PC: Earlier Rifle Grenade
- Thread starter danwild6
- Start date
Hoist40
Banned
It was invented in the early 20th century so you might be able to push it back a few decades but you run into the problem that mass producing such a weapon would be difficult. They had trouble mass producing reliable fuses for artillery in the 19th century, so they would have similar problems with grenades and rifle grenades.
How much earlier do you want it? If you went with something hand made and primitive you could push the time back even farther but expect a few of them to blow up in your soldiers faces.
How much earlier do you want it? If you went with something hand made and primitive you could push the time back even farther but expect a few of them to blow up in your soldiers faces.
Fearless Leader
Donor
The way I see it, the development of a rifle grenade is mainly a conceptual barrier rather than a technological one so the potential is there quite early.
The only real technological barrier I can see is the limitations of black powder. Smokeless powder exerts a great deal more force than black powder and can thus throw a rifle grenade farther. Would black powder propelled rifle grenade be that much of an improvement over a hand thrown grenade?
The American Civil War particularly the siege of Richmond might be a good ignition point for such an invention someone figures out how to adapt Ketchum Grenades to be fired from rifles or something...
The only real technological barrier I can see is the limitations of black powder. Smokeless powder exerts a great deal more force than black powder and can thus throw a rifle grenade farther. Would black powder propelled rifle grenade be that much of an improvement over a hand thrown grenade?
The American Civil War particularly the siege of Richmond might be a good ignition point for such an invention someone figures out how to adapt Ketchum Grenades to be fired from rifles or something...
Grenade launchers were used during the black powder era, but were not that common.
Black powder can only launch the grenades that far, and limits in metallurgy made it hard to just pack in more gunpowder, especially if you were going to have the thing man-portable.
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31359
There were no things such as MG nests (which was what the ww1 rifle grenade was designed to take out) duing the earlier times, and thus there were little need for such a weapon.
If you make light, portable artillery (1-2pdrs) with Swedish anmarschbommar common, and increase light infantry warfare, they might see more use.
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31359
Black powder can only launch the grenades that far, and limits in metallurgy made it hard to just pack in more gunpowder, especially if you were going to have the thing man-portable.
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31359
There were no things such as MG nests (which was what the ww1 rifle grenade was designed to take out) duing the earlier times, and thus there were little need for such a weapon.
If you make light, portable artillery (1-2pdrs) with Swedish anmarschbommar common, and increase light infantry warfare, they might see more use.
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31359
Does this count: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_mortar ?
Edit: ninja'd by von Adler
Edit: ninja'd by von Adler
What about breaking up the orderly lines of infantry armies fought with then, that seems an obvious use.
A weapon has to;
A. Be feasible.
B. Be the solution to a problem faced by the user.
C. Fulfill a role another weapon does not to equally well.
Otherwise, the weapon will not be developed or used to any great extent.
The OTL rifle grenade was developed to give infantry firepower beyond throwing distance (since enemy MGs had firepower beyond throwing distance) and the ability to take out lightly fortified positions (MG nests) without calling in own artillery (which would take too much time).
For disrupting enemy formations, artillery and skirmishers were used. In times when artillery operated within direct line of sight of the enemy troops, there's little reason to add this firepower to the infantry, especially as it may very well pose a threat to the infantryman's own formation should it be improperly handled, would be expensive and have little use against cavalry (no bayonet, cavalry moves too fast) and light infantry.
A. Be feasible.
B. Be the solution to a problem faced by the user.
C. Fulfill a role another weapon does not to equally well.
Otherwise, the weapon will not be developed or used to any great extent.
The OTL rifle grenade was developed to give infantry firepower beyond throwing distance (since enemy MGs had firepower beyond throwing distance) and the ability to take out lightly fortified positions (MG nests) without calling in own artillery (which would take too much time).
For disrupting enemy formations, artillery and skirmishers were used. In times when artillery operated within direct line of sight of the enemy troops, there's little reason to add this firepower to the infantry, especially as it may very well pose a threat to the infantryman's own formation should it be improperly handled, would be expensive and have little use against cavalry (no bayonet, cavalry moves too fast) and light infantry.
Thanks for the replies guys. The invention of the Percussion cap would really be necessary to provide for a safe and reliable warhead.