• glitchdx@lemmy.worldEnglish
    962·
    24 days ago

    baseball.

    The average American could be expected to already know how to throw a baseball, so it was easier to change the equipment to fit the user than to train every fucking soldier how to throw a lopsided stick.

    • SSTF@lemmy.worldEnglish
      34·
      24 days ago

      That and all the other reasons. The only stick grenades still around in appreciable numbers are anti-armor grenades where the handle has a parachute inside. For normal fragmentation grenades, essentially everyone has moved to non-stick grenades (except the USMC who want to make stick grenades).

      Even in WW2, the Germans produced more of the boring looking Model 39 grenades than they did of the iconic and eye catching stick grenades. People notice what they want to notice.

        • SSTF@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          23 days ago

          Why I hedge with “essentially everyone” because I know some obscure Literally Who is always going to be an exception.

    • Atomic@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      17·
      23 days ago

      That’s a reason for then not now.

      Better question is then why didn’t Germany stick with the old design instead of switching to more “modern” looking grenades?

      And the answer is NOT “baseball”. The answer is that they’re too heavy and cumbersome. And the cons outweighs the pros.

      • Madison420@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        22 days ago

        It’s actually that they’re more expensive when you add the frag jacket to them. There cheaper to produce but logistically more expensive being larger and multi part.

    • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.worldEnglish
      141·
      23 days ago

      Is this why soldiers in the rest of the world kick their grenades like a soccer ball?

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.worldEnglish
      61·
      23 days ago

      Knife juggler here, so I have a lot of experience throwing off-CG objects…

      It’s not really that different from throwing a baseball. It’s a little more difficult to catch, but with very little practice ( like 5 or 10 minutes) you’ll be able to do it. That being said, I think the “baseball” style grenades where adopted because they can fit through smaller openings, you can roll or tumble them towards your target, they’re harder to see, and harder to scoop up and throw back.

    • Acters@lemmy.worldEnglish
      53·
      24 days ago

      I thought it was American football as the design is more shaped to be more closely resembling a hand held size 🏈

      American football was simply more popular back then too, but a little less now in terms of ratio, but the crowd has still grown instead of shrinking/stagnantion

      • Artyom@lemm.eeEnglish
        21·
        24 days ago

        A football is WAY bigger than a grenade, and football was way less popular in the 40s because 1. Baseball came first and 2. Baseball is better in person and TVs sucked. Even if more people play football now, it’s still better to design grenades around baseballs because you spend more time practicing with a ball in baseball, and only one person per team knows how to throw a football.

        • qarbone@lemmy.worldEnglish
          53·
          24 days ago

          As someone who played football (american), that is incorrect. Most people on the team learn how to throw it properly, with the spiral. You like the game, so you toss around the ol’ pigskin.

          The quarterback is chosen for a variety of reasons.

      • EvolvedTurtle@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        24 days ago

        In my opinion I think it’s more likely for someone to have played baseball then football

        Cause football needs alot more prep when baseball can be just a random school activity

        Note: I’m not athletic at all and this is just based on my personal experiences

  • yesman@lemmy.worldEnglish
    82·
    24 days ago

    The Germans did have hand grenades without a stick. Their doctrine was the stick type was for offensive operations, and the little one was favored for defense.

    I assume this has something to do with the distance you can throw them.

      • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        5·
        24 days ago

        throw a parachute on it so it’s aligned vertically, make it detonate when it lands, make it blow straight down as opposed to all over the place, and try to get that thing to land on a tank

        You’ve basically just described a HEAT round without the melted copper penetrator.

        • SSTF@lemmy.worldEnglish
          9·
          24 days ago

          Actually, they just described a HEAT grenade. Of the cute anti-armor grenades with parachutes, the RKG-3 is a great example. The purpose of the parachute is to make sure the HEAT penetrator is facing the right direction.

          • SSTF@lemmy.worldEnglish
            4·
            24 days ago

            everyone figured out that cope cages and improvised shields create such a gap that renders them mostly useless

            Not sure how much I really want to commit to that air gap idea. Pretty much every time there is data, the ideal standoff is somewhere between 8 and 12 times the diameter for a given HEAT warhead.

            The nets and cages seen like on US vehicles weren’t designed to give standoff on an ideal detonation, but to catch the nose of an incoming round in the open space and hopefully strip apart or dud it. It is commonly called “statistical armor” because it relies on the statistical chance of being hit in the right place to work.

            MPDI link article with charts and more explanation.

            Against a weapon which won’t be shorted out by this armor it is, well, cope. The reason you don’t see RKG-3s often in Ukraine footage is more likely they they aren’t common, and other better options that can be fired accurately and from more distance are.

          • SSTF@lemmy.worldEnglish
            6·
            24 days ago

            HEAT is just a type of warhead. You can put it into lots of things. You are correct that the front of the warhead needs to be facing the target.

            In hand grenades, the penetrator usually faces down compared to the “stick”. The sticks in these grenades are not simple wooden sticks, but hollow metal ones containing parachutes. The grenade is meant to be thrown in a large arc or dropped from above (from a bridge or building) on to the tank. The parachute helps drag the back of the grenade and keep the penetrator pointed at the target (maybe).

      • taladar@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        3·
        24 days ago

        I would assume in bunkers you don’t want to try to throw the stick version through the small slits or windows.

    • SSTF@lemmy.worldEnglish
      16·
      24 days ago

      Their doctrine was the stick type was for offensive operations

      A minor addendum, the M24 and M43 stick grenades both had fragmentation sleeves produced for them. These could be quickly fitted over the grenades to change them from offensive to defensive grenades. Similar to the RGD-33 stick grenades used by the Soviets.

      I assume this has something to do with the distance you can throw them.

      The difference between offensive and defensive grenades is defined by how much fragmentation they produce. Without a fragmentation sleeve, a German stick grenade produces blast and concussion but very minimal fragmentation, making it’s practical danger area smaller. This is good for an offensive grenade where the person throwing it likely has less cover than the person receiving it. A defensive grenade produces fragmentation, and is desired when the person throwing it has cover to hide behind safely.

      The non-stick grenade commonly used by the Germans in WW2, was the Model 39 (“egg grenade”), and it actually came in both offensive and defensive flavors. So really, either a stick or egg grenade could be used for either role.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      24 days ago

      Their doctrine was the stick type was for offensive operations, and the little one was favored for defense.

      Hmm…defensive hand grenades. There’s something crazy I’ve wondered before; is there anywhere it’s legal to use hand-grenades as a form of home defense?

      Let’s say you live on a big property in the middle of nowhere, like a ranch out in West Texas. So you know that if you detonate a hand grenade on your property, you can be absolutely sure that the fragments won’t fly through your walls and hit a neighbor. Let’s say you live alone, and you’re so stupid wealthy that you don’t give a damn about grenade damage in your own home.

      Imagine this is true. Is there anywhere in the US you could legally keep a crate of hand grenades in a gun safe, and just start chucking them at a home invader?

      • glimse@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        24 days ago

        It isn’t legal to own hand grenades in the US so I would imagine the self defense part would be irrelevant.

        Though I’d imagine it they might be allowed if they were legal because you can use, say, your car as a weapon in self defense…

        • HelixDab2@lemm.eeEnglish
          4·
          24 days ago

          It isn’t legal to own hand grenades in the US

          Not correct. It’s an ‘other destructive device’, and is covered under the National Firearms Act of 1934. Each one would require completing a transfer form, waiting for approval from the ATF, and cost $200 for the tax stamp. …And would then be usable exactly once.

          You might be able to manufacture a grenade with an ATF Form 1 approval, but I’m not positive. And, again, it’s a single-use item that requires a $200 tax stamp.

  • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.deMEnglish
    36·
    23 days ago

    3/4 of volume is taken by wood, what are you, russian logistics officer?

    also no way to attach spoon-type igniter, this thing is properly ancient design

  • Darkassassin07@lemmy.caEnglish
    26·
    24 days ago

    >can give you pleasure

    Are we saying blowing stuff up is fun, or telling you to go fuck yourself with a grenade?

    • SSTF@lemmy.worldEnglish
      22·
      24 days ago

      TNT filler is very stable. It’s fine. I mean, the grenades would not be great as hammers, but they won’t explode at a touch.

    • Sylvartas@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      23 days ago

      Not sure if you’re joking but the German Stielhandgranate was literally nicknamed “potato masher” by soldiers, so there may be some truth to that

  • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    7·
    24 days ago

    Clearly their biggest weakness was not being heavy enough. I suggest the next generation have a baseball bat for a handle.