For Military professionals: your unit’s chain of command, applicable ARs, DA Pams, and unit SOPs should guide your specific heavy weapon storage procedures and regulatory compliance requirements. This article focuses on storage specifications and configuration considerations to inform equipment and infrastructure decisions.
Launchers, tubes, and mortars present a set of storage challenges that most armory infrastructure wasn’t designed to handle well. The weapons are large, heavy, dimensionally awkward, and carry regulatory requirements that overlap with but aren’t identical to those governing individual weapons or machine guns. Armorers who manage these systems alongside a standard individual weapon inventory frequently end up with heavy weapon storage that developed as an afterthought rather than a designed solution, and that shows up in accountability gaps, physical security deficiencies, and the kind of inspection findings that are genuinely difficult to explain away.
This guide covers the specific storage requirements for launchers, tubes, and mortars across the dimensions that matter most: physical security, component accountability, dimensional and weight considerations, and the regulatory framework that governs how these systems are stored and accessed.
Why Heavy Weapon Storage Gets Treated as an Afterthought
The practical reason heavy weapon storage tends to be under-specified is that these systems are less numerous than individual weapons in most unit inventories. A company armory might manage two or three mortar systems alongside a hundred individual weapons, and the storage solution for the majority tends to get most of the planning attention and most of the budget.
The accountability consequences of that prioritization mismatch are significant. A missing M4 is a serious finding. A missing mortar tube or a launcher with unaccounted serialized components is a finding of a different magnitude entirely, both within the unit accountability system and in the broader regulatory context that governs crew-served and special weapons.
The physical security requirements for these systems are typically equivalent to or stricter than those for machine guns, meaning that a storage solution adequate for individual weapons is unlikely to meet the standard for launchers and tubes without specific upgrades or purpose-built configurations. Units that store heavy weapons in whatever space was left over after the individual weapon storage was configured are operating with a security and compliance gap that is difficult to defend during an inspection.
Dimensional Challenges: Building Storage Around the Weapon, Not the Other Way Around
The most immediate practical challenge with launcher, tube, and mortar storage is dimensional. These are large systems, frequently exceeding the vertical clearance or horizontal depth that standard armory rack configurations are designed for, and forcing them into standard configurations creates problems that compound over time.
A mortar tube stored vertically in a rack designed for rifles will either exceed the available ceiling clearance or require the tube to be stored at an angle that compromises stability and creates handling hazards during retrieval. A launcher system stored horizontally on a shelf designed for individual weapons will typically lack adequate depth support for the full length of the system and may not have adequate weight rating for the load.
The right approach is to design storage around the dimensional and weight specifications of the actual systems being stored, not to adapt those systems to available storage. This means knowing the length, diameter, and weight of each system in storage configuration, including any associated components that are stored with or adjacent to the system, and specifying storage infrastructure that accommodates those parameters with adequate clearance and structural support.
Weight rating deserves specific attention. Mortar baseplates and heavy weapon mounts can weigh significantly more than individual weapons or even machine guns, and storage infrastructure that isn’t rated for the actual load creates structural risks that develop gradually and become apparent at the worst possible time. Confirm the weight rating of any storage system against the actual weight of the heaviest load it will carry, with a safety margin that accounts for the dynamic loads of retrieval and placement.
Purpose-built DASCO launcher, tube, and mortar storage solutions are dimensionally specified for the actual systems they’re designed to store, with weight ratings and structural configurations that match the physical demands of heavy weapon storage rather than approximating them from standard armory infrastructure.
Component Accountability for Complex Systems
Heavy weapon systems are among the most component-intensive in a unit’s inventory. A mortar system includes the tube, the baseplate, the bipod assembly, and the sight unit, each individually serialized and individually accountable. A launcher system may include the launcher body, grip stock, sight system, and various serialized accessories. Each component has its own hand receipt entry and its own accountability requirement, and the storage configuration needs to maintain the connection between each component and its parent system.
The failure mode is familiar from machine gun storage: components get separated from their parent system, stored in whatever space is available, and the hand receipt record gradually diverges from the physical reality as components migrate between systems or get informally co-located with the wrong parent weapon.
Storage configurations that provide designated positions for each component of each system, physically grouped with the parent weapon and individually labeled, maintain the accountability connection as a function of the storage layout rather than requiring armorers to enforce it through procedure alone. A component that has a designated storage position adjacent to its parent system has a visible home. A component stored informally has no visible home and becomes an accountability problem waiting to be discovered.
The component grouping in storage also speeds verification. An armorer conducting a component accountability check on a mortar system can confirm all components in a single position check rather than searching the armory for components that may have been stored separately from their parent system. That efficiency matters when accountability verification happens frequently, as it should for these systems.
Access Protocols and the Dual-Custody Question
Access control requirements for heavy weapon storage typically mirror or exceed those for machine gun storage, with dual-custody requirements applying in many unit configurations and regulatory frameworks. The same principles that govern machine gun dual-custody apply here: the storage system needs to physically enforce the dual-custody requirement, not just procedurally require it.
Heavy weapon storage also carries specific considerations around access authorization that go beyond the general armorer authorization that covers individual weapon storage. In some unit configurations, access to certain launcher systems or associated munitions storage requires specific qualification or authorization that isn’t automatic for all armory personnel. The access control system should reflect these tiered authorization requirements, with designated heavy weapon storage positions accessible only to personnel with the appropriate authorization level.
The retrieval process for heavy weapons also requires specific attention from a safety standpoint. These are large, heavy systems that require proper handling techniques to move without injury or equipment damage. Storage configurations that position heavy weapons in ways that require awkward retrieval angles or inadequate maneuvering space create handling hazards that result in both personnel injuries and equipment damage. Safe access should be a design requirement for heavy weapon storage, not an afterthought addressed through procedural guidance alone.
The Regulatory Overlap With Machine Gun Requirements
Units that store both machine guns and heavy weapons frequently find that the regulatory requirements for the two categories overlap significantly in terms of physical security standards, accountability verification frequency, and documentation requirements. That overlap is an opportunity to build a consistent compliance framework across both categories rather than managing them as separate regulatory obligations.
The storage infrastructure for machine guns and heavy weapons can often be designed as an integrated system within the same secured area, with consistent access control, consistent documentation requirements, and a single verification process that covers both categories. This approach is more efficient from an armorer time standpoint and produces more consistent documentation than managing each category under a separate process.
The dimensional requirements for the two categories are different enough that they typically need separate physical storage configurations within the shared secured area, but the access control and documentation framework can be consistent. A purpose-built heavy weapon and machine gun storage area with integrated access logging, component-level position identification, and consistent verification documentation produces a compliance picture that holds up under the kind of detailed inspection that these weapon categories attract.
Explore DASCO machine gun storage configurations alongside the heavy weapon storage line to see how the two categories can be integrated within a consistent armory storage framework.
Mortar-Specific Storage Considerations
Mortar systems carry a few specific storage considerations that distinguish them from other heavy weapon categories and that standard armory infrastructure handles particularly poorly.
The mortar tube presents a vertical storage challenge in most armory configurations. A standard 60mm mortar tube is manageable in many armory ceiling heights. An 81mm or 120mm tube is not, and storage solutions that don’t account for the full length of the tube in its stored configuration will require the armorer to compromise on orientation, stability, or clearance. Horizontal storage with adequate length support and stable positioning is often the most practical solution for larger mortar tubes, but it requires dedicated horizontal storage infrastructure rather than adaptation of vertical rack systems.
The baseplate is the heaviest individual component of most mortar systems and the one most commonly stored inadequately. A baseplate stored on a standard shelf that wasn’t rated for its weight, or positioned in a way that makes retrieval physically awkward, creates both a structural risk and a handling hazard. Dedicated baseplate storage with appropriate weight rating and retrieval clearance is a specific infrastructure requirement that storage specifications for mortar systems should address explicitly.
The full range of DASCO military storage solutions covers the heavy weapon storage requirements described in this guide, with configurations designed for the specific dimensional, weight, and accountability demands of launcher, tube, and mortar storage in military armory environments. Read more practical guidance for military armory management on the Arctos Industries blog.
Want to assess whether your current heavy weapon storage configuration meets the physical security, dimensional, and accountability requirements your unit operates under?
We work with unit armories to evaluate existing configurations and identify purpose-built solutions that address the specific demands of launcher, tube, and mortar storage.
Reach out at arctosindustries.com/contact or visit arctosindustries.com to learn more.
For Military professionals: your unit’s chain of command, applicable ARs, DA Pams, and unit SOPs should guide your specific heavy weapon storage procedures and regulatory compliance requirements. This article focuses on storage specifications and configuration considerations to inform equipment and infrastructure purchasing decisions.
