Piat

Suicidal!
Sapper

 

PIAT was a spigot-gun, a concept with which the British had a considerable fling in the last half of WW2. Other examples were the Hedgehog and Squid anti-submarine mortars, and the 'Flying Dustbin' demolition mortar of the Churchil AVRE tanks used in NW Europe.

There was a propellant charge, carried in the tail-tube of the bomb. The spring-driven spigot was pushed up the tube and the charge fired, blowing the bomb off the end. If the fins came back, that must have been a fault condition, as they were supposed to stabilise the bomb's flight. The back-pressure from the propellant was supposed to re-cock the spigot, which would have produced severe recoil. On the other hand, the weapon could easily be fired from inside a house or pillbox, which a bazooka or panzerschreck could not, due to the lethal wash of backblast.

PIAT could and did take out Tigers, at Arnhem and elsewhere.

Regards,
MikB

 

(MikB @ Dec 18 2005, 05:09 PM) [post=43334]PIAT was a spigot-gun, a concept with which the British had a considerable fling in the last half of WW2. Other examples were the Hedgehog and Squid anti-submarine mortars, and the 'Flying Dustbin' demolition mortar of the Churchil AVRE tanks used in NW Europe.

There was a propellant charge, carried in the tail-tube of the bomb. The spring-driven spigot was pushed up the tube and the charge fired, blowing the bomb off the end. If the fins came back, that must have been a fault condition, as they were supposed to stabilise the bomb's flight. The back-pressure from the propellant was supposed to re-cock the spigot, which would have produced severe recoil. On the other hand, the weapon could easily be fired from inside a house or pillbox, which a bazooka or panzerschreck could not, due to the lethal wash of backblast.

PIAT could and did take out Tigers, at Arnhem and elsewhere.

Regards,
MikB
[/b]
If the propellant was supposed to re-cock it, then it must have taken a lot of velocity off the round and limited its range.

 

(jimbotosome @ Dec 19 2005, 02:29 PM) [post=43344](MikB @ Dec 18 2005, 05:09 PM) [post=43334]PIAT was a spigot-gun, a concept with which the British had a considerable fling in the last half of WW2. Other examples were the Hedgehog and Squid anti-submarine mortars, and the 'Flying Dustbin' demolition mortar of the Churchil AVRE tanks used in NW Europe.

There was a propellant charge, carried in the tail-tube of the bomb. The spring-driven spigot was pushed up the tube and the charge fired, blowing the bomb off the end. If the fins came back, that must have been a fault condition, as they were supposed to stabilise the bomb's flight. The back-pressure from the propellant was supposed to re-cock the spigot, which would have produced severe recoil. On the other hand, the weapon could easily be fired from inside a house or pillbox, which a bazooka or panzerschreck could not, due to the lethal wash of backblast.

PIAT could and did take out Tigers, at Arnhem and elsewhere.

Regards,
MikB
[/b]
If the propellant was supposed to re-cock it, then it must have taken a lot of velocity off the round and limited its range.
[/b]
The charge as I understand it was "calculated" to do both jobs (fire & cock) for 75mm penetration under 100yds which is not a bad weapon on paper for a forward patrol who has the time and opportunity to be imaginative.

I can only imagine the nasty recoil of this on the shoulder as I used to "feel" my Winchester 44mag rifle before I padded it. (I was just a kid!!!!!)

http://www.battlefront.co.nz/Article.asp?ArticleID=194

A love-hate relationship

The men of the British army were of mixed opinion on the PIAT, they found it heavy, cumbersome, difficult to cock and hard on the shoulder when fired. But it proved an effective anti-tank weapon, capable of defeating most tanks when used with cunning and daring.

 

Thanks, I looked it up and someplace quoted 1500 were made, this appears to be an error, its more like 11,500.
Regards
MG

 

Was looking at a Piat in the Hertenstein Hotel museum last week. Veteran with me says "you could see the round arc to the target, bit like lobbing a ball under-arm, hated the damn thing". My Father said they only liked to use it to enter buildings when clearing houses etc. Said it would near enough take a wall out. He, like Sapper, thought you needed to be almost 'Kamikaze' to use it on tanks etc. Tha man with the Piat had drawn the short straw!!