athletes and strangers, who will then be our guests.† In a span of 4 years he presented an altogether new look to the Stadium fully decorated. Such was the appeal of the Stadium that no other