problematic PIATs

[Pugilist]

I just witnessed a recent turn where four PIATs loosed a total of eleven rounds at a motionless target 35 meters or less away, without a single hit. Every one missed.

They were regular quality, they were not under fire (the target was turning and I suspect shocked), and they were all in command. The enemy unit was not hull down, either.

Now, I know one incident does not necessarily suggest a problem, but this seems odd to me. Anyone else have similar experiences?

Or is the PIAT notoriously inaccurate?

edit: it was daytime, & clear.

[ April 26, 2004, 05:17 AM: Message edited by: Konstantine ]

[yacinator]

what experience level were those piats? how far away were from the target? was it day or night? what were the weather conditions? also did u know that unlike the bazooka or panzerfaust which are propelled by a rocket the piat is propelled by a spring. i'm not sure but i don't think that would be very accurate in real life.

i did a test with a piat shooting at stug from

50m- 1 shot hit, 2 shot miss, 3 & 4 hit

75m- 1 & 2 missed , 3,4 & 5 hit , and rest missed

100m- 5 & 7 hit rest missed

125- 5 hit rest missed

150m and > - all missed

[Ant]

the piat is propelled by a spring.

Well that's not strictly true. The projectile had a propellant in the tail, the spring firing pin was there to provide ignition.

[Michael Emrys]

Yeah, it was something kind of like a spigot mortar, wasn't it?

Michael

[Ant]

Yes. It was actually developed from a mortar design.

[l.cassidy]

Hi guys,

here' s the result of a little search I've made over the net about the PIAT: http://www.6th-airborne.org/index.html

There are some good pics and the user's manual, too.

From a quick glance, I do believe the guys that had to hunt panzers with that thing must 've had a good pair of solid brass balls under their pants...

Regards,

L.Cassidy

[Moon]

Check out the sample chapter titled "The worth of the PIAT" or similar over at the CMAK Companion webpages

Martin

[Other Means]

yes they were brave men. have a look at Major Robert Henry Cain VC.

the best thing about the PIAT is it's stealth. when you're in the last 1/4 of the battle & everything is getting dirty, your opponents armour tends to be close enough to have a couple of goes with the PIAT & from a little bit of cover they are very hard to spot.

[Other Means]

oh and after having nothing but molotovs for years these things seem like voodoo.

[GoofyStance]

I wondered about a backblast being produced by the PIAT, as I also thought it was launched by a spring. I don't have the book handy, but an Allied officer in BF's new book The CMAK Companion mentions how hazardous it was to launch a PIAT in a building, due to the backblast. I know this is a subjective question, but any insight would be appreciated - just how much of a backblast did the PIAT produce? As compared to, say, a Panzerfaust?

[Ant]

but an Allied officer in BF's new book The CMAK Companion mentions how hazardous it was to launch a PIAT in a building, due to the backblast.

:confused: :confused: :confused:

Are you sure he was talking about the PIAT? One of the advantages was that it could be fired from confined spaces because it didn't have a backblast.

In fact it would be impossible for it to have a backblast as the rear was enclosed. It did, however, have quite a fearsome recoil. In fact the recoil was supposed to recock the firing spring, unfortunately if the firer didn't brace himself properly this didn't happen and a very awkward manual recock was required.

[Sergei]

This is off the excellent Panzerfaust site of M.Hofbauer:

The weapon fired a fin-stabilized shaped-charge projectile with a length of 38cm, a caliber of 8.9cm and weight of 1.13kg. HE-Shrapnel and smoke warheads were also available. The projectile can not be inserted into the forward part of the weapon before the spring has been loaded. The latter is a very tedious process: not only does the very strong spring need a loading force of 90kg, but also has to be loaded with a certain techinque. Therefore, the weapon can only be loaded by very strong and trained personnel. Loading in a prone position is out of question: With the tube between the legs and standing on the T-piece with the feet, the gunner grabs the tube at the trigger pistol grip and turns it counterclockwise while while at the same time pulling it up until he hears the cocked spring lock with a loud click.

Firing the weapon is no less of a problem: the trigger can only be pulled using all four fingers. Then the firing pin hits the procectile in its rear, where a small charge of propellant is detonated. The latter makes for a recoil that will cock the spring automatically for the next shot - if the gunner can't take that recoil - which was reportedly not too seldom - he will have to load the weapon again in the way described above. The projectile leaves the weapon at a Vo of 135m/s but accelerates in flight. Tanks could be attacked at ranges up to 100yd., larger targets like houses at larger distances of 300m and more.

From what I understand there was no backblast when using PIAT. It wasn't a rocket launcher, the rear end of the weapon was pressed against shoulder.

[Mr. Tittles]

The spring loaded pin will detonate the propellent and when the bomb 'uncovers' from the pin, there will be an excaping blast. Its like an inside out gun. The bomb carries the 'barrel' away with it.

There most certainly is a blast and it is directed not backwards out the tail like a panzerfaust or bazooka, but rather towards the firers face.

I imagine it would be like someone firing a large blank cartidge right at your face.

[dieseltaylor]

Sergei

Terry Ganders book on anti-tank weapons disagrees in some respects to your quoted source.

Two fingers to fire [ Iam not sure that thisn't the traditional English way]

Can be re-cocked lying down - but very difficult

Mentions the max. possible range as 700 metres but effective ranges as per your quote.

Regarding Mr Tittles and blowback I think the whole point of the blast to the rear was dissapated in successfully pushing the spring back for recocking. It would rather mess up the design otherwise? : )

[GoofyStance]

I'll need to re-read that chapter of the book, as I'm not positive the officer said "PIAT." I was half asleep when I read that section but I do recall thinking "Huh, I didn't know that about the PIAT ..." and was going to post a query about that on here. I don't know how accurate the movie is, but in A Bridge Too Far, they show Colonel Frost's men firing a PIAT from the balcony of a house overlooking the Arnhem bridge. There wasn't much of a blast when the projectile left the launcher, which seemed to "jive" with what I'd read of the PIAT's characteristics. (By the way, there's footage in The Pianist of a partisan in Warsaw firing a Panzerfaust from the balcony of a building, the target being the police headquarters across the street. Couldn't really see the backblast from the camera's angle, but the resulting explosion was impressive.) Unless someone else beats me to it, I'll post the relevant section from BF's book later.

[MikeyD]

The Piat was a shoulder fired weapon much like a rifle, and it wasn't unknown for the firer to get something dislocated in the process (sounds rather worse than the anti-tank rifles the Piat replaced, actually!). You'll notice the Piat in the game rests against the little guy's shoulder, not over the shoulder in bazoka-style.

Four Piats firing together could very well miss eleven times (that's only three attempts each and one guy's missed shot wouldn't increase the likelhood of the second guy hitting anything). A single Piat team firing eleven shots in a row and missing WOULD be odd!

[Sergei]

GoofyStance, I can perfectly well imagine that you wouldn't want to fire a PIAT from indoors unless it was a big room. Any explosion is bad in confined spaces, even if it is not a backblast.

[Mr. Tittles]

The rod comes forward under spring pressure. It enters the bombs rear and slides into it till it strikes the charge. The charge detonates creating pressure and starts both the bombs sliding off the rod (shooting downrange) and pushing the rod backwards. When the bomb seperates from the rod, there will be an escape of gas, smoke , etc. This will more than likely shoot backwards in a cone pattern. Very similar to the effects of a low velocity gun firing.

I would imagine that the place where seperation takes place is somewhere along the trough. Is the large tube area meant to capture this blast? It would certainly get the spring dirty if it was.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Sergei:

...not only does the very strong spring need a loading force of 90kg...

Ninety kg? That's almost 200 lbs. Even an average strong man could injure himself trying to lift that kind of weight. And the method you describe of cocking the spring is equivalent to lifting a weight.

Michael

[dieseltaylor]

Mr Tittles

The trough in which the round lies takes up only 25 % of the length of the weapon. The rest of the tube therefore provides the area for the spring to be compressed into . Recocking achieved or not the gas would then be vented from the upward facing large trough in the front of the Piat.

Weighing 14.4kg 32lb there was a very large monpod on the front end to carry the weight when aiming.

[flamingknives]

IIRC, it sometimes took two men to cock a PIAT.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

...not only does the very strong spring need a loading force of 90kg...

Ninety kg? That's almost 200 lbs. Even an average strong man could injure himself trying to lift that kind of weight. And the method you describe of cocking the spring is equivalent to lifting a weight.

Michael </font>

[dieseltaylor]

Curiously whilst mentioning how hard it is to cock the spring you would think that on the ground you would have the advantage of being able to use your leg muscles against the T piece of the stock rather than rely on the arm muscles.

The forum requires a someone who has been trained in using them !

[Mr. Tittles]

Originally posted by dieseltaylor:

Mr Tittles

The trough in which the round lies takes up only 25 % of the length of the weapon. The rest of the tube therefore provides the area for the spring to be compressed into . Recocking achieved or not the gas would then be vented from the upward facing large trough in the front of the Piat.

This would certainly be very discomforting and I can only imagine the flinch-factor that had to be dealt with.

It is not the same as firing a typical rifle where the powder, blast is propelled forward. When the rod/bomb disengage after the blast, the effect is shot back at the firer.

A better design would have had the bomb attached by some break away holding device. The bomb could be held in place on the end without a trough. There would be a large funnel around the end of the weapon to protect the firer.

[ April 27, 2004, 07:59 AM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Pugilist]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

The Piat was a shoulder fired weapon much like a rifle, and it wasn't unknown for the firer to get something dislocated in the process (sounds rather worse than the anti-tank rifles the Piat replaced, actually!). You'll notice the Piat in the game rests against the little guy's shoulder, not over the shoulder in bazoka-style.

Four Piats firing together could very well miss eleven times (that's only three attempts each and one guy's missed shot wouldn't increase the likelhood of the second guy hitting anything). A single Piat team firing eleven shots in a row and missing WOULD be odd!

Thanks for your interest folks. I think this response in particular neatly solves my "problem". Obviously I need to watch "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead" again!