Mills Bombs


PDA






BigG
October 16, 2007, 12:36 PM
Mills Bombs -

Gotta love the British. We yanks have a hand grenade (hang grenade) or pineapple or frag but if you read British war lit you will see reference to Mills Bombs, as in "Too right! I took out that bleedin Jerry machinegun nest with a well placed Mills bomb, I did, old mate!"

I had to look it up to make sure it was a hand grenade they were talking about. What I want to know, is why can't British guys just speak English?

Any other funny names for weaponry you've come across it Brit Lit?

Thanks in advance.

If you enjoyed reading about "Mills Bombs" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Jim Watson
October 16, 2007, 01:35 PM
The British liked to give things the name of the designer or source.
STEN = Shepherd + Turpin + ENfield.
Bren = BRno + ENfield
Livens Projector = WW I gas bomb launcher designed by Captain Livens, Royal Engineers.
Probably a hundred more.

BigG
October 16, 2007, 02:23 PM
Too bad most of the stuff is comparative junk. The British Tommies fought valiantly with very substandard equipment, imho, except the ones who fought with US provided equipment, including sporting guns donated by US shooters.

CWL
October 16, 2007, 02:44 PM
The British Tommies fought valiantly with very substandard equipment,

Yet the British carved out an Empire that hasn't been matched with "very substandard equiptment". It isn't just the weaponry that wins battles and wars, the British soldier had a fighting spirit that allowed them to stand in line and be charged by thousands of crazed Zulus, Pathans, Maoris, Dervishes, etc. and not run.

As for military technology, the Brits invented radios, jet engines, battleships, radar, television, the first military aircraft, tanks...

El Tejon
October 16, 2007, 02:49 PM
I thought the British referred to Mills bombs as "pineapples" as well?:confused:

Hutch
October 16, 2007, 02:52 PM
My fave is the PIAT - Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank. Cocked by putting your feet in stirrups on the gun and hauling back the cocking handle with both hands. Imagine that.

BigG
October 16, 2007, 02:55 PM
the British soldier had a fighting spirit that allowed them to stand in line and be charged by thousands of crazed Zulus, Pathans, Maoris, Dervishes, etc. and not run.

Very true. Especially when the ship behind them was hosing the sword wielding hordes down with machinegun and naval gun fire. See the fight against Dervishes for one example.

Deanimator
October 16, 2007, 02:56 PM
My fave is the PIAT - Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank. Cocked by putting your feet in stirrups on the gun and hauling back the cocking handle with both hands. Imagine that.

If you're confused as to why they didn't develop an electrically fired rocket launcher the way we did, you're clearly unfamiliar with British automobiles and their electrical systems...

BigG
October 16, 2007, 03:12 PM
Lord Lucas was probably working on that electrical projector for the Brits. ;)

CWL
October 16, 2007, 03:25 PM
Very true. Especially when the ship behind them was hosing the sword wielding hordes down with machinegun and naval gun fire. See the fight against Dervishes for one example.

Yes, but weren't they "very substandard" machineguns? ;)

Koos Custodiet
October 16, 2007, 03:30 PM
>why can't British guys just speak English?

*coff* *coff*

By definition the British guys do speak English.

Off topic : Reminds me of the USA fellow who told me the stuff on my Land-Rover is not Africa-ready... erm... excuse me? (looks around) Looks like Africa to me...

Zundfolge
October 16, 2007, 03:34 PM
By definition the British guys do speak English.
So are all South Africans immune to ironic humor? :neener:

BigG
October 16, 2007, 03:40 PM
Yes, but weren't they "very substandard" machineguns? Nyuk nyuk nyuk

Actually, no. Back in those hoary days, they used the real McCoy MAXIM before they pirated the design and called it the Vickers. ;) That was invented and produced by AMERICAN Hiram Maxim.

CWL
October 16, 2007, 04:20 PM
That was invented and produced by AMERICAN Hiram Maxim.

Oh, you mean SIR Hiram Maxim, born in the USA but Brittish by nationality. He invented the Maxim machinegun in England using funds provided by Vickers, the machinegun was first adopted by the Brittish Army.

edit to add: The Maxim was the first machinegun if you don't include the Gatling gun or the French Mitrailleuse, which were mechanical repeaters.

RonE
October 16, 2007, 04:21 PM
Deanimator wrote:..."If you're confused as to why they didn't develop an electrically fired rocket launcher the way we did, you're clearly unfamiliar with British automobiles and their electrical systems..."...

Too true, that is why Lucas is called the Prince of Darkness and the Brits drink warm beer because of Lucas refridgeration.

There was nothing substandard at the time about the Martine-Henry single shot falling block rifles. Nor was there anything substandard at the time about Webbley .455 pistols.

The Brits did tend to keep arms long after better and newer designs were available.

Neo-Luddite
October 16, 2007, 04:49 PM
C'mon, funny Brit name for a weapon?

Brown Bess

BigG
October 16, 2007, 04:58 PM
nothing substandard at the time about the Martine-Henry single shot falling block rifles.

Another gun invented by a Yank - look up Peabody. The last truly British weapon was probably the Brown Bess musket. Even the Smelly was an American product - look up James Paris Lee.

The Browning HP; the BRNO was a Czech LMG. They even had M1 Garands and Thompsons and good old Colt .45 Autos, given as largesse by good natured Americans.

cnorman18
October 16, 2007, 05:49 PM
True story:

President John Kennedy and Sir Winston Churchill were having coffee after some diplomatic meeting or other, and the subject of the American and British pronunciations of the word "schedule" came up.

"Why is it," asked Churchill, "that you say 'SKED-ule' and I say 'SHED-ule'?"

Kennedy replied, "I suppose it's because we went to different SHOOLS..."

Mk VII
October 16, 2007, 06:10 PM
many contemporary texts refer to the Stokes mortar as the Stokes Gun.
'Bomb' for grenade seems to have dropped out by WW2, although mortar shells continue to be mortar bombs here (and quite right, too).
Amuses us to hear US 'artillerists' (what sort of a word is that, anyway?) calling artillery 'cannons'. That's like calling the USS New Jersey a boat.

Acera
October 16, 2007, 06:16 PM
Lord Lucas was probably working on that electrical projector for the Brits.

BigG, I am LMAO at that one. I hope there are a fair number of people who catch your meaning. Remember this one, "Why did Lucas Electrical not build TV's? They could not figure how to make one leak oil"

Lucas would have needed to sub the work out to Bosch to get the the thing to work.

BigG
October 16, 2007, 06:19 PM
I really like the Brits, but 1066 and all that. King William and the rest of those guys if they can see really probably got a problem with their progeny. ;>

damien
October 16, 2007, 06:24 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrapnel

The word shrapnel is derived from the name of Major-General Henry Shrapnel (1761–1842), an English artillery officer, whose experiments—initially conducted in his own time, and at his own expense—culminated in the design and development of a new type of artillery shell.

Fosbery
October 16, 2007, 06:36 PM
The Mills bomb was called the Mills bomb because that's what its designer (William Mills) called it. The official army designation was "hand grenade No.5" (or hand grenade No.23, No.36 or No.36M depending on variant).

except the ones who fought with US provided equipment, including sporting guns donated by US shooters.

No British servicemen have ever fought with sporting guns donated by US shooters (at least not officially, it's possible some British officer was sent an American revolver by his American uncle or some such).

I thought the British referred to Mills bombs as "pineapples" as well?

We did :)

If you're confused as to why they didn't develop an electrically fired rocket launcher the way we did, you're clearly unfamiliar with British automobiles and their electrical systems...

I think you'd be hard pressed to decide which was the better weapon, the PIAT or the bazooka. Both had roughly equal penetrative power (both being woefully inadequate). The bazooka had a longer range and was lighter but was usually slower to reload, longer, and couldn't be used in tight spaces. It also required a second person to load. I'd say the bazooka was better in open countryside, but the PIAT was superior in urban enviroments. The German antitank weapons were far superior, however.

The last truly British weapon was probably the Brown Bess musket.

The Maxim machinegun was designed by British national Sir Hiram Maxim. Webley and Adams revolvers were British, as were the Webley semi-auto pistols and numerous other early (both BP and metallic cartridge) revolvers. The Sten gun was a British design, as was the PIAT and numerous tank, aircraft, anti-tank, and artillery guns. The L85 assault rifle, the Accuracy International bolt and semi-automatic rifles, the Parker Hale M82, the Parker Hale PDW and the Britpistol.

They even had M1 Garands

The M1 Garand has never seen British service.

BigG
October 16, 2007, 06:48 PM
The M1 Garand has never seen British service.

According to the US National Rifle Association it has. They have examples of M1s with British proofing and painted red around the ejection area cautioning to use US 30 cal.

Many of us have seen the famous picutres of the pudgy bulldog with his Tommy Gun and cigar. Also, according to his memoirs he had a trusty Colt .45 Auto next to his bed, Yank guns both. ;)

Geronimo45
October 16, 2007, 06:50 PM
My fave is the PIAT - Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank. Cocked by putting your feet in stirrups on the gun and hauling back the cocking handle with both hands.
So... the PIAT was basically a crossbow firing a rocket?

Mk VII
October 16, 2007, 06:57 PM
The M1 Garand has never seen British service.

Yes it has.

http://www.fototime.com/4A0D09B66A6C67F/orig.jpg

CWL
October 16, 2007, 07:03 PM
So... the PIAT was basically a crossbow firing a rocket?

Nope, more like one of those suction-cup tipped dart guns that kids used to play with.

The PIAT was basically a tube with a real strong spring at the bottom, once cocked, you loaded a AT shell down the top and launched it by releasing the spring.

Fosbery
October 16, 2007, 07:13 PM
Sure those aren't Candaians/New Zealanders/Australians?

The British army tested small numbers of the M1 Garand but it was rejected. Several thousand were given British proof marks but kept in storage, then shipped back to the US after the war.

Churchill was pictured holding a British army Thompson M1928, though it wasn't his. He did own a Colt 1911, an Enfield .38 caliber revolver and a Steyr Mannichler carbine during WW2. He owned other weapons before then, including, famously, a broom handled Mauser.

CWL
October 16, 2007, 07:25 PM
MKVII,

Where was that photo taken? While the railsign is Chinese, I can't help but notice that at least one of the Japanese soldiers is still armed with his rifle. (notice rifle muzzle at front of picture roughly parallel with face of the Tommy).
If that is indeed a Japanese rifle, then this photo would probably have been from IndoChina where the Japanese were allowed to keep their firearms (and the origins of Vietnam conflict).

DMK
October 16, 2007, 07:36 PM
I just got done reading "Pegasus Bridge" by Stephen Ambrose. An excellent book about the company of British Airborne troops who captured two bridges at the extreme left flank of the Normandy invasion and held them in spite of heavy counter attacks. Very competent chaps. Without their success, SS Panzers could have come right through the left flank, and cutting across the invasion force in an action similar to the Nazi repulse in Market Garden.

Aside from being very impressed by their discipline, bravery and ingenuity, I found it interesting that they thought the PIAT was a piece of junk (although one man equipped with one did stop an entire column of SS Panzers) and before the night was up, most had ditched their "unreliable Stens" for MP40s.

DMK
October 16, 2007, 07:38 PM
The British army tested small numbers of the M1 Garand but it was rejected. Several thousand were given British proof marks but kept in storage, then shipped back to the US after the war.I read something similar to that myself. They mainly used them for home guard and such, although some commandos used them, even in Korea. I believe they were mostly concerned about the logistics. The Brits marked them all with a red band on the front handguard and marked them with a 30 (for 30 caliber). It's said that many of these were returned to the US and folks removed the red paint, thereby reducing the value of them considerably.

Bart Noir
October 16, 2007, 08:00 PM
So I can buy some red paint and increase the value of my Garand? Cool! Oh wait, it was made in the 1950's.

I saw a Life Magazine pic of US GI's practicing their "wading ashore" tactics, in the pond of a British park with Mum and the kiddies standing nearby. The rifles, you ask? 1888 Lee Metfords. They must have wanted to keep the Garands from getting rusty.

Another gun invented by a Yank - look up Peabody.

As an American, I am a bit embarrassed that our Army turned this fine design down and went with the Trapdoor musket rebuild. Yes, that saved money, but the Peabody action was stronger and faster, especially after Martini (a Swiss officer IIRC) totally redesigned the firing mechanism to have an internal hammer that cocked when the breech was opened. Why nag the British for doing the smart thing?

And I can't top the name Brown Bess for a funny one. But never will I laugh at those who used them or the successor weapons.

Bart Noir

Elm Creek Smith
October 16, 2007, 08:29 PM
"The ancestor to the modern minigun was made in the 1860s. Richard J. Gatling replaced the hand cranked mechanism of a rifle-caliber Gatling gun with an electric motor, a relatively new invention at the time. Even after Gatling slowed down the mechanism, the new electric-powered Gatling gun had a theoretical rate of fire of 3,000 rounds per minute, roughly three times the rate of a typical modern, single-barreled machine gun."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minigun

Imagine a few of those with Custer at the Little Big Horn with a small steam-powered generator in the wagons. It's a shame the Ordnance Department of the War Department was so conservative that repeating rifles offended them.

Oh, yeah, so much for Ol' Hiram.

ECS

OldBillThundercheif
October 16, 2007, 08:41 PM
Custer had several Gatling guns...

He left them behind because they slowed down his calvary hauling the brutes around.

Davo
October 16, 2007, 08:54 PM
Did you know Disney made training films for the boys anti tank rifle?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rODm7HF5lFU

The Intro alone is worth the time!

Neo-Luddite
October 16, 2007, 10:24 PM
’TWIXT my house and thy house the pathway is broad,
In thy house or my house is half the world’s hoard;
By my house and thy house hangs all the world’s fate,
On thy house and my house lies half the world’s hate.
For my house and thy house no help shall we find
Save thy house and my house—kin cleaving to kind;
If my house be taken, thine tumbleth anon.
If thy house be forfeit, mine followeth soon.

’Twixt my house and thy house what talk can there be
Of headship or lordship, or service or fee?
Since my house to thy house no greater can send
Than thy house to my house—friend comforting friend;
And thy house to my house no meaner can bring
Than my house to thy house—King counselling King.

Rudyard Kippling, The Houses


I thought about this poem, of course not directly applicable to the situation in historical context, when Mr. Blair joined President Bush in addressing the joint session of Congress after the attacks on September 11, 2001.

This was a lighthearted thread, about funny names for weapons and such?? How about "Blitz Buggy"?

Geeez,

-Mike

RPCVYemen
October 16, 2007, 11:01 PM
I thought the British referred to Mills bombs as "pineapples" as well?

In Yemen (as I recall), the sang word for hand grenade was the Arabic word for "pineapple" - and they wouldn't sell them to Peace Corps Volunteers. :)

Mike

loose cannon
October 16, 2007, 11:21 PM
not flame big g i note you depict your location as"dixieland" that tells me
you are a southern man tho i stand to be corrected.

our ancestors in the war of northern agression made good use of the excellent p53 enfield and whitworth rifles to show the yankee a thing or two.

if we'd been a bit smarter and freed the slaves before abes proclimation the producers of those guns wouldve helped us make this country a different place.

Hoppy590
October 16, 2007, 11:23 PM
born in the USA

last time i checked that makes him AMERICAN

loose cannon
October 16, 2007, 11:39 PM
yep confederates refered to themselves as americans.

giving a bit of a history lesson.not still fighting the war.

members of my family fought under the stars and stripes afterward and do so to this day.

Jim K
October 16, 2007, 11:44 PM
Hey, guys, give the PIAT a break or at least understand how it works. The discription of cocking is correct, but that is only for the first shot. After that, the spring is cocked by the recoil of the projectile. And, the spring does not drive the projectile, a propellant charge does.

The PIAT is basically what is called a spigot mortar, but in a horizontal position; the rod is the guide. In a spigot mortar, instead of dropping the projectile down a barrel, the projectile has a hollow tube which contains the propellant charge and it is dropped down over a guide rod. The rod has a "teat" to fire the primer of the charge, propelling the "bomb" upward.

While in a spigot mortar, the guide rod is roughly vertical and does not move, in the Piat, it is driven into the projectile tube by a powerful spring. When the propelling charge fires, the gas forces the projectile forward, and recoil forces the guide rod (firing rod) backward, cocking the projector again and absorbing much of the recoil.

The PIAT was not recoilless like the rocket types, but it had a low recoil and was quite effective.

BTW, like the rocket launchers, the PIAT did not depend on velocity for penetrating armor. The projectile had a hollow shaped charge that did the job no matter how fast or slow the projectile itself was moving. It could have even been stationary; the hot gas from the shaped charge did a number on armor plate.

Jim

Gator
October 17, 2007, 12:04 AM
I believe the photo posted by Mk VII is from post WWII South Vietnam. The Brits had the South and the French the North. Many Japanese soldiers were left in Vietnam after the war, the Brits armed them and used them to help police the country. In the North many Japanese joined the Viet Minh and fought the French, so I guess the Brits were smarter ;)

doc jake
October 17, 2007, 09:20 AM
Re: M1 Garand, I have pictures somewhere of Royal Marines with issued US cold weather gear and M1 Garandís, green berets and 44 pat webbing. The pictures are from a book about Royal Marines in Korea.

The reason we donít change weapons and equipment for the lasts model is ďif it isnít broke donít fix itĒ and itís defiantly easer to say go get the Gimmpy than the L7A1, never could get attached to a list of letters and numbers.

Khornet
October 17, 2007, 01:02 PM
that A) the Brits issued Garands in WWII. Done via Lend-Lease, I think, but I have at least one M1 book that shows them with Brit markings from WWII, and have one with the photo mentioned above of Brits in Korea with M1s; and

B) that US privately owned sporting arms were donated to Britain after Dunkirk and when they thought operation Sealion was about to launch. In Col. Brophy's book on the 03/03A3 there's a photo of someone's beloved 03 with attached request for its return from Britain "after Germany is defeated."

CWL
October 17, 2007, 01:07 PM
born in the USA
last time i checked that makes him AMERICAN

Hoppy, no it doesn't. The US does not allow dual nationalities. If one chooses to retain their Brittish citizenship, then he/she will not be granted US citizenship. Also, you can renounce your US citizenship anytime beofore witneses & lose it.

Trebor
October 17, 2007, 01:16 PM
There is simply no question that A) the Brits issued Garands in WWII. Done via Lend-Lease, I think, but I have at least one M1 book that shows them with Brit markings from WWII,

There is a difference between the Brits accepting U.S. M-1 Garands and proof marking them and actually putting them in service.

I know for sure that we sent the Garands to England. I know that they were proof marked. The poster from the U.K. says that although they were proofed, they were never actually issued. I don't know if that's true or not, but it's definately a possibility. Just because we sent them, doesn't mean they had to *use* them.

Trebor
October 17, 2007, 01:23 PM
The US does not allow dual nationalities. If one chooses to retain their Brittish citizenship, then he/she will not be granted US citizenship. Also, you can renounce your US citizenship anytime beofore witneses & lose it.

Actually, the U.S. does allow dual citizenship. I know several people who have citizenship rights and passports from both the U.S. and other countries. One is U.S./Canada, another is U.S./U.K. and the third is U.S. Australia.

All the people I know have other citizenship due to one parent being a citizen of the U.S. and the other a citizen of the other country. The guy from Canada was born in the U.S. to Canadian parents.

I always thought the U.S. didn't allow dual citizenship as well and I asked an immigration attorney friend of mine about that. She said that it is allowed, in certain circumstances, but the U.S. government unofficially "encourages" the myth that it is not allowed.

Gator
October 17, 2007, 11:17 PM
Yes, we sent M1s to England, but they were never "issued" and used as service rifles. The British markings seen on "Lend Lease" Garands were put there long after the war ended in preparation of the rifles being exported from England.

Privately owned sporting arms were sent to England, but they were not issued to troops.

rust collector
October 18, 2007, 12:18 AM
And although we've had our differences, we've got a lot more in common. And what's with knocking the other guy's guns, anyway? Check out the top of the page.

The amazingly different approaches to common problems taken by the Russians (quantity over quality), Germans (engineering for its own sake), Brits (homely but capable and serviceable) and Yanks (yeah but our tanks are faster). True strength came from the synergy of our alliance and the unifying effect of a maniac intent on destruction of every obstruction.

I've read that PIATs worked in small spaces better, as the backflash wasn't as destructive. As noted earlier, both anti-tank weapons left a lot to be desired. I don't think Yanks would want to compare torpedos, however, especially early in the war.

woodybrighton
October 18, 2007, 05:57 AM
some sporting weapons were issued to the home guard donations were probably a more effective propaganda device than of military use.
my grandfather was a home guard member who got issued shotgun cartridges for his 12 bore mostly used on rabbits :D

most fun with US personnel comes from the fact slang for cigarettes in UK is fags
i.e you got any fags mate~?
or is it ok to smoke fags around here :D
though in the good old days when we had the SLR you could set the gas setting to 1 or 2 and convince the hapless American that British rifles kick like mules:D

although the hapless guardsman we had attached mentioned the fact he was doing a degree in American history
that must be easy
why theres so little of it :D

BigG
October 18, 2007, 07:24 AM
Lets keep it on topic guys - Any more "funny" names for weapons from our British friends. :)

Zoogster
October 18, 2007, 07:49 AM
Ah politics. The history books leave out more history than they tell.
In WW2 America was out placing embargos and patroling the seas in the Pacific making things difficult for Japan long before they attacked Pearl Harbor. In fact if any nation did to us what we were doing to them we would consider it an act of war.
They knew we were getting ready to go on the offensive, they had minimal resources and raw materials and were trying to expand into the mainland so they could actualy be a world contender (which obviously an Island the size of Japan could never be without expanding). They could see that while they were ahead, America had a much more vast number of resources, and would quickly catch up and exceed thier military capability in the coming years. So it was now or never.
They launched a strategic attack on a nation that had made it quite appearant it was an enemy of thier empire, and would go on the offensive once militarily ready. In thier shoes anyone that did not make the choice to attack then would have been a foolish military tactician. They managed to destroy a good chunk of our naval power with very few losses in a single blow. Had they waited until we were good and ready first we would have crushed them far more easily.

Our country was simply trying to remain openly passive until it could build a massive force without having bombs falling in the meantime. Keep in mind every nation that was actualy on the front lines was being bombed and had production severely hampered. If our factories were under constant attack we would not have faired as well either. We were simply fortunate that at that point in time we were an isolated untouched factory of a nation seperated by the rest of the world by large oceans.
So the front lines were kept elsewhere, the American public was made to think it was keeping out of the war and the world's problems while the leaders planned otherwise. Pearl Harbor was a rallying point, but had it not happened something else would have been used shortly thereafter.
America was involved in WW2 actively long before it officialy jumped in as documented for school children. It was both a friend and an enemy of those involved prior to then and the major players knew it and planned accordingly.

Everyone sacrificed a lot. America poured in lots of troops who lost thier lives, and was the unmolested factory for all the Allies involved in the war, producing goods that kept everyone else afloat. However America also didn't have soldiers on its streets, battles destroying cities, bombings of factories, bridges, power plants and supply lines etc. Much of Europe did, although the UK managed to keep thier fight in the skies and off thier soil.
America was also able to wait until the 8th round of a 12 round fight, when the other sides were bloodied and had beaten eachother into a stupor before pouring in to help save the day, in both world wars. So combined with no fighting on home soil, and attacking economies already struggling in the midst of war, they are successes to be proud of, but certainly not almighty enough to be rude to others who had not just thier soldiers on the front lines, but thier homes and families as well.
America has never had a modern war brought to it. We have never had bombs rain down on us, cities burning, and women and children killed by the millions along with our men. Not since the civil war have we had widespread horrors of war here.
The closest we have had is a mere couple buildings destroyed on 9/11, and that brought our economy to its knees for weeks. So lets not get too smug.

Call Brits a bunch of pansies for things they do now, like letting themselves be disarmed, not for combined valiant efforts we both took part in in our past.

matt87
October 18, 2007, 07:57 AM
As semi-mentioned before there is the Boys antitank rifle... .55 calibre and weighing 36lb. Named for Captain Boys, of course!

LaEscopeta
October 18, 2007, 09:40 AM
So... the PIAT was basically a crossbow firing a rocket?More like a cross bow launching a mortar bomb. Propulsion was provided by the spring and also a small charge at the base of the shell, set off by the spring slamming the "bolt" into the back of the shell. I theory the spring would absorb most of the recoil and the recoil would re-cock the spring.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PIAT

There is a great scene in the movie ďA Bridge Too FarĒ of British paratroopers firing a PIAT at a German tank as it rumbles down a city street and across a bridge. The Brits score 2 or 3 direct hits but the explosions are so small the tankers donít notice, nor even realize they are passing an enemy unit that is firing at them. They just rumble on their way. This story was also in the book, the author getting it from interviews with survivors of the British paratrooper unit.

What I have continually noticed, however, it the lack of gratitude of every British guy I've ever spoken to about WWII. They act as if they won it themselves single-handedly and will almost come to fisticuffs if you question that.We Americans did not win WWII single-handedly either. If the British hadnít held out after France fell, hadnít protected Egypt, the Suez canal and middle east oil fields, hadnít kept the Japanese out of India, etc, etc, we would all be speaking German now (those of us not sent to ďhappiness camps.Ē)

Calibre44
October 18, 2007, 10:46 AM
Lets keep it on topic guys - Any more "funny" names for weapons from our British friends.


V1 Flying Bombs were commonly known as "doodlebugs" or ďBuzz BombsĒ. Launched in 1944, almost 9,250 V1's were fired against London. Although a around a quarter reached their target, in flight they were almost as vulnerable as the ramps they were fired from: about 2,000 were destroyed by anti-aircraft gunfire; 2,000 by fighter planes, and almost 300 by barrage balloons.

jerkyman45
October 18, 2007, 11:05 AM
Not really a funny name, but a goofy looking gun. The Webley and Scott Mars pistol. Powerful to be sure, but that thing is the ugliest handgun ever.

http://www.horstheld.com/Mars-43-b.jpg

Bart Noir
October 18, 2007, 03:10 PM
I find the used-to-be British way of designating artillery to be.... interesting.

As in using the weight of the shell. For instance they replaced the US 75mm gun on the Sherman with a very capable "6-pounder". Must have been a direct carry over from old muzzle loading cannon days.

Bart Noir

buzz_knox
October 18, 2007, 03:13 PM
As in using the weight of the shell. For instance they replaced the US 75mm gun on the Sherman with a very capable "6-pounder". Must have been a direct carry over from old muzzle loading cannon days.


Wasn't the main gun on the Sherman Firefly (the British converted variant) a 17 pounder? The 6 pounder was used on the older cruiser tanks.

ARGarrison
October 18, 2007, 03:39 PM
What about the British Gammon grenade so loved by our (USA) airborne troops. A Gammon grenade is basicly a sack stuffed with 2lbs of high explosives and a collar to affix a detonator. The detonator was a pull type with a string attached to it. When assembled you place the loop of the sting over your hand on the wrist and throw the grenade, when the string pulls tight it pulls the pin on detonator and starts to burn until it reaches the explosives. Some claimed it was like having a hand tossed artillery round!

Yeah, the British firefly was a 76mm gun to our 75mm.

As for calling grenades "bombs", seam to recall in "Bravo Two Zero" they kept saying "203 bombs" meaning 40mm grenades for the M203s.

The Movie "A Bridge Too Far" it has been said you never see the face of the soilder firing the PIAT. They ended up getting a WWII Vet to come in and fire the thing to get it to hit the target. The young guys, be they actors something else, couldn't figure the PIAT out.

SDC
October 18, 2007, 04:55 PM
There are also a number of oddly-descriptive names for British ordnance, such as the Vickers "toffee apple" 2-inch trench mortar, from the First World War, and the WW2 "sticky bomb" anti-tank grenade, which had to be transported inside a thin metal casing until ready for use, otherwise it WOULD stick to anyone or anything.

http://www.landships.freeservers.com/jpegs_new/allied%20at/ta1.jpg

http://www.home-guard.org.uk/hg/pics/gren74.jpg

rust collector
October 18, 2007, 10:07 PM
So, who cooked up the term "smelly" to describe the short magazine Lee Enfield? And yes, hanging the designer/builders' names on the early aircraft has cracked up a few generations of baby boomers (Sopwith Camel? Short Sturgeon? Fairey Swordfish? C'mon, yer killin me). And how do you pronounce Siddeley, anyway?

I'm a big fan of deHavilland mosquitos, however, and the P-51 wouldn't have amounted to much without those gorgeous Rolls Royce engines.

ConfuseUs
October 19, 2007, 05:41 AM
The PIAT was not recoilless like the rocket types, but it had a low recoil and was quite effective.

What I've read about the PIAT is that it had a hellacious recoil. It was supposed to be fired in the prone since guys who fired it in any other position found themselves flat on their backs admiring the clouds after firing.

alsaqr
October 19, 2007, 07:37 AM
"If you're confused as to why they didn't develop an electrically fired rocket launcher the way we did, you're clearly unfamiliar with British automobiles and their electrical systems..."

In the 60s and 70s a new MG, Triumph or whatever could not go from Miami to NYC without experiencing at least one major electrical problem.

woodybrighton
October 19, 2007, 09:30 AM
the gimpy is now the general
and rifles are usually referred to as gats

Bart Noir
October 19, 2007, 02:28 PM
I find the used-to-be British way of designating artillery to be.... interesting.

Apparently I find them confusing also.

Sticky bomb is maybe a winner.

And who has a problem going from SMLE to "smelly"??? It is so obvious to anybody who deals in acroyms and there pronunciations, if they have any at all.

Bart Noir

sterling180
October 23, 2007, 03:43 PM
Many of us have seen the famous picutres of the pudgy bulldog with his Tommy Gun and cigar. Also, according to his memoirs he had a trusty Colt .45 Auto next to his bed, Yank guns both.
Yes and the other 1911 was given to Inspector Thompson to use.Imagine if Brown gave a cop on duty a private handgun...wait...wait....oh yes thats right,his Party banned then.Those were the glory days of the UK.

Not really a funny name, but a goofy looking gun. The Webley and Scott Mars pistol. Powerful to be sure, but that thing is the ugliest handgun ever.
Don't tell the GCN about that,otherwise they will ban it.

ktc
December 24, 2007, 08:41 AM
The picture is from Hong Kong.
The name plate at the back ground is "Fan Ling" in Chinese. It is a train station near the Hong Kong Chinese broder.

That must be after the Japanese pow sent back to Japan via China.
Those are british force from Indea, equiped by the Americans.
They came with a british war ship in the Pacific fleet. They were in the Pacific campain with the American.


Regards

K.T.Chan

mekender
December 24, 2007, 09:24 AM
No British servicemen have ever fought with sporting guns donated by US shooters (at least not officially, it's possible some British officer was sent an American revolver by his American uncle or some such).

every thing ive ever read is that the gun control movement in europe after WWI made arms such a scarcity in europe that the governments there were begging for weapons from anywhere... and that thousands of private sporting arms were donated by americans and shipped overseas... not sure if those mad it to england or what...

Black Adder LXX
December 24, 2007, 10:31 AM
The Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch?
http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/front/holy_hand_grenade.jpg
Or are we referring to strictly modern era weapons?

Slugless
December 24, 2007, 10:53 AM
The British were far better than we at naming aircraft. I don't know if you'd consider their names "funny." (although "Eurofighter" makes me :barf:)

For instance, we Yanks developed the P-51 Mustang, right? Not quite. We developed a mediocre plane w/great aerodynamics with the catchy name "NA-73." Stirs the blood, that.

The brits dropped an awesome Rolls-Royce engine into it and the best fighter-interceptor of the war was born.

from WikipediaThe first production contract was awarded by the British for 320 NA-73 fighters named Mustang I by the British. Two aircraft of this lot delivered to the USAAC for evaluation were designated XP-51.[5] A second British contract called for 300 more (NA-83) Mustang I fighters. In September 1940, 150 aircraft designated NA-91 by North American were ordered under the Lend/Lease program. These were designated by the USAAF as P-51 and initially named the "Apache" although this designation was soon dropped and the RAF name, "Mustang," adopted instead.

Eric Bergerud talks about this in his book "Fire in the Sky" (about the air war in the South Pacific) which is one of the best history books I have ever read.

loud-mouth shnook
December 24, 2007, 01:12 PM
I've always had an affinity toward the antiquated M3 Stuart light tank. The british called them, "Honeys", IIRC.

I've often wondered why, among the names of british armor such as the, "Cromwell", "Chieftain" and such, that they referred to another as the, "Matilda".

Gotta call 'em sumpthin', I reckon.

Mk VII
December 24, 2007, 01:38 PM
The vast majority of the arms donated in 1940 went to the Home Guard - the huge variety of types and calibres would have made them very difficult to service and supply with ammo in any more active warfighting force. As to what happened to them, a recent article related the experience of one man who had loaned a .22 rifle earlier in the war. He got a message to go to a depot in the West to collect it. On arrival he found a great heap of guns and rifles lying promiscuously on the floor. He started sorting through them, but after a while it became obvious that the task was hopeless so he just sorted out one that was the approximate equivalent of his gun and settled for that.
The reference to Hong Kong sounds right, can't remember where I got that picture from now. Marine Commandos in the Far East had M1s, (my late father picked one up off a dead man that way) and got them again in Korea, fortunately they still had some NCOs who were qualified to instruct on them

“ While preparing to leave, the Commando was informed that they would be armed and equipped by the United States forces. As at the end of World War Two the Commando brigades were armed with US .45 Colt automatic pistols and the M1 (Garand) Rifle, there was some experience available already with the unit. Twenty Garands were borrowed from the Royal Marines weapons collection held by the Platoon Weapons School at Browndown. Many thousands of rounds were fired at the firing range before the departure of the Commando from Bickleigh. ”

Brian Dale
December 24, 2007, 02:20 PM
Welcome to The High Road, K.T.Chan. Thanks for contributing that information. :)

Roswell 1847
December 24, 2007, 02:51 PM
That MARS pistol would go well with the Broken bones due to recoil thread.
I've read that several young officers had badly sprained wrists when testing the gun.

I've also read that a US Arms dealer whose Mother was a UK Citizen sent thousands of low numbered 1903 springfields his company had converted to .303 British caliber.
The Rifles had been bought cheap due to the heat treatment issues and he'd intended to use the actions to build custom sporting rifles.
He had the bores lapped a bit and set back a few threads then rechambered.
Unfortunately the Bitish stripper clips wouldn't fit and the mag well wasn't suited to hold rimmed cartridges, plus the feed lips didn't handle the .303 well either.
The rifles were used as Drill Purpose only till it was found that they were highly accurate due to tight nicely lapped bores, they were then used as singleshot target rifles.

As for US designs used by other countries the Luger was a development of the Borchardt which was designed by an American who later moved to Europe.

It wasn't were you were born that made the difference, it was the fact that the US civilian arms industry offered more freedom to work on your designs, and the lack of interest by the US Military resulted in many fine US designs finding backers in Europe.
The Lewis Gun is a prime example.

Mk VII
December 24, 2007, 04:50 PM
The Bannerman guns are based on part-finished M1901 receivers which he bought surplus and include a mix of Springfield and Krag and 'other' parts. No two seem to be identical.

Roswell 1847
December 24, 2007, 06:47 PM
The Bannerman guns are based on part-finished M1901 receivers which he bought surplus and include a mix of Springfield and Krag and 'other' parts. No two seem to be identical.
I've seen the mix and match Bannerman military rifles made for sale to small countries, often in 7mm.
I've never run across any info on the .303 rifles sent to Britian that suggested they were of the same breed. Near as I could tell they were supposed to have been identical to the 03 except for a slightly shorter barrel and the chambering.

scout26
December 24, 2007, 09:22 PM
Ahh, The UK and the US, two countries separated by a common language.

Pigspitter
December 24, 2007, 09:44 PM
The Brown Bess muskets were excellent designs. Somehow I remember them helping some farmers defeat a large empire in the 1770's. Correct me if I'm wrong.

CrawdaddyJim
December 24, 2007, 10:26 PM
Welcome to THR, Mr. Chan.

Thank you for the translation and information about the picture.

Hope to see you posting.

My Grandfather had nothing but praise for the weapons and soldiers he fought beside in Europe and North Africa.
I for one like the idea of giving credit to the developer of whatever munition or weapon. If it didn't work so well then he was surely to find himself in the boat with the Prince of Darkness himself.

As an aside I ride a Triumph BSA restored but with modern electrics. :D

goon
December 24, 2007, 11:50 PM
The Brown bess was such a good weapon that even today you could stick a new flint in it and it would fire just as well as they did in their prime.
What british guns lose in their names they make up for in their function.

Roswell 1847
December 25, 2007, 02:34 AM
I can truthfully dump on British automotive ignition systems with good reason. I've driven both the MGA and MGB and put many miles on each. The MGA belonged to my older sister and she let me use it for awhile after she bought a new Firebird. The MGB was one My older brother picked up dirt cheap in a trade and had little use for since he's a Corvette collector and Hotrod enthusiast.
Both of these otherwise exemplary Sportcars would short out if you ran through a mud puddle. I finally traced the problem with each to a silly little paper spacer under the points in the distributer. If these paper spacers have the slightest microscopic tear in then even condensation from cool moist air can turn these babies into lawn ornaments.
If the problem were not so erratic and seemed to fix itself after a few minutes it would have been easier to figure out.

The Brown Bess muskets were excellent designs. Somehow I remember them helping some farmers defeat a large empire in the 1770's. Correct me if I'm wrong.
__________________

The Brown Bess was probably the best smoothbore musket ever produced. The American Colonists did use a lot of them but they also used many French Charleville Muskets and home grown copies of the Brown Bess and of course many sporting smoothbores and long rifles.

Remember that although the Men who fought for our freedom had been Farmers and Merchant Sailors along with every other occupation of the day it took a well trained and fairly well equiped army to finally oust the British from our shores. The Embattled Farmers most often lost, with few but notable exceptions, when faced by British Regulars. If not for Von Steuben teaching our soldiers and their officers the discipline necessary to hold their lines and face the Redcoats in close combat with fixed Bayonets things might not have ended so well.

PS
I've seen a Brown Bess that had been used by Mexican forces during the Mexican War of the late 1840's. The Brown Bess had for generations been the AK47 of its day. You didn't have to be a rocket scientist to keep it in operating condition, and since it was designed to crack heads and batter down doors with its buttstock you'd have a hard time breaking one if you tried. Also its pickeled steel finish was a controled rusting process so it was prerusty when it left the armory, true genius that. A truly classic firearm.

ktc
December 25, 2007, 08:08 AM
Hi
I found a story about the fuse for the stokes mortar to delay the fire and clean up barded wire.

see http://www.hellfire-corner.demon.co.uk/fuse.htm

Regards

K.T.Chan

MarkDido
December 25, 2007, 08:27 AM
If you're confused as to why they didn't develop an electrically fired rocket launcher the way we did, you're clearly unfamiliar with British automobiles and their electrical systems...

Anyone who has ever owned an MG or a Triumph (the car, not the moptorcycle) can attest to that!

ktc
December 25, 2007, 08:50 AM
Hi
I read about the Dror LMG is a direct descendant of the Johnson LMG.

Why don't the Americans like it.
They sold them all and no more mentioned it anymore.

Regards

K.T.Chan

SDC
December 25, 2007, 09:45 AM
The Dror (the Israeli name for the Johnson M1944) wasn't known for reliability, and the long, thin magazines were prone to damage. It was a so-so design when it first entered service, but badly outclassed as soon as the Russians fielded the RPD (and would've been considered a poor second choice even against the DP machinegun; at least the DP had a sizeable pan mag, compared to the Johnson).

macFarlaine
December 25, 2007, 12:58 PM
The Brown Bess was probably named after Elizebeth I.She was probably the toughest most intelligent Monarch we ever had.
Steadfast is a good word to describe the British,more commonly used by our foreign friends and enemies.Rourkes Drift is a fine example....

macFarlaine
December 25, 2007, 01:07 PM
Big G seems a big fan of British armaments and it's armed forces.We have a trully unmatched history in warfare wether it be with sub standard equipment or by fighting hand to hand.We are and always were a tiny island but by god we put the fear of god into many an army at land,sky and sea.
RULE BRITTANIA.

CB900F
December 25, 2007, 03:15 PM
Fella's;

OK, back to the original premise of the thread. The British term I'd like to have explained is: "Bangalore torpedo". I've seen it used in context that would seem to absolutely preclude the idea that it's a naval weapon. I'd also presume that the Bangalore part would indicate some association with the Brits in India. However, though I've seen the term in use, I've never run across what I thought was an adequate explanation of what the bloody thing was.

Humph! Humph! 900F

DuncanSA
December 25, 2007, 03:44 PM
My goodness! this discussion is really becoming ridiculous. I am surprised that no one has yet referred to the British Granadiers,who were a regiment raised to throw what were then the equivalent of hand grenades.

Lets look on something positive - two great nations, united by the spirit of liberty and a common language and heritage, fought for freedom in the first and second World Wars. They are still linked as the pivot around which the modern world revolves.

We should celebrate our common heritage and values rather than petty bickering about who invented which gun!

Slugless
December 25, 2007, 04:00 PM
A Bangalore torpedo is an explosive charge placed on the end of a long, extendable, tube. It is used by combat engineers to clear obstacles that would otherwise require them to approach directly, possibly under fire. It is sometimes colloquially referred to as a Bangalore mine, bangers or simply a Bangalore.

It has been estimated that the modern Bangalore torpedo is effective for clearing a path through wire and mines up to 15 meters long and 1 meter wide.
The Bangalore torpedo was first devised by Captain McClintock, of the British Army Bengal, Bombay and Madras Sappers and Miners at Bangalore, India, in 1912. He invented it as a means of exploding booby traps and barricades left over from the Boer and Russo-Japanese Wars. The Bangalore torpedo would be exploded over a mine without the sapper having to approach closer than about ten feet (three meters)- Wikipedia

Torpedo originally was a term for mines. Admiral Farragut's cry of "Damn the Torpedos!" was an order to run a minefield, as opposed to entering "torpedo waters" (a term from WWII).

Sherman also refers to mines as torpedoes in his memoirs.

CrawdaddyJim
December 25, 2007, 04:01 PM
Bangalore torpedo was a HE weapon designed to sever razor wire and to clear paths through mine fields.
Think of 3ft long sausages tied together. Usually pushed under the wire like sliding a stick on top of the sand. Then detonated.

Dave Markowitz
December 25, 2007, 09:14 PM
The use of a Bangalore torpedo is illustrated very well in the movie The Big Red One.

inkhead
December 25, 2007, 10:25 PM
CWL, actually there are dual citizenships for some americans, and you can get one if you are willing to jump through hoops or your parents did for reasons. It's like filling out the forms to get a machine gun, can be done, but it's a real pain ;-)

I know several people who have such deals.

Trebor
December 27, 2007, 05:43 PM
The use of a Bangalore torpedo is illustrated very well in the movie The Big Red One.

"Number 4!"

"Dead, Sarge!"

"Number Five! Go! GO!..."

Brrrrrrp!

"Number Six!"

ktc
December 28, 2007, 03:45 PM
The d-day Omaha beach Brigadier General Norman Cota ask those engineers to use their Bangalore torpedo to clear the wire and blow up the seawall.

The "Big red one" I forgot when they use Bangalore torpedo.

41magsnub
December 28, 2007, 03:48 PM
What is amusing is in the Army from 94-97 as an engineer we did the exact same bangalore drills they did in WWII. Yes, I was in the "big Red One"...

actually if you are curious I was in the most numerically superior engineer unit in the Army: 1st Squad, 1st Platoon, Alpha company, 1st Engineer Battalion, 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division.

ktc
January 10, 2008, 01:36 PM
I read the "The Saga of the M16 in Vietnam".
Dick Culver name the M16 as "mouse gun".

K.T.Chan

Brian Dale
January 10, 2008, 11:50 PM
Yep. The militaries of the world had been carrying .30 caliber rifles (many .30 cal, with 6.5mm to 8mm in some places) since the advent of smokeless powder. "Mouse gun" and "poodle shooter" were terms of derision for the rifle that fires a .223/5.56mm bullet from a much smaller brass case than the .30s use.

Iron Mike
January 11, 2008, 01:27 AM
A bit o.t. but, Lucas is an acronym, it stands for loose unsoldered connections and splices.

The Lone Haranguer
January 11, 2008, 02:40 AM
In his novels, Alistair MacLean called sawed-off shotguns "whippets." This was also the name of a British WWI tank. Not a bad name, really, since a whippet is a very fast sight-hunting dog, but it still sounds funny.

stubbicatt
January 11, 2008, 11:19 PM
BigG, I am LMAO at that one. I hope there are a fair number of people who catch your meaning. Remember this one, "Why did Lucas Electrical not build TV's? They could not figure how to make one leak oil"


Nah man, it was a lack of positive ground and a zener diode or a sprague clutch! LOL.

throdgrain
January 12, 2008, 10:42 AM
[QUOTE]Ah politics. The history books leave out more history than they tell.
In WW2 America was out placing embargos and patroling the seas in the Pacific making things difficult for Japan long before they attacked Pearl Harbor. In fact if any nation did to us what we were doing to them we would consider it an act of war.
They knew we were getting ready to go on the offensive, they had minimal resources and raw materials and were trying to expand into the mainland so they could actualy be a world contender (which obviously an Island the size of Japan could never be without expanding). They could see that while they were ahead, America had a much more vast number of resources, and would quickly catch up and exceed thier military capability in the coming years. So it was now or never.
They launched a strategic attack on a nation that had made it quite appearant it was an enemy of thier empire, and would go on the offensive once militarily ready. In thier shoes anyone that did not make the choice to attack then would have been a foolish military tactician. They managed to destroy a good chunk of our naval power with very few losses in a single blow. Had they waited until we were good and ready first we would have crushed them far more easily.

Our country was simply trying to remain openly passive until it could build a massive force without having bombs falling in the meantime. Keep in mind every nation that was actualy on the front lines was being bombed and had production severely hampered. If our factories were under constant attack we would not have faired as well either. We were simply fortunate that at that point in time we were an isolated untouched factory of a nation seperated by the rest of the world by large oceans.
So the front lines were kept elsewhere, the American public was made to think it was keeping out of the war and the world's problems while the leaders planned otherwise. Pearl Harbor was a rallying point, but had it not happened something else would have been used shortly thereafter.
America was involved in WW2 actively long before it officialy jumped in as documented for school children. It was both a friend and an enemy of those involved prior to then and the major players knew it and planned accordingly.

Everyone sacrificed a lot. America poured in lots of troops who lost thier lives, and was the unmolested factory for all the Allies involved in the war, producing goods that kept everyone else afloat. However America also didn't have soldiers on its streets, battles destroying cities, bombings of factories, bridges, power plants and supply lines etc. Much of Europe did, although the UK managed to keep thier fight in the skies and off thier soil.
America was also able to wait until the 8th round of a 12 round fight, when the other sides were bloodied and had beaten eachother into a stupor before pouring in to help save the day, in both world wars. So combined with no fighting on home soil, and attacking economies already struggling in the midst of war, they are successes to be proud of, but certainly not almighty enough to be rude to others who had not just thier soldiers on the front lines, but thier homes and families as well.
America has never had a modern war brought to it. We have never had bombs rain down on us, cities burning, and women and children killed by the millions along with our men. Not since the civil war have we had widespread horrors of war here.
The closest we have had is a mere couple buildings destroyed on 9/11, and that brought our economy to its knees for weeks. So lets not get too smug.

Call Brits a bunch of pansies for things they do now, like letting themselves be disarmed, not for combined valiant efforts we both took part in in our past.

/[QUOTE]

A mighty post , largely ignored in a light hearted thread. Well said Zoogster.

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/images/blitz2.jpg

Hope that picture helps describe the scene.

However one thing Ive noticed in this thread is a lack of the arrogance our media like to portray the Americans as having. A lot of respect, and hardly any silly comments about 1776.

My faith in you guys is much restored!

Slugless
January 12, 2008, 11:18 AM
Throd,

You're quoting Zoogster? Nice post, Zoog. Yeah, watch a history channel show and it sounds like we were picnicking under a blue sky when the totally unprovoked Japanese pounced on us. To them, cutting off their oil and steel was an act of war. Immediately before Pearl Harbor, Admiral Halsey was cruising a couple days out from Hawaii with the Enterprise and gave orders to his ships to attack "foreign" ships in the waters near Hawaii.

"Admiral, do you realize that [your order] means war?" his XO asked. "Yes", said Halsey, "...if anything gets in my way we'll shoot first and argue afterwards."

We knew we were going to tangle with Japan but didn't expect the "Spanish Inquisition", I mean the specific air attack on Pearl.

I don't believe the Brits are a bunch of pansies. They just don't have their backs against the wall. They are mean fighters when they do. Just look at their attack on the French navy at Oran. Or the sinking of the Belgrano.

A bar conversation after a minor insult to a Barmy Army man: (Our East Londoner friend explaining the facts of life to a Yank colleague):

"Randy, do you know why the English conquered the globe? When one Englishman is attacked the rest of us pile in."

There were about 20 drunken Englishmen in the bar! I was wondering if my friend was going to take sides against us in a bar brawl...

=======
How about the DeHavilland "Mosquito", a figher-bomber?
.

throdgrain
January 12, 2008, 11:49 AM
Damn straight Slugless :D

LaEscopeta
January 12, 2008, 12:36 PM
I read the "The Saga of the M16 in Vietnam".
Dick Culver name the M16 as "mouse gun".Did the solider/marines issued the original ones also call the “Mattel 16s”? Because of the plastic stock & hand guard?

In his novels, Alistair MacLean called sawed-off shotguns "whippets."One of the History Channel shows (Called ”Gangster Guns” I think) said Clyde Barrow (of Bonnie and Cyde) had a sawed off double barreled shotgun with a strap at the but end of the shorten stock. He would put his arm through the hole the strap formed with the stock, so the gun would hang from his shoulder under his arm. Put on a trench coat and you can walk down the street with a concealed long gun. Walk up to a bank teller, reach under the coat and swing the barrel up level to the teller’s face, and it is pay day. The show claimed Barrow called this his “whipit” gun, because he could whip it out in a second. Apparently this idea was better in theory than practice, and he only used it on a couple of bank hold-ups.

ktc
January 12, 2008, 02:00 PM
The name is like the gun.

woodybrighton
January 12, 2008, 02:44 PM
two ways to freak out the amrican military
one ask them for a spare fag :D i.e a cigarette

or more worrying on a nato exercise trying to dig in with those stupid folding shovels.
US officers umpire humvee with proper shovels and things strapped to it
" excuse me sir can we borrow a couple of spades to help us dig in"
One huge explosion of anger later I only meant the spades attached to your wagon:mad:

AndyC
January 12, 2008, 02:56 PM
I had to look up the reference as I had no idea before your post that "spade" is a derogatory term, Woody :what:

It's rough being a Brit here in the US ;)

Slugless
January 12, 2008, 04:33 PM
Woody, that's funny. Made me LOL.

The most freaked out Englishman I've seen was a public school boy at my work. Our secretary opened the door, interrupting a meeting, and snapped out:

"Nigel, get your fanny downstairs!"

I've never seen a guy turn red so fast.

Andy, since you're in Dallas you've probably in our dialect heard the term "boy" for a grown man. It is decidedly not a term to use for a grown black man. I've had to coach an dude from India on that one.

toratoratora1941
February 11, 2009, 04:51 AM
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=309681&page=2

Where was that photo taken? ???
I confirmed the photo posted by Mk VII is from post WWII HONG KONG. 1943??
Hong Kong's East Rail Line, Fanling Station (Chinese: 粉嶺站)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanling
Fanling, also known as Fan Ling and Fan Leng, is an area in the North District, New Territories, Hong Kong, China.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanling_(KCR)
Fanling Station (Chinese: 粉嶺站, Jyutping: fan2 ling5, colloq. fan2 leng5, Pinyin: Fěnlǐng) is a station on Hong Kong's East Rail Line. It is next to Fanling Town Centre, and is only a short walk away from Fung Ying Seen Koon, a well-known Taoist temple. The Fanling Highway was built from 1983 to 1987 directly adjacent to the station. Fanling station is located within the Fanling area in North District, New Territories, Hong Kong.


http://www.panoramio.com/photo/6058588
Fanling railway station in the 1960s

http://www.jamd.com/image/g/3377062
Photo circa 1960: A diesel-powered train passing through Fanling Station in the New Territories, Hong Kong, on its way to the border with China. (Photo by Richard Harrington/Three Lions/Getty Images)

foghornl
February 11, 2009, 09:40 AM
Having had some friends with both British cars & motorcycles, I can see why it is said:

"The Brits brink warm beer because they have Lucas Beer Chillers."

Now, the Brits DID have some very fine weapons...The series of SMLE rifles/carbines. Maxim/Vickers machine guns, Bren LMG..

Mk VII
February 11, 2009, 10:01 AM
"The Brits brink warm beer because they have Lucas Beer Chillers."

That's because it's proper beer, not that freezing cold weasel's piss you lot drink. :D

Acera
February 11, 2009, 12:39 PM
Q: Why did Lucas Electronics never make televisions?
A: Because they could never figure out how to make it leak oil.

Birddog1911
February 11, 2009, 12:46 PM
Quote: or more worrying on a nato exercise trying to dig in with those stupid folding shovels.
US officers umpire humvee with proper shovels and things strapped to it
" excuse me sir can we borrow a couple of spades to help us dig in"
One huge explosion of anger later I only meant the spades attached to your wagon

I almost died laughing at that one!

I would take issue with the L85; A number of the British troops I worked with despised their L85 rifle.

Slightly off topic: I would take issue with what Zoogster said about us joining in in the 8th round of a 12 round fight. Seems to me we were in the fight in Europe rather early, not to mention my Grandfather who was a China Marine and went into Nanking after the massacre, in 1938. The 3rd round perhaps, but not the 8th.

Back on topic: Do the British troops not call the US designated M240 machine gun the "Minimi"? I always found that interesting.

I may be of Irish descent; but thank God for the English; I married one!

SDC
February 11, 2009, 09:15 PM
"Back on topic: Do the British troops not call the US designated M240 machine gun the "Minimi"? I always found that interesting."

Close; they call the M249 the "Minimi", because that's what FN called it, and that's who developed it and sold it. They call their version of the M240 the "Jimpy" (a way of saying GPMG), while FN calls it the MAG-58 (Mitrailleuse Arme a Guerre 1958).

akodo
February 12, 2009, 03:02 AM
America was also able to wait until the 8th round of a 12 round fight, when the other sides were bloodied and had beaten eachother into a stupor before pouring in to help save the day, in both world wars

That is not accuate. The USA showed up in round 10 of a 12 round fight in WW1

The USA showed up in round 4 or 5 of a 12 round fight, there were just a lot of pre-match punches thrown. Also, without BOTH the US and Russia entering, it would have been a 48 round fight.

antediluvianist
February 12, 2009, 03:19 AM
The best army : British troops using American equipment led by German generals .

bonza
February 12, 2009, 06:09 AM
Another OLD thread given new life. Good reading though!

Just a couple more observations.
1. Another funny British name for their weapon was 'Long Tom', given to the first Lee Enfields (pre-SMLE).
2. Even Winston Churchill was only half English, his mother was American.

PS. I noticed a couple of comments about US & UK beer. Reminded me of a joke:
Q. "Why is American beer like making love in a canoe?"
A. "Because it's f*#@*%g close to water!

Mk VII
February 12, 2009, 06:19 AM
1. Another funny British name for their weapon was 'Long Tom', given to the first Lee Enfields (pre-SMLE)

Not a British name. You don't hear it here.

bonza
February 12, 2009, 12:27 PM
Not a British name. You don't hear it here.

Interesting, I grew up in Australia & it was relatively common term there, at least among collectors. I had assumed it would have originated in Britain.

ktc
February 28, 2009, 01:31 PM
To:toratoratora1941
Sorry the time must not be 1943.
Those are Japs and at that time HK is under Jap occupation.
Check the http://www.airmuseum.ca/rcn/
HMCS PRINCE ROBERT was in HK 1945 and with photos of Japs then.

Gungnir
February 28, 2009, 02:48 PM
Totally off topic but an interesting experience I had


PS. I noticed a couple of comments about US & UK beer. Reminded me of a joke:
Q. "Why is American beer like making love in a canoe?"
A. "Because it's f*#@*%g close to water!


Reminds me of my first experience of drinking in the US, after spending much of my drinking career in the UK. I'm 8 pints into a good night of beer, when all the Americans I'm with are looking at me, since I'm generally getting another round every 15 minutes. I stop for a moment and do a quick count (since I'm concerned I might have had significantly more than I remembered). Nope it's 8 pints, then it dawns on me, I'm pretty sober, I've got a bit of a beer buzz, but I'm not drunk at all. So after asking what's up and getting no responses, I keep going after getting weird looks at the quantities I'm drinking and leave.

Following day I'm asked whether I'm an alcoholic to which I respond no... Why? Well apparently sinking a 4 pints an hour is a bit unusual, and not getting falling down drunk is a bit unusual too.

Well I did the math shortly after and found two interesting facts

Fact 1 US pints are 16oz , British pints are 20oz So there's 20% less beer

Fact 2 The Beer I was drinking was only 3% ABV, I was used to beer that was 5.5% to 6% ABV double the alcohol.

So a 10 pint night in the UK (which was an occasional experience) would have been the equivalent of 24 American.

So the beer may be warmer in the UK, but it's a great deal stronger.

Brian Dale
February 28, 2009, 04:57 PM
That's because it's proper beer, not that freezing cold weasel's piss you lot drink.

That's kind of mean, and there's no need for exaggeration. ....{ETA: J/K!}

We get it from horses, because weasels are too hard to catch. :neener:

If you enjoyed reading about "Mills Bombs" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!