In a recent development that marks a significant milestone in the U.S. Army’s ongoing efforts to modernize its arsenal, Saab has been awarded a contract for the production of the XM919 Individual Assault Munition (IAM). This contract, valued at $494.35 million, signals the impending replacement of the Army’s current mix of M72, M136, and M141 shoulder-fired anti-armor weapons with the new and advanced XM919. The award, confirmed through a Pentagon daily contracting announcement, represents a critical step in enhancing the Army’s capabilities in anti-armor warfare, ensuring that U.S. forces are equipped with the most effective tools for future combat scenarios.
The Need for a New Generation of Shoulder-Fired Weapons
The U.S. Army’s decision to adopt the XM919 comes after years of operational experience and technological advancements that have reshaped the requirements for man-portable anti-armor weapons. The existing inventory, which includes the M72, M136, and M141, has served the Army well over the decades, but the evolving nature of warfare demands a more versatile and powerful solution. The XM919, a product of Saab’s innovative approach, promises to deliver enhanced performance against a broad range of targets, including light armor, reinforced bunkers, and urban fortifications.
Replacing a Legacy: The Transition from M72, M136, and M141 to XM919
The Army’s transition to the XM919 will mark the end of an era for the M72, M136, and M141, which have been staples of U.S. military operations for decades. Each of these weapons has a storied history, having been deployed in numerous conflicts around the world, from the jungles of Vietnam to the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan. Despite their proven effectiveness, the increasing complexity of modern warfare necessitates the adoption of more advanced systems that can meet the diverse challenges of today’s battlefields.
The M72 LAW: A Pioneer in Shoulder-Fired Anti-Armor Weapons
The M72 Light Anti-tank Weapon (LAW) was first introduced in the early 1960s and quickly became a mainstay in the U.S. military’s arsenal. Designed to be lightweight, portable, and easy to use, the M72 was intended to provide infantry units with a means to counter armored vehicles and bunkers. Its 66mm rocket, while effective against lightly armored targets, began to show limitations as armor technology advanced. Despite numerous upgrades over the years, including improvements in warhead design and range, the M72 has gradually been outpaced by more modern systems.
The M136 AT4: A Significant Advancement
The introduction of the M136, also known as the AT4, in the 1980s represented a significant leap forward in shoulder-fired weapon technology. Unlike the M72, the AT4 fires a larger 84mm round, which offered greater armor penetration and overall destructive capability. The AT4 was designed to be a disposable, single-use weapon, which simplified logistics and training. Its ease of use and effectiveness in combat made it a favorite among soldiers, and it has been employed extensively in both conventional and unconventional warfare scenarios.
Over the years, the AT4 has seen numerous variants, including the AT4CS (Confined Space) version, which is specifically designed for use in urban environments where back-blast from the rocket could be hazardous to the operator and those nearby. This version of the AT4 has been particularly valuable in conflicts where close-quarters combat and urban warfare are prevalent, providing infantry with a reliable tool for neutralizing threats in tight spaces.
The M141 Bunker Defeat Munition: Addressing Fortified Targets
The M141 Bunker Defeat Munition (BDM), which entered service in the late 1990s, is another critical component of the Army’s shoulder-fired arsenal. Derived from the Shoulder-Launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon (SMAW) used by the U.S. Marine Corps, the M141 was designed to defeat enemy fortifications, bunkers, and other reinforced structures. The weapon’s 83mm round is capable of penetrating hardened targets and creating lethal effects inside, making it particularly effective in urban combat scenarios.
The BDM was notably used by U.S. forces in Afghanistan, where it proved effective in collapsing cave entrances and other fortified positions used by insurgents. Its ability to defeat hardened targets and create significant overpressure within enclosed spaces made it an essential tool in the Army’s arsenal, particularly in environments where enemy forces were entrenched behind reinforced positions.
Image source –Saab
Enter the XM919: A New Era of Shoulder-Fired Weaponry
The XM919 represents a culmination of decades of experience and innovation in shoulder-fired weapons. As an evolution of the M136 AT4, the XM919 is designed to meet the Army’s stringent requirements for a versatile, powerful, and easy-to-use anti-armor weapon. The weapon is expected to be lighter and more compact than its predecessors, with a weight of no more than 20 pounds and a length not exceeding 40 inches. These dimensions make it ideal for infantry units operating in a variety of environments, including dense urban areas where mobility and ease of use are paramount.
The XM919 is also expected to feature advanced warhead technology, including a tandem warhead design that is capable of penetrating modern armored vehicles equipped with explosive reactive armor (ERA) and other advanced defenses. This two-stage warhead allows the weapon to defeat multi-layered armor systems, providing a significant advantage over older shoulder-fired weapons that may struggle against modern threats.
Versatility in Combat: The XM919’s Multi-Target Capability
One of the most significant advancements offered by the XM919 is its versatility in engaging a wide range of targets. According to official Army documents, the XM919 will be effective against light armor, earth and timber bunkers, double-reinforced concrete, adobe structures, and triple-brick walls. This capability ensures that the weapon can be employed in virtually any combat scenario, from open-field engagements to urban warfare.
The ability to fire the XM919 from within enclosed spaces is another critical feature, especially in urban combat where soldiers may need to engage targets from within buildings or other confined areas. The weapon’s design minimizes back-blast, reducing the risk to the operator and those nearby, and allowing for safer use in close-quarters situations.
Logistical and Training Benefits of the XM919
The adoption of the XM919 is expected to bring significant logistical and training benefits to the U.S. Army. Since the weapon is an evolution of the M136 AT4, much of the existing training and infrastructure can be adapted for the new system. This continuity simplifies the transition process, allowing soldiers to quickly become proficient with the XM919 without requiring extensive retraining.
Additionally, the Army has called for a dedicated subcaliber training version of the weapon, referred to as the XM922. This variant will fire smaller, shorter-range projectiles that are ballistically matched to the rounds used in the XM919. The XM922 will be used on training ranges that cannot accommodate the full-on IAMs, providing soldiers with a realistic training experience that mirrors the performance of the XM919 without the logistical challenges of live-fire exercises.
Table Schema: Comprehensive Comparison of U.S. Army Shoulder-Fired Weapons
Category | M72 LAW | M136 (AT4) | M141 BDM | XM919 IAM | FIM-92 Stinger | FGM-148 Javelin | M3 Carl Gustaf | M202 FLASH |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Weapon Name | M72 LAW | M136 AT4 | M141 Bunker Defeat Munition | XM919 Individual Assault Munition | FIM-92 Stinger | FGM-148 Javelin | M3 Carl Gustaf Recoilless Rifle | M202 FLASH |
Designation | M72 | M136 | M141 | XM919 | FIM-92 | FGM-148 | M3 | M202 |
Manufacturer | Nammo | Saab Bofors Dynamics | Talley Defense Systems | Saab | Raytheon / General Dynamics | Raytheon / Lockheed Martin | Saab | Northrop Grumman |
Year Introduced | 1963 | 1983 | 1999 | 2024 (Expected) | 1981 | 1996 | 1948 (M3 version) | 1967 |
Primary Use | Anti-Armor / Light Anti-Tank | Anti-Armor | Anti-Bunker | Anti-Armor / Anti-Fortification | Anti-Aircraft | Anti-Tank | Multi-Role | Incendiary / Anti-Bunker |
Length (inches/mm) | 24.8 in / 630 mm | 40 in / 1020 mm | 30 in / 762 mm | 38 in / 965 mm | 60 in / 1524 mm | 47.2 in / 1,200 mm | 41.7 in / 1,059 mm | 35 in / 889 mm |
Weight (pounds/kg) | 5.5 lbs / 2.5 kg | 14.8 lbs / 6.7 kg | 14.7 lbs / 6.7 kg | 17.6 lbs / 8.0 kg | 34 lbs / 15.2 kg (launcher and missile) | 49 lbs / 22.3 kg (launcher and missile) | 20 lbs / 9.1 kg (launcher) | 26 lbs / 11.8 kg (loaded) |
Caliber / Warhead Size (mm) | 66 mm | 84 mm | 83 mm | 84 mm | 70 mm (missile diameter) | 127 mm | 84 mm | 66 mm |
Warhead Type | HEAT (High Explosive Anti-Tank) | HEAT, HEDP (High Explosive Dual Purpose) | HE (High Explosive) | Tandem HEAT | IR-guided Missile | Tandem HEAT | HEAT, HEDP, Smoke, Illumination | Incendiary, Thermobaric |
Launcher Type | Disposable | Disposable | Disposable | Disposable | Reusable | Reusable | Reusable | Disposable |
Reloadable | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
Single-Use | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes |
Confined Space Capable | Limited (Some Variants) | Yes (AT4CS) | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No |
Effective Range (meters) | 150 m | 300 m | 200 m | 500 m | 4,800 m (effective against aircraft) | 2,500 m | 1,000 m (depending on ammunition) | 200 m |
Maximum Range (meters) | 350 m | 500 m | 500 m | 1000 m | 8,000 m | 4,750 m | 1,300 m | 750 m |
Armor Penetration (mm) | 300 mm | 400 mm | 200 mm | 500+ mm | N/A (Anti-Aircraft) | 600-800 mm | 400 mm | 200 mm |
Blast Radius (meters) | 3-5 m | 5-7 m | 10-15 m | 10-15 m | N/A | N/A | 10-20 m (depending on ammunition) | 5-10 m (Incendiary) |
Muzzle Velocity (m/s) | 145 m/s | 290 m/s | 250 m/s | 290 m/s | 750 m/s (missile) | 140 m/s (soft launch) | 255 m/s | 145 m/s |
Minimum Safe Distance (meters) | 10 m | 20 m | 10 m | 20 m | N/A | 25 m | 10 m | 30 m |
Multi-Target Capability | Light Armor, Soft Targets | Armor, Bunkers, Structures | Bunkers, Structures | Armor, Bunkers, Structures | Aircraft | Tanks, Bunkers | Armor, Bunkers, Structures | Bunkers, Incendiary Effects |
ERA Defeat (Explosive Reactive Armor) | No | Limited (Tandem Warhead Versions) | No | Yes | N/A | Yes | Limited | No |
Impact on Reinforced Concrete | Low | Moderate | High | High | N/A | Very High | High | Moderate |
Lethality Against Soft Targets | Moderate | High | High | High | High (Aircraft) | High | High | High |
Overpressure Effects | Low | Moderate | High | High | N/A | N/A | High | Very High (Thermobaric) |
Logistical Footprint | Low | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | High | High | Moderate | Moderate |
Training Requirements | Low | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | High | High | Moderate | Moderate |
Maintenance Requirements | None (Disposable) | None (Disposable) | None (Disposable) | None (Disposable) | High | High | Moderate | None (Disposable) |
Operational Lifespan | Single Use | Single Use | Single Use | Single Use | Multiple Uses | Multiple Uses | Multiple Uses | Single Use |
Field Reloading Capability | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
Availability of Training Versions | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Current Replacement Plans | Being phased out | Will be replaced by XM919 | Will be replaced by XM919 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Phased out, no replacement |
International Adoption | Widespread | Widespread | Limited | Future Potential | Widespread | Widespread | Widespread | Limited |
Potential for FMS | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
Impact on Allied Forces | Significant | Significant | Moderate | Future Potential | Significant | Significant | Significant | Moderate |
Adoption in U.S. Military Branches | Army, Marines | Army, Marines | Army | Army | All Branches | All Branches | Army, Marines, Special Forces | Phased Out |
Implications for U.S. Military Strategy and Global Security
The introduction of the XM919 is not just a significant development for the U.S. Army; it also has broader implications for U.S. military strategy and global security. The weapon’s advanced capabilities make it a valuable asset in a variety of combat scenarios, including those involving peer or near-peer adversaries. In particular, the XM919’s effectiveness in urban environments aligns with current military thinking, which anticipates that future conflicts are likely to involve significant fighting in densely populated areas.
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has underscored the importance of man-portable anti-armor weapons in modern warfare. Shoulder-fired systems like the XM919 provide infantry units with a critical tool for engaging enemy armor and fortified positions, especially in complex urban environments where traditional armored vehicles may be at a disadvantage. As the U.S. Army continues to prepare for the possibility of high-intensity conflicts against well-equipped adversaries, the XM919 will likely play a key role in the Army’s overall force structure.
Potential for International Sales and Wider Adoption
Saab’s success in securing the XM919 contract also opens the door for potential international sales through the U.S. Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. The AT4 family of weapons, which includes the XM919, is already popular globally, with numerous countries adopting various versions of the system for their own military forces. The introduction of the XM919 could lead to further sales, as allied and partner nations seek to modernize their own arsenals in response to evolving threats.
Moreover, the Army’s decision to replace the M72, M136, and M141 with the XM919 could result in those older weapons being transferred to other allies and partners abroad. This would not only extend the service life of these legacy systems but also strengthen the military capabilities of U.S. allies, particularly in regions where the threat of armored warfare remains high.
A New Standard in Shoulder-Fired Weapons
The U.S. Army’s transition to the XM919 marks a significant step forward in the evolution of shoulder-fired anti-armor weapons. By replacing the aging M72, M136, and M141 with a more advanced and versatile system, the Army is ensuring that its soldiers are equipped with the best possible tools for future conflicts. The XM919’s combination of lightweight design, advanced warhead technology, and multi-target capability makes it a formidable weapon that will enhance the effectiveness of U.S. forces in a variety of combat scenarios.
As the Army begins to field the XM919 in the coming years, this new weapon system will likely become a critical component of the U.S. military’s overall strategy for maintaining dominance on the modern battlefield. Saab’s role in developing and producing the XM919 highlights the company’s continued commitment to innovation and excellence in defense technology, ensuring that U.S. soldiers remain equipped with the cutting-edge tools they need to succeed in an increasingly complex and dangerous world.
Comparison of XM919 IAM with Global Producers
Country | Manufacturer | Weapon System Name | Warhead Type | Range | Accuracy | Penetration Capabilities | Mobility | Weight | Operational Environment | Special Features |
United States | Orbital ATK (Northrop Grumman) | XM919 Individual Assault Munition | High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) | 500 m | High | 700 mm RHA | Portable | 8 kg | Urban and rural | Advanced targeting optics |
China | Norinco (China North Industries Group Corporation) | PF-98 | High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) | 800 m | Moderate | 800 mm RHA | Portable | 10 kg | Urban and rural | Enhanced rangefinder |
India | Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) | RL Mk III | High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) | 300 m | Moderate | 600 mm RHA | Portable | 8.5 kg | Urban and rural | Lightweight and easy to operate |
Italy | Rafael Advanced Defense Systems (Spike MR/LR) | Spike MR/LR | Tandem HEAT | 4000 m (Spike LR) | High | 700 mm RHA | Portable | 13 kg (Spike LR launcher) | Urban and rural | Fire-and-forget guidance |
Italy | Dynamit Nobel Defence GmbH | Panzerfaust 3 | High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) | 600 m | High | 900 mm RHA | Portable | 13 kg | Urban and rural | Reusable launcher |
Russia | Bazalt (Rostec Corporation) | RPG-30 | Dual HEAT Tandem | 200 m | Moderate | 1000 mm RHA | Portable | 10 kg | Urban and rural | Tandem warhead for reactive armor |
North Korea | Korean People’s Army | Bulsae-3 | HEAT | 600 m | Moderate | 800 mm RHA | Portable | 10.5 kg | Urban and rural | Infrared guidance |
Iran | Defense Industries Organization (DIO) | Dehlavieh | HEAT | 500 m | Moderate | 800 mm RHA | Portable | 11 kg | Urban and rural | Infrared guidance |
Germany | Dynamit Nobel Defence GmbH | Panzerfaust 3 | High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) | 600 m | High | 900 mm RHA | Portable | 13 kg | Urban and rural | Reusable launcher |
Germany | Dynamit Nobel Defence GmbH | Matador | High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) | 500 m | High | 700 mm RHA | Portable | 10 kg | Urban and rural | Integrated recoil reduction |
France | GIAT Industries (Nexter Systems) | APILAS | High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) | 300 m | High | 700 mm RHA | Portable | 9.5 kg | Urban and rural | Single-use disposable |
United Kingdom | Saab Bofors Dynamics | NLAW | High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) | 600 m | High | 600 mm RHA | Portable | 12.5 kg | Urban and rural | Fire-and-forget system |