John Kettler Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 This book looks quite good, at least, based on the excerpts. The illos are gorgeous. World War II Infantry Anti-Tank Tactics By Gordon Rottman Anyone here read it? It's in the Osprey Elite series. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Just to clarify, the U.S. and British hand grenades are grenades which kill primarily by frag effect, whereas the German grenade, as designed, kills by blast. Nonsense. Offensive grenades incapacitate mainly by blast, while defensive grenades incapacitate mainly by fragmentation. It has nothing to do with nationality. The US, UK, and Germany all had a range of grenades that were either offensive or defensive, and utilised primarily either blast or fragmentation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Since I mentioned German close assault tactics vs. tanks, it would probably be a good idea if I showed the field expedient techniques, some quite extraordinary. They're after the Goliath segment here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Doc5QIWY-Uo&feature=related Perusal of the winners of the Tank Destruction Badge listed here indicates that at least some of those predate the arrival of the Panzerfaust, even the Panzerschreck, on the scene, and likely were done at very close quarters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Destruction_Badge Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 JonS, The primary grenade, the iconic weapon, if you will, of both the U.S. and British, though often employed offensively, was a defensive frag grenade. The primary weapon of the Germans was an offensive blast grenade. Nationality is important because it relates directly to tactics. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 These are also under Close Assault, as defined by BFC. Lends a whole scary new meaning to the phrase "getting caught up in your work!" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_bomb The SPR improvised sticky bomb was straight out of the period Ranger training manuals http://www.sproe.com/s/sticky-bomb.html Since I know someone will challenge this assertion, please note the subjects taught in an early version of the WW II (1943) Ranger manual, especially this one 6. Booby trap & demolitions http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/wwii-2nd-army-ranger-school-prototype-manual-very The sticky bomb is still in use today--by insurgents! Of course, remote detonation is a big help on the life expectancy issue. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/world/middleeast/14stickybombs.html This retro weapon has now spread to Afghanistan, too. http://www.stripes.com/news/middle-east/afghanistan/sticky-bombs-like-those-used-in-iraq-now-appearing-in-afghanistan-1.183623 Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 Since I mentioned German close assault tactics vs. tanks, it would probably be a good idea if I showed the field expedient techniques, some quite extraordinary. They're after the Goliath segment here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Doc5QIWY-Uo&feature=related Perusal of the winners of the Tank Destruction Badge listed here indicates that at least some of those predate the arrival of the Panzerfaust, even the Panzerschreck, on the scene, and likely were done at very close quarters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Destruction_Badge Regards, John Kettler John the Panzervernichtungsabzeichen was instituted on 09.03.42 & back dated to 21.06.41. The Germans also had an hollow charge, AT rifel grenade the Gewehr Panzergranate 30. Regards, John Waters 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 JonS, The primary grenade, the iconic weapon, if you will, of both the U.S. and British, though often employed offensively, was a defensive frag grenade. The primary weapon of the Germans was an offensive blast grenade. Nationality is important because it relates directly to tactics. Regards, John Kettler Not sure what the discussion is here, the Germans had 2 main hand grenades, the Stielhandgranate 24, with a hollow wooden handle, & TNT bursting charge in a thin metal sheave. The Stielhandgranate 43 was an improved 24, with a solid wood handle. Both had a smooth or serrated fragmentation sleeve. The 2nd type used was the Einhandgranate 39, egg shaped with an HE filler with a thin sheet metal caseing. The main difrence was the burst charge weight. Ie, Stielhandgranate 43 was 7 ounces, while the Einhandgranate 39's was 4 ounces. Regards, John Waters 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 Pzkpfw1, The Stielhandgranate was an offensive grenade, for which a slide-on frag jacket (Splitterring) was later created as an afterthought. Master Gunner and ordnance expert Ian Hogg was unimpressed with this kludge. See his GRENADES AND MORTARS for details. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitterring Pic here http://www.royaltigergear.com/images/ww_ger_m24she.jpg My fundamental point was that the typical grenades were as listed, JonS's customary blanket rejection of my position not withstanding. Didn't know about a frag jacket for the Eihandgranate, but here it is. http://www.lexpev.nl/grenades/europe/germany/splittermantelfureihandgranate.html Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.