Wartgamer

The German heavy 81mm round. At 16.5 pounds, this probably had a much shorter range than the typical WGR39 round (7.7 pounds). The US heavy round had very thin walls and was noted for its inferior fragmentation compared to teh standard US 81mm HE round. It was basically good for penetrating roofs on delay fuse settings. The German 120mm round seemed to come in different HE weights also. [ April 21, 2005, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

The Germans also had a 81mm heavy

So what was the 25 pounder's intended task? Certainly not blast. Was it supposed to make large fragments? As far as asphixiation, it would only be possible if the Japanese were knocked unconcious first. They were found sitting with thier hands over thier ears. As far as the guy in the jeep, he was more than likely closest to the wheel that struck the mine. The body of the jeep acted as a blast shield for everyone else in the jeep more than likely. The air burst of a hand grenade (grenades do not generally make supersonic microsplinters) is interesting. Weapons with thin walls and large HE payloads will make such fine splinters. [ April 17, 2005, 02:21 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Here we see that being in a tank, immune from fragments, but still vulnerable to the concussive effects of artillery. Here we have another concussion type effect..a super CW grenade? Landmine selective concussion.. [ April 17, 2005, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

Skill, actually. A skilled operator was usualy very good at range estimation. One friend who served in Borneo during Konfrontasi told me of being attached to a British patrol and watching the 2in Mortarman put 10 rounds down range, during an attack on a village, with 9 arriving on target at the same time. </font>

Or maybe the irritable old foul mouthed guy will stick to WWII era data and act like an expert. More than likely, since data supporting my theories exist, the typical self-congratulating CW responce will be more butt-blown-smoke and hand waving and scoffing. Speaking of which, I read where the TOT was probably the best method for using the US type of chemical smoke. The burning kind. The 4.2 apparently could kill through concussion when troops were in caves. It could certainly throw troops into the air. [ April 16, 2005, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

www.aapmr.org/zdocs/assembly/04handouts/C168_4.pdf In any discussion, modern research should also be taken into account. It seems that mild concussions/brain injuries were not well understood and 'shell-shock' may actually have been a physical injury. Given this, many blast events in a short duration certainly would have an adverse effect. It is very analogous to being struck by a flurry of punches. Note also that HE displaces bodies. The body is actually benefitted by 'going' with the blast wave. If it were rigid (like being up against a wall), it would suffer considerably. But getting thrown and having ones momentum traveling in one direction, and then being met by another blast wave coming at you, is very bad news. When could this happen? Why during a TOT artillery barrage! There is also speculation that people who died from the medical condition Shock (not to be confused with shell shock), may actually have had multiple injuries from HE including internal ones. Most WWII treatment and surveys focused on what they knew at the time. People going into shock and dying was a possible effect of unkbown HE effects. http://www.tpub.com/content/combat/14234/css/14234_253.htm [ April 15, 2005, 12:49 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

It was a quite good piece. Unfortunately, it had an inferior shell. But I suspect that you are actually practising what you are accusing me off. You are in denial. The 25 pounder had a 7% payload. I would like to know what its shell wall thickness was (hopefully it was cast iron).

This was the data I wanted to posrt earlier but cut and paste the incorrect data from the same website. The study was a group of 100 casualties. From a lethality standpoint, blast is negligible. From a casualty producing agent; it is not. It is clearly additive to fragmentation in many cases. There are also many effects and other non-treated injuries that HE blast causes. Partial deafness, nervous conditions, bruisin, etc.

For mortars without bipods, indirect fire 'corrections' are a bit of luck. The US 60mm mortar should be thought of as a mini-81mm. The 'knee-mortar' variety should be thought of as super greande launchers. The US 60mm used the same sight as the 81mm I believe. They also had the same fuse on the mortar bombs with fuse settings. The US 60mm range set it apart as well.

Oh, before I forget, the very weak 25 pounder switched to a more powerful explosive late in the war in an attempt to increase its output to something more effective.

Another effect is that shells landing in very close succesion may acually trigger a PD fuse off. So a round that lands/detonates may actually trigger another one still in the air through its blast/fragments/ejecta.

A foul mouthed nut also.

My opinion is that if the shells can all be coincided such that they all fall within 0.4 secs (or very close to that time span), they are significantly a better payoff. They do not all have to physically combine waves. Human reaction time, being what it is, would not allow someone to take any cover. Its very much like being under a mortar barrage. In a typical artillery barrage, the shells (unless directly coming at you) give some warning and protective measures acan be taken. Even if just laying flat on the ground. A TOT saturates the area and if you are within it, you will be within its effects before you can do anything.

They need to work the bolt action before they fire a second time anyway.

Holy Cripes. Why does it need to be fatal? I have already said numerous times that artillery is largely a wounding agent. Hence the low death rates associated with it. Everyone should appreciate that and do not need Mr. Salt to act like its a amazing discovery. Artillery wounds mostly through fragmentation and blast effects. The blast itself or the secondary or tertiary effects of blast. The blast can be directly additive for shells that explode simultaneously or near simultaneously. For those that explode in rapid succesion (blast waves do not interact but the soldier is thrown about by one after the other), the physical effects are like being in the center of several large brutes who 'bounce' you between them in a very short time span. Well within human reaction time (0.4 seconds). For 10-20 battalion shoots, some shells in a converged artillery TOT strike WILL be additive in thier blast effects. The rapid assault on the eardrums (multiple fluctuations in a short span of time) are much more debilitating than one loud noise.

This is absolute rubbish. It has nothing to do with the effect. The basic effect is this. The effect was that 8 evenly spaced 20 kton nukes arranged around a target can achieve better blast effects than 1 megaton bomb. In other words, 160kton can make the same blast effects as a bomb 6.25 times its size. Why you go off on some bad math calc is beyond me.

Do you need to drink much to be this abusive?

Probable causative agent2 Head Neck Thorax Abdo- men Upper extremity Lower extremity Upper half of body Lower half of body Upper and lower halves of body Pelvis Total Casualties with single wounds High explosive 61 1 31 6 3 7 4 5 9 2 129 According to this study of single cause KIA's, the head is the most likely area to be vulnerable to HE. Its about 50% followed by the Thorax at 25%. Notice that the neck is not a large contributor. Mr. Salt seems to think that all HE blast effects pale in comparison to fragmentation. This is usually just the case for troops in the open. When under cover, blast can kill/wound troops that can not be hit with fragmentation.

Do facts generate profanity in CW wankers?

Some reality first: The US 105mm HE is 4.9 pounds. The 4.2" mortar had 8 pounds. The US 155mm HE is 15 pounds. The US 8 inch is 37 pounds. These are probably the most common weapons that make up a US TOT but I have read that 240mm were also used. Obviously, they could not get into each shoot because of slow loading times. The primary CW field piece is a 25 pounder with LESS than 2 pounds of HE. More than likely this was the reason the CW did not like to use TOT. [ April 09, 2005, 05:18 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

In the case of using simultaneous nuclear detonations they are widely seperated. The main benefit is that one '8' cluster of 20kton weapons can handle a city better than one megatonner. So just as the yield is bigger than a conventional weapon, the wide dispersion of the nukes is offset (by an inverse cube for those that can calculate). In a TOT, where multiple battalions are targetting the same registration point, the density of many small 3+ pound HE (US 105mm and greater) in very close proximity must be taken into account. Certainly structures like buildings, human skulls and bones and brains, optics, etc will feel the shared reflected blast waves. Imagine yourself fighting three people at once. If they are very slow/uncoordinated and you can get only one punch at a time from them, you may last awhile. But if all three hit you at once, you are going to be going down quickly.

Its absolutely relevant. Read your own posts above. You mention that the CW's thought TOT wasn't worth it. I am directly rebutting that statement. Do you know what relevance means? The CW needed to weigh the value to get the worth. Or, more than likely, they did not know the value. But this thread, like so many, is just going to get ruined by more CW grafitti. Anyone with any real technical education and experience knows that I am correct. Salt is probably just a buff. He jumped up and took a stand and now he (I hope for his sake) knows it. Nice try trying to help his loss of face JonS. Continue with your grafitti now. Edit: Again, I repeat, again; the effects are not limited to nuclear weapons. The source I cut'n'pasted above is about conventional weapons. Just to be sure, should I repeat myself again?

How feeble. Physics is Physics. I am not comparing radiological effects. Its clearly blast effects. And, again, you are wrong. One of the sources was actually discussing HE and fuel-air explosives as well as blast effects from nuclear weapons. They are not my crackpot assertions. They are actual fact based realities shared by people that know what they are talking about. You have a foul mouth. [ April 09, 2005, 01:12 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]