Why did they drop the 50 mm mortar?

[Panzer76]

Hi.

I was wondering why the germans and russians dropped the 50 mm mortar while the US and British continued to use small caliber mortars until the end of the war.

Was the 50 mm mortar a popular weapon among the soldiers?

What, if anything, replaced it?

[Shosties]

I've noticed that 81mm mortars start to become organic to infantry companies (like SS Aufklarung) after the 50mm ones are dropped from the platoons.

[Robert Isenberg]

Bigger Boom desired

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Robert Isenberg:

Bigger Boom desired

Yes, but sometimes there is nothing to replace it with. SOME boom is better than NO boom, I would guess?

[PiggDogg]

76,

As Robert said "bigger boom desired". The 81 (82) mm mortars provided that desired bigger boom. As soon as that was realized and as soon as the bigger mortars became available, the 81/82s were used and applied.

Cheers, Richard

[Engel]

Bigger boom and at least with the Germans the fact that the 50mm mortar was horribly inaccurate, with a drift of up to 35m, which is quite a lot considering the relatively weak shell.

[Wol]

As I recall The British 2" mortar's primary role was actually to provide smoke coverage at the platoon level. That is why the Brits kept it (and still do today although the new 2" fires a much more powerful bomb.) The yanks used a 60mm mortar which is not in the same catergory, and is a company asset.

[Slater]

I dont Know if this is correct! But a read that the Russians found the little 50mm effective in close front line combat but was droped because it was complex to build and often broke under extreme conditions! I could be wrong I just remembered reading it in a book but it could of been a even smaller caliber morter. Did the russians ever use a smaller cal morter maybe 30mm or 40mm?

[Engel]

Originally posted by Slater_SS:

Did the russians ever use a smaller cal morter maybe 30mm or 40mm?

They had a 37mm mortar, but I don't know how much use it saw.

[CombinedArms]

For what it's worth I remain a fan of the US 60mm--a bit heavier than the 50mm but with just that extra bang for the buck and a bit more ammo load, too. For me it gives a nice balance of portability and effectiveness.

Actually, I never met a mortar I didn't like, but I really like that organic company level firepower provided by the US 60mm. I wonder how a US company would function in the CMBB framework, with its several organic MGs and mortars and its large squads offering balanced long range/short range firepower. It might just turn out to be a very effective package since it's designed from the ground up to provide a substantial supporting fire unit and a substantial manuever unit.

[Olle Petersson]

The 50mm mortar and most of it's peers had a lousy accuracy, poor max range and the punch of a handgrenade.

It had little use that couldn't be better handled by handgrenades or 81mm mortars. The 50mm was more of a burdon on logistics...

The US 60mm mortar is more like a shrunken version of the 81mm, and had therefore better accuracy.

Cheers

Olle

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by Engel:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Slater_SS:

Did the russians ever use a smaller cal morter maybe 30mm or 40mm?

They had a 37mm mortar, but I don't know how much use it saw.</font>

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by Slater_SS:

I dont Know if this is correct! But a read that the Russians found the little 50mm effective in close front line combat but was droped because it was complex to build and often broke under extreme conditions! [snips]

I think the complexity of the beast is what makes the difference between successful and unsuccessful 2-in/50mm class mortars. The British and the Japanese were the greatest users of this kind of weapon; the Japanese weapons were, and the British ones became, quite simple devices, without bipods or much in the way of sights. I've carried a 2-in mortar -- they didn't tell me what mark it was, but it was one of the late ones, nothing more than a tube with a firing-lever and a vestigial spade at the bottom, and a painted white line to aim with. The only simpler weapon I know is the half-brick.

The Germans and the Italians, on the other hand, went in for fabulously complicated devices. "Those knobs and screws and toggles -- The imagination boggles", as Pete Atkin said of the Omega Incabloc Oyster Accutron '73 (the only wristwatch for a drummer). Russian 50mm mortars tended towards the complicated, although they had dropped the bipod by the PM-41.

I would also suggest that the number of LMGs available in the definitive Red Army infantry organisations meant that Russian platoons needed the extra firepower of the mortar less than the British or Japanese platoons did.

All the best,

John.