previous post next post  

Riling the natives back up...

Solving the whatziss...  Not an egg cup.  Nope, it wasn't the canvas it was resting on (though that was a good sly shot!)

Well, we didn't, really.  But don't feel bad - I'm not all that sure, either.

Yep, it was a US 60mm mortar round and fuze, both mid-70's dated.

Yep, it was a (inert) Bulgarian RPG rocket motor.

Because that's what I had in the holdings of the Arsenal.  I'm missing a key piece - the collar that mates the two.

Like this Iranian example. 

The Iranian example has an older version of the fuze, and I assume the same is probably true for the round. 

As several of you noted, because of the set-back requirement, unless this fuze has been modified, you're going to have to whack it on something before firing.  It's possible, and I dunno without testing I'm not equipped to do, if the shock of the initial expelling charge would be sufficient to arm the fuze or not - assuming that this is fired from a standard launcher...

Of course, Bill brought up the possibility that it is simply a field expedient long-handled hand grenade.

Dunno.  The website I found this on didn't elaborate - though they clearly thought it was some form of making a field expedient HE-frag round for the RPG.  I've got an inert RPG laying about, I think I'll see if I can get a sense for the weight and balance changes. 

But I do know this - unless they've made some significant changes to the fuzing, I wouldn't want to be the user!


IIRC RPG family rounds self detonate at a fixed time of flight so as an indirect fire  weapon that could be a problem. Using a mortar round as a warhead makes some sense. If a thump on the tail fin is enough to arm the round I suspect the RPG boost should be enough. But, a commando style 60 mm tube and conventional rounds make more sense.
 1. The fuse on the PG-7 round is at the rear of the warhead, where it can be activated by the firing of the boost/ejection motor. Then the timer fuse activates as a safety and detonates c.850m downrange.
2. My guess is in favour of an improvised PG-7 round, although I too am suspicious of the weight and balance solution.
3. Stick grenade? The Wehrmacht had several versions made from recycled propellent, with the warhead and handle cast in the bangy stuff. But I can't quite see the value of using a rocket motor's fuel to increase the warhead's effect. 


Lemme see if I got this right.

You gave us a whatziz that you didn't even know whatwas?
Much more fun than just throwing up the pic and asking though, wasn't it? 
I remember, in "Saving Private Ryan", they had mortar shells (bombs) but no mortars, and thus thumped the shells on their tails before throwing them. People on the Internet objected, saying that it would take a much harder lick than that to turn off that safety gizmo. Does anyone here have access to any original Ordnance data, with NUMBERS, which could tell us if it's possible for a man to give one of those a sufficient jolt to do that?
P.s. Oh, even better than Ordnance NUMBERS would be actual experimental data, thwacking mortar shells on their tails, which have had all of their kaboomy contents removed.

A lot of people don't realize, that the folks who invent fuzes use lots of ingenuity to make sure that the kaboomy thing will not, and shall not, go off unless and until it is time for the kaboom.
The initating charge on a 60mm (ie no powder bags) is about the equivilant of a 12 guage shotgun shell, anybody got any idea of the foot pounds etc. involved?
Old Fat, we'd need to know the mass of the shell, the pressure behind it in the tube, and so forth. I'm sure that the data about how hard you need to kick that thing in the butt to turn off that safety exist somewhere, but finding them might be right hard for us ordinary folks.
Way cool. A way cool whatsis, thanks. Keep 'em coming.
Still no numbers, I see. Somebody needs to do the experiment, with the shell filled with something inert of the same mass as the charge, and a tiny little squib instead of the initiator, well-vented with holes. 
We're all waiting the results of your testing, JTG.