Defensive vs Offensive Hand Grenades
genrl_m...@my-deja.com
grenades used by various armies. The grenades shown were listed as
defensive and offensive. ISTM that grenades used for offense should be
lighter so that attacking infantry could carry them with greater ease
but otherwise I wasn't aware of any distinctions. Could someone
provide some enlightenment on the subject?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Taki Kogoma
to soc.history.war.world-war-ii decree...
>In my travels to some war museums this summer, I saw examples of
>grenades used by various armies. The grenades shown were listed as
>defensive and offensive. ISTM that grenades used for offense should be
>lighter so that attacking infantry could carry them with greater ease
>but otherwise I wasn't aware of any distinctions. Could someone
>provide some enlightenment on the subject?
Typically, "defensive" grenades have a burst radius close to the
average throwing range, which means that if you tossed one while
standing out in the open, you might be hit by some of the fragments.
These grenades are generally best used from cover: i.e. a defensive
position.
"Offensive" grenades usually have lighter bodies, and tend to depend
on blast and concussion, rather than fragmentation, to do their damage.
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk | "I'll get a life when someone
(Known to some as Taki Kogoma) | demonstrates that it would be
quirk @ swcp.com | superior to what I have now."
Veteran of the '91 sf-lovers re-org. | -- Gym Quirk
RLA99
news:3a149ffb...@news.pacific.net.au...
Defensive gernades throw out more shranel that the defender can evade by
staying low in his position when it goes off. Offensive gerandes are more
concusive, their effects more limited in area, US ones are like baseballs.
RA
David Constable
Speaking purely as an end user I would be happier using a grenade which
produced heavy fragments as far away as possible. A light grenade that
tended to have more of a blast effect than splinters would be useful close
up.
For clearing houses light, i.e. offensive.
For defending houses heavy, i.e. defensive.
The weight of individual grenades is not relevant to carrying it long
distances, not in small quantities. By the box, yes.
<genrl_m...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3a149ffb...@news.pacific.net.au...
Cub driver
stun explosive, rather than spewing bits of steel, so as to reduce the
risk to the man who threw it and who was presumably running toward
the blast. No such distinction was made in the US Army when I was a
trainee; we had the fragmentation grenade and nothing else.
all the best - Dan Ford
The Warbird's Forum at http://www.delphi.com/annals
Steven James Forsberg
: grenades used by various armies. The grenades shown were listed as
: defensive and offensive. ISTM that grenades used for offense should be
: lighter so that attacking infantry could carry them with greater ease
: but otherwise I wasn't aware of any distinctions. Could someone
IIRC, a defensive grenade is usually lighter and is designed
to have a smaller lethal radius (allowing you to use it closer to your
person), while an offensive grenade has a greater lethal raadius.
Aside from possibly different sized charges, the type (if any) of
shrapnel produced is the main factor. a defensive grenade might be smallish
and plastic encased so you can use it accurately and in relatively
closer quarters without blowing yourself to bits. An offensive grenade might
have a larger charge and a heavy metal case (to produce nice flying chunks)
in order to better kill and destroy - but you'd better toss it a good
distance or you could get a piece of your own shrapnel. In modern days
defensive grenades are especially useful in urban/indoors type fighting,
you can at least 'stun' folks in the target room without worrying about
shrapnel coming through the plasterboard and mowing down your own guys.
Of course, you can use an offensive grenade defensively and
a defensive grenade offensively, depending on conditions. I'm not certain
how the categorization got started, at first I assumed the vice-versa
as you did.
regards,
------------------------------------------------------------
sjfo...@bayou.uh.edu wizard 87-01
--
Osmo Ronkanen
<genrl_m...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In my travels to some war museums this summer, I saw examples of
>grenades used by various armies. The grenades shown were listed as
>defensive and offensive.
A defensive grenade produces larger fragments that can move farther than
the thrower can throw the grenade so he has to take cover after
throwing. Offensive grenades produce smaller fragments that do not fly
so far.
Osmo
--
Bill Shatzer
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 genrl_m...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In my travels to some war museums this summer, I saw examples of
> grenades used by various armies. The grenades shown were listed as
> defensive and offensive. ISTM that grenades used for offense should be
> lighter so that attacking infantry could carry them with greater ease
> but otherwise I wasn't aware of any distinctions. Could someone
> provide some enlightenment on the subject?
I think the distinction is blast vs. fragmentation.
Defensive hand grenades are designed to produce a lot of fragments on the
theory that a defensive grenade tosser can toss and then hunker down in
his trench/parapet/foxhole while the fragments put holes in the enemy.
Attackers don't have that luxury of hunkering down so "offensive" grenades
are designed to produce little or no fragmentation and maximum blast
effect so as not to put holes in the body of the tosser or his friends.
The theory is that while such grenades are unlikely to kill anyone, the
blast will stun the enemy sufficiently that the position can be overrun
and the enemy finished off by other means.
Cheers and all,
--
William Black
Bill Shatzer <bsha...@OregonVOS.net> wrote in message news:8v1713
> I think the distinction is blast vs. fragmentation.
>
> Defensive hand grenades are designed to produce a lot of fragments on the
> theory that a defensive grenade tosser can toss and then hunker down in
> his trench/parapet/foxhole while the fragments put holes in the enemy.
>
> Attackers don't have that luxury of hunkering down so "offensive" grenades
> are designed to produce little or no fragmentation and maximum blast
> effect so as not to put holes in the body of the tosser or his friends.
The Austrians (I think) used to( and maybe still do) make a grenade with a
detatchable fragmentation collar made of a coil of notched steel wire.
--
William Black
--------------------------------------
On time, on budget, or works;
Pick any two from three
--
Jhe56
radius
and minimal fragmentation. The idea is that troops advancing (not under
cover)
could use such grenades with less danger of frendly fire casualties. the
German
stick grenade is IIRC an "offensive" grenade. Defensive grenades are more
powerful and have significant fragmentation. They are designed to be used
by
troops operating from cover. The US "pineapple" was an example.
In practice, the distinction was rather meaningless.
REstey9690
shape) use a heavy metal body (usually
cast iron) filled with some 2- 2 1/2 oz
(55-70gram) of high explosive filler. The
filler were TNT, picric acid, Baratol (British - mix of TNT and barium
nitrate). The US
had an unusual filler - EC blank powder
(smokeless powder flakes). Later replaced by a mix of nitrostarch (25%)
ammonium nitrate (35%) and sodium nitrate (40%). The metal body on
detonation
shattered into fragments - hence the name fragmentation grenade. It
could be throw about 30 yards (27m), but the thrower had to take cover do
to
the danger of stray fragments which could travel in excess of 100 yards
(90m).
Offensive grenades used a light metal or
cardboard body filled with about half pound
(200-250grams) of high explosive filler. The
German "potato masher" was a grenade of this type. Offensive grenades rely
on
blast effects. The Germans often would remove the throwing handles and tie
a
half dozen
grenades into a "bundle charge". Throwing this on engine deck or turrent
overhang of a tank could stop a tank.
It
Henning Forsstrøm
positions, where the thrower would be shielded from the blast so it
had a stronger blast. There's also the shrapnel issue i think, with
the defensive having more of it for the same reasons.
Henning
Rich Rostrom
>In my travels to some war museums this summer, I saw examples of
>grenades used by various armies. The grenades shown were listed as
>defensive and offensive.
"Defensive" grenades are designed to produce the maximum
amount of shrapnel. If one is defending, one has cover,
usually. One throws the grenade out of cover, toward the
attackers who are in the open, to kill or wound them with
the shrapnel.
"Offensive" grenades are designed to produce flash and
shock, but little shrapnel. They are for pitching into
a defensive position to disable its defenders, without
endangering the attacker who is using it.
--
Never consume legumes before transacting whatsoever | Rich Rostrom
even in the outermost courtyard of a descendant of |
Timur the Terrible. | rrostrom@dummy
--- Avram Davidson, _Dr. Bhumbo Singh_ | 21stcentury.net
t. m.
> ISTM that grenades used for offense should be
>lighter so that attacking infantry could carry them with greater ease
No. Offensive grenades have a smaller radius of fragmentation to
minimize the risk for advancing troops. Defensive grenades have a much
bigger radius to maximize damage caused to advancing enemy troops
while the thrower of the grenade can remain in cover.
t.m.
Martin Rapier
<3a149ffb...@news.pacific.net.au>...
> In my travels to some war museums this summer, I saw examples of
> grenades used by various armies. The grenades shown were listed as
> defensive and offensive. ISTM that grenades used for offense should be
> lighter so that attacking infantry could carry them with greater ease
> but otherwise I wasn't aware of any distinctions. Could someone
> provide some enlightenment on the subject?
I belive (and I could be wildly wrong here) that defensive grenades
frequently have a bigger dangerous radius than offensive grenades, in some
cases encompassing the thrower. This is because generally defensive
greandes will be used - defensively ie bomber chucks grenade from foxhole
in direction of enemy and ducks back again. Bombers using offensive
greandes have less cover so the lethal radius has to be smaller.
From http://wio.newmail.ru/galgrnd/ww2inf.htm we see the following Russian
grenade types:
F1 defensive, lethal radius 200m (!)
RG42 offensive, lethal radius 25m
RGD-33 offensive/defensive, lethal radius 25m/100m depending on the fusing
all these grenades can be thrown 30-40m.
Cheers
Martin.
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
wrote:
> Offensive" grenades usually have lighter bodies, and tend to depend
> on blast and concussion
An example of this is the British army which used the Mills bomb as an
defensive grenade. There was also an offensive grenade with a plastic body
and about the same amount of explosive.
Ken Young
ken...@cix.co.uk
Maternity is a matter of fact
Paternity is a matter of opinion
--
David Shaw
The difference is in the size of the charge and the greater danger
range from fragments. Because it's assumed that defensive grenades
will be thrown from cover, i.e., trenches, they are bigger, on the
assumption that the thrower be able to shelter from the fragments.
Offensive grenades are lighter, to be thrown further and with a
reduced danger area. Which means that you've got an equal chance of
hurting one of the enemy or yourself!
--
Teu...@webtv.net
During WW2 there were a wide range of grenades. Among them were the
British No.74 "sticky grenade", the German "flying grenade"
(Panzerwurfmine), the German Heft Hohladung "magnetic grenade", the US
M9 rifle grenade, German M24 "stick grenade", and the Italian "Red Devil
grenades" (all painted bright red).
"That which does not kill us makes us stronger'
- Friedrick Nietzsche
Andrew Clark
Rich Rostrom <rrostrom@see_organizati.on> wrote
> "Defensive" grenades are designed to produce the maximum
> amount of shrapnel. If one is defending, one has cover,
> usually. One throws the grenade out of cover, toward the
> attackers who are in the open, to kill or wound them with
> the shrapnel
The terms date from WW1, where the defenders in a trench blindly threw
fragmentation grenades out into no-mans-land to stop raiding parties or even
(on the Austria/Italy border) to stop large attacks. The offensive blast
grenade was designed to be thrown into and around the enemy trenches by
attackers advancing on foot.
IIRC, the British Army in WW2 abolished the concept of two types of grenade
and started to introduce a General Purpose range around 1941.