PIAT

Gotta wonder how hard it would be to build a PIAT.
I've got a document that states:
2nd December 1942: 800 guns have been delivered.
ICI is expecting to have 10,000 guns, with 50 rounds each delivered by 10/1/43, with additional appropriate drill and prac rounds. Then on 2,000 guns per week with appropriate ammo.
2,000 guns per week is roughly 1 per minute, assuming one 8 hour shift. No specialised equipment or heavy or high precision machine tools would be required. No scarce materials should be required. Most of the components could be done by subcontractors, as could the final assembly.

The projectiles themselves would be more of a problem, as you would need 50 times as many, and the assembly workers would need to know safe handling procedures for filling with explosives.

From that perspective, the PIAT itself would be easy to make. The main manufacturing issue would be the projectiles due to the number required. I would not be surprised if the ammunition complement for each was worth more than the PIAT itself.
 
Gotta wonder how hard it would be to build a PIAT.
I've got a document that states:
2nd December 1942: 800 guns have been delivered.
ICI is expecting to have 10,000 guns, with 50 rounds each delivered by 10/1/43, with additional appropriate drill and prac rounds. Then on 2,000 guns per week with appropriate ammo.
Manufacturing the PIAT in a country comprehensively set up for wartime production would have presented very little challenge I expect, as has been pointed out it's a really quite simple device with no odd materials, that any number of places could have turned out parts or whole units quite quickly.

As to the bombs there were ordnance factories turning out all sorts of bangy stuff and the bomb diagrams in the thread make it look far from complicated so again I bet they were being churned out at a great rate, especially when there was great demand for AT weapons.
 
No idea, but it never ceases to amase me how utterly and tightly controlled British production was during the War. The MoS really out did itself. Equally, lets be honest, the PIAT isn't exactly the most complicated weapon.

@HE117 A request for your insight, as you're the explosives expert.
They used a fully crewed an manoeuvring A.22 as a target tank for PIATS firing Mk.1 inert rounds (which I posted a cross section of earlier IIRC). They did however include the CE pellet. The commander of the tank reports that the hits filled his tank with smoke, although there's no indication of a penetration.
I would have thought the CE would have just given a very small 'bang' to indicate a hit? Although the photo's do seem to show a scorch mark on the hull.
CE (Composition Exploding or Tetryl) is a sensitive intermediary explosive with a high rate of detonation (about 7.6 Km/sec). If the booster was in contact with armour when it detonated, it would provide a significant shock effect to the target. I suppose the inert filling in the PIAT warhead would provide a degree of mitigation, but loosing HE against armour is a pretty robust effect for a practice round.

I would be surprised that such a practice would be allowed for a manned target. OK for a static hulk, but such a thing would not be allowed today. Practice charges should normally be of low explosive or pyrotechnic nature so that no shock effect can be transmitted..
 
CE (Composition Exploding or Tetryl) is a sensitive intermediary explosive with a high rate of detonation (about 7.6 Km/sec). If the booster was in contact with armour when it detonated, it would provide a significant shock effect to the target. I suppose the inert filling in the PIAT warhead would provide a degree of mitigation, but loosing HE against armour is a pretty robust effect for a practice round.

I would be surprised that such a practice would be allowed for a manned target. OK for a static hulk, but such a thing would not be allowed today. Practice charges should normally be of low explosive or pyrotechnic nature so that no shock effect can be transmitted..
Thanks,
I guessed it was the primary explosive. I suppose the nature of the inert filling would have been a factor as well.

Firing at manned tanks does seem to have been, if not common, then unknown. Chester Beatty devised a simple mortar that lobbed a glass bottle suing a shotgun cartridge. The glass bottle was similar to the No76 WIP. It was to be demonstrated agaisnt an old Vickers Light tank. The driver of the target was given the choice of driving or not.
Reportedly the Driver saw the Heath-Robinson nature of the weapon and was not concerned, and volunteered. At first it seemed like he'd made a good choice. The first round went over manoeuvring the tank at 120 yards. The Second round fired at about 100 yards hit the tank, right in the drivers visor. There was a huge flash of flame, some of which entered the tank, and caused the Driver to exit sharpish.

I've got another doc about testing the ROF and accuracy of PIAT. They used it agaisnt a manned Covenantor. Obviously the charges were inert. In this case of Inert PIAT rounds vs an A22, at least they didn't expect the round to penetrate and thus the crew to be safe.
At the same test they trailed another weapon, which they did expect to penetrate, and they dragged their target hulk along.
 
Nice safety drill, and a good demonstration of how it was fired.
Silly question: what's the role of the chap on the left? Loader is in the foreground. The chap on the right is sighting/traverse/elevation(?) and I assume firing the bombard. The chap on the left looks as if he may be holding something.
 
Very, very interesting, Wivenhoe is not that far from me. Thanks for posting!
Interesting that they are using Browning MMGs not Vickers (pistol grip rather than spade..) presumably lend-lease!
 
Lastly (sorry for spamming) from 6 mins 31 seconds here: v clear film. Watch until 10 mins to see C Coy awarded pennant for area Spigot Mortar Contest 1943.
I had no idea these local film archives existed tbh...some good film of the Northover Projector firing phosphorus grenades (I think) before 6mins, too.

Detail 10950 – Screen Archive South East

_20190427_002749.JPG
 
Last edited:
Silly question: what's the role of the chap on the left? Loader is in the foreground. The chap on the right is sighting/traverse/elevation(?) and I assume firing the bombard. The chap on the left looks as if he may be holding something.
Not a silly question.
No1 (on the left): is the gun commander. He controls the range and the weapon fire. You saw the range being set in the film.
No2 (on the right): Is the gunner dealing with traverse and swinging the gun about and firing.
No3: Loader
No's 4-5 (optional): Ammo numbers and local security.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top