Mills Bombs

[Mk VII]

The M1 Garand has never seen British service.

Yes it has.

[CWL]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

"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]

Custer had several Gatling guns...

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

[Davo]

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]

’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]

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]

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]

born in the USA

last time i checked that makes him AMERICAN

[loose cannon]

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 Keenan]

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]

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]

Re: M1 Garand, I have pictures somewhere of Royal Marines with issued US cold weather gear and M1 Garand’s, green berets and 44 pat webbing. The pictures are from a book about Royal Marines in Korea.

The reason we don’t change weapons and equipment for the lasts model is “if it isn’t broke don’t fix it” and it’s defiantly easer to say go get the Gimmpy than the L7A1, never could get attached to a list of letters and numbers.

[Khornet]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

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
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

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