Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Hole-and-twine grenade?
jastayme3    9/27/2007 12:35:16 AM
Suppose grenades were issued with a ring attached to them and a coil of twine or rope thin enough to be cut with a knife. This would be threaded through the ring. This would serve two goals. It can be used like a sling or bolo giving the range of a stick grenade without the encumberance. As a bonus several grenades can be strung together to make an ad-hoc satchel charge. Perhaps even combinations(a bundle containing a WP an HE and a frag for instance). Or single type bundles. But it is an interesting option.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
kirby1       9/27/2007 3:14:20 AM
Why isssue cord? If  you are in theatre, and you can't find 550 cord, you are blind!
 
The booby trap is good. For a satchell charge, you'd need alot more accurate time fuses then what you have nowadays. The differences in actual burn time on a "5 second" fuse are pretty bad. 
 
As far as the  bolo idea goes, no thanks. Some troops have a hard enough time figuring out how to throw the damned things, don't tempt them with something that'll just get me killed. 
 
Quote    Reply

Jeff_F_F       9/27/2007 8:35:30 AM
An easier way to increase throwing range is to design one of those atlatl-like devices that dog owners use to throw balls further to take a grenade. I'm thinking a design that encloses the safety lever until the grenade is thrown.
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       9/27/2007 11:11:28 AM


An easier way to increase throwing range is to design one of those atlatl-like devices that dog owners use to throw balls further to take a grenade. I'm thinking a design that encloses the safety lever until the grenade is thrown.



Interesting. That might be a good idea. The concept of the old German stick grenades was flawed because it had a disposable shaft with every grenade when all that is needed is a throwing stick like what you descriped.
As Kirby 1 points out, it really doesn't matter where you get the cord, it serves the same purpose.  The disadvantages he describes are interesting but may not be insurmountable. One should probably do the experiments with blanks for obvious reasons though!
 
Quote    Reply

andyf       9/27/2007 11:31:33 AM
perhaps some sort of telesopic or folding 'stick' could be formed on the grenade body?
some of the plastics now are seriouslt rigid and lightweight
my problem with the atlatl type idea is that its another bit of kit to carry
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag       9/27/2007 12:12:19 PM
The problem with adopting an atlatl design is that it means one more thing to train the troops how to use it accurately: getting the power and pitch angles down to toss a grenade can almost be considered a second-nature reflex for many people (throwing things), but make it more complex by adding a throwing mechanism that requires balance, aiming, and considerable training to master means making the infantryman's job a lot harder.
 
What about redesigning the standard grenade's shape to create something more aerodynamically pleasing that grants a greater range, perhaps shaped like some of those Nerf footballs with the tailfins, those can be throw pretty far compared to standard pigskin. The only issue being, they're easier thrown when they're lighter (Nerfs are foam, regular grenades are metal and filler), so unless we can develop some form of lightweight (foam type?) explosive that still packs a comparable wallop, there's little point in developing an aero grenade that can barely cause any damage downrange.
 
Perhaps we make a decent areo design, but instead of typical explosive filler, we wind a coil (or ball)  inside it made of det cord?
http://www.hasbrotoyshop.com/Files_Main/200/56670312c230_main400.jpg" width=200 align=left border=0>
 
But the thing here is, if it's range we're after, we're only a small step away from making it a rifle grenade. But then you run into the 40mm proponents who suggest the M203 types are more favorable.
How about a multi-option grenade that can be throw/pitched baseball style like a regular grenade, or strap on the fins for a longer ranged toss?
 
I wouldn't suggest just depending on a spiral pass design as American league footballs are thrown, because it takes a lot of practice to get the proper grip and wrist rotation down pat to master passing a good spiral (just watch the ineptness of countless people who think they're armchair quarterbacks).
 
There's also the option of a more flattened discus or frisbee type grenade, but not everyone, even with practice, can precisely toss a frisbee, either,
even though the proper design with the right rotation can fly/glide farther than anyone could ever toss a ball-style grenade.
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       9/28/2007 12:44:22 AM
"The problem with adopting an atlatl design is that it means one more thing to train the troops how to use it accurately: getting the power and pitch angles down to toss a grenade can almost be considered a second-nature reflex for many people (throwing things), but make it more complex by adding a throwing mechanism that requires balance, aiming, and considerable training to master means making the infantryman's job a lot harder."

It's no different for any other weapon that comes into service. Perhaps in practice the cost in retraining is worse then the gain but that is just another cost/benefit and doesn't stop us from at least discussing the theoretical aspects.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    I have one word for you   9/28/2007 1:13:32 AM
Slingshot

Simple slingshothttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/Slingshot_%28weapon%29.jpg/200px-Slingshot_%28weapon%29.jpg" class="thumbimage" border="0" height="257" width="200">

http://www.slingshotworld.com/images/trumark_fssling1large.jpg" alt="Trumark wrist-braced slingshot fs-1 : large image" height="240" width="240">

Has this not been tried before? 

 
Quote    Reply

Jeff_F_F       9/28/2007 5:15:24 PM


"The problem with
adopting an atlatl design is that it means one more thing to train the
troops how to use it accurately: getting the power and pitch angles
down to toss a grenade can almost be considered a second-nature reflex
for many people (throwing things), but make it more complex by adding a
throwing mechanism that requires balance, aiming, and considerable
training to master means making the infantryman's job a lot harder."

It's no different for any other weapon that comes into service. Perhaps in practice the cost in retraining is worse then the gain but that is just another cost/benefit and doesn't stop us from at least discussing the theoretical aspects.

 



If it was WWII, I could honestly see it maybe being worth it, nowadays I think between all of the ways of propelling a grenade there isn't much push for such a thing. Though it would be a cool low-tech weapon.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       9/28/2007 6:00:46 PM
During the Great War, the French had a HE lugging crossbow in their trench warfare armoury.


 
Quote    Reply

Jeff_F_F       9/28/2007 6:54:30 PM
The PIAT wasn't that far removed from a crossbow, come to think of it.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics