Info Please

Does anyone know about a British anti-tank weapon that is very hard to describe. I saw it while watching "A Bridge too Far", It seems to toss a projectile from the end of a pipe-like divice, but not a rocket like a bazooka or shell like a recoiless rifle, it all seems very clumsy. Does anyone know about this?

The Blue Max

[ 15. July 2003, 01:19 AM: Message edited by: Blue Max ]

 

That would probably be a PIAT, Blue Max.

It looks like a bazooka which is being put on the ground. The a projectile is placed at the top and the thing is fired.

I'll try and find some pics on line.
From a site recently promoted by Sommecourt ( ): http://www.junobeach.org/e/4/can-tac-inf-pia-e.htm


http://www.extraplan.demon.co.uk/piat.htm

[ 15. July 2003, 01:23 AM: Message edited by: Stevin Oudshoorn ]

 

Stevin's right, this ws the PIAT which was used to considerable effect by the Para's at Arnhem.

There's a good pic and description at ; -

http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/piat.htm

 

Was it, Martin? I can remember hearing that the PIAT left a lot of soldiers frustrated as the 'knock out' power was not that big, but it was the best they had.

 

It did a pretty good job at Arnhem due to the close-in, built-up nature of the battlefield. German armour became quite fearful of the anti-tank capability of the British which made their advances into Oosterbeek from both West and East very tentative. And Major Robert Cain's use of the PIAT earned him a VC...

As to how many vehicles knocked out, that's an interesting point and one I'll have to look into.

 

I saw them use it in THEIRS IS THE GLORY. If I remember correctly the first PIAT strayed from its target and the second one was a hit. Wasn't there a problem with the accuracy of the weapon or did that solely depend on the gunner?

Any idea how many Piats were allocated to a company or similar? (maybe Sommecourt would know this too?)

If the weapon allows you to win a , it should be a bit of allright....Martin, do you know if THEIRS IS THE GLORY was ever released on video/dvd or something? I have a copy on video, taped from TV, but the quality is artocious. It was made by RANK and I een believe the original version doesn't exist anymore. This is one film I really like to have a good copy off.

 

I'll get back to you on the PIAT questions soon, Stevin - but you can get an excellent VHS video of 'Theirs Is The Glory' from the Airborne Museum Hartenstein Shop right now !

 

Whohoo!

It's off to Arnhem we go, we go

It's off to Arnhem we goooo

La la lala, la la lala

It's off to Arnhem we go!

Thanks Martin! I had no idea! You made my day.

 

I can't seem to find out how many PIATs were issued to platoons, etc - maybe we need input from Sommecourt or No 9 for this...

But the weapon itself is interesting. There seems to be an opinion that because it was British it must be eccentric/useless/a joke etc.

It was different to Panzerfaust/Bazooka it than it was not rocket-propelled ; in crude terms it is like a shoulder-fired mortar ( ). A spring-loaded spigot fired a charge in the base of the hollow-charge projectile. British soldiers HATED firing it - the spring gave heavy recoil and when fired the PIAT gave a vicious 'crack' which hurt the ears.

It was effective against vehicles at very close ranges indeed ( 25-50yds maximum ) but at that range it was quite deadly.

It 'came into it's own' at Arnhem for several reasons. Firstly, to be used effectively the firer needed to be very brave and very skilled - and the paras were. Then, in contrast to the Panzerfaust and Bazooka, it had no 'back-blast' to give away the firer's position. This also meant that it could be safely fired from inside buildings without causing them to catch fire. Conversely, it proved useful for 'clearing' buildings at ranges of up to 100yds by firing through windows with good blast effect.

So in short, it was almost perfectly suited to street-fighting in Oosterbeek....

 

PIATs were issued at one per rifle platoon.

Thus making 3 per rifle company for a Parachute Battalion and 4 per rifle company for an Airlanding Battalion (4 Plts).

In addition, the War Establishment for a Parachute Battalion in 1944 included an Anti-Tank Platoon in the Support Company which contained a further 10 PIATs. However, at Arnhem all Parachute Battalions with the exception of the 156, had an assault Pioneer Platoon instead. Thus Arnhem Paras were somewhat short of the official numbers.

At Arnhem I get the impression that the PIAT was more of a tank deterent in built up areas than a tank killer. But definitely could be termed as an APC killer. IMHO the majority of tank and APC kills were attributable to 6 and 17 pdr AT guns. Perhaps 50 percent of the vehicles knocked out in the Grabner charge were 6 pdr kills. The rest PIAT, AT mines and grenades.

Well Urquhart was impressed, so what do I know? In his report on the battle he states:

"The value of the PIAT in thick country and in built up areas as a tank destroying weapon is immense. All ranks have now complete confidence in its use and through the battle there was a constant cry for more PIATs. An increased establishment of these weapons for Para Bns and an initial allotment for the Lt Regt and A tk Btys is being demanded."

Peter

 

Thanks for clarifying that, Peter. I think Urquhart was probably a little over-enthusiastic about 'all ranks' enthusiasm for the weapon, but....

In fact, most of the damage during the Graebner attack was done by one 6-Pounder, Sgt Cyril Robson's gun.

The Gammon Bomb also played its' part in the Arnhem fighting. The PIAT for sure was no 'wonder-weapon', but in the right place at the right time, it was handy....

 

Also thanks for this corner, Peter. All this info make the pieces fall into place. Have been trying to read up on the weapon in the Arnhem books that I have, but so far have found not that much.

Was Arnhem the first big battle in which they were used so extensively?

Maybe I will be able to answer this question by myself in a few days when I have exhausted my sources...

 

Stevin, I'm certainly no authority on the PIAT, but I'm sure that by 1944 the PIAT had replaced the Bofors Anti-Tank rifle as the standard Commonwealth infantry handheld anti-tank weapon. So it definitely had been extensively used throughout the Western European and Mediterranean theatre before Arnhem.

Martin, definitely handy. Major Cain's VC citation affirms this, as well as the fact that he was one of the bravest soldiers who ever lived. I especially admire the part when even after he had been wounded several times and the PIAT ammo had ran out, he still went on tank hunting with a 2" Mortar! Well hard.

Cheers

Peter

[ 16. July 2003, 12:01 PM: Message edited by: PeterJ ]

 

Is that Bofors, or do you mean Boys, Peter ?

The Boys .55 inch A/T rifle was easily one of the most hated weapons in the British soldiers' armoury. I think it was probably OK against WW1 tanks and it was certainly effective against the unfortunate users' shoulder !

Cain was indeed quite a man - you can read most of his post-action diary from Arnhem in Simon Haines' home-made book, mentioned elsewhere.

 

Oh no! Of course it was the Boys! Rookie error.

I'm dying to get hold of Simon's book, but being stuck in Singapore, I'll just have to wait until I come back to the UK for Christmas.

Just heard from Niall Cherry that they will be publishing another South Staffs book in November. Since these are guys also did "Off At Last" and "Red Berets and Red Crosses", it should be agood'en. It'll be in the same format...with all that superb detail.

Peter

 

Be sure to ask Niall to save you a copy of 'B Company Arrived' - highly recommended and well up to Robert Sigmond's usual publishing standard....

 

Gents,

Any info on where these books can be gotten?

please....The addict in me is rearing its ugly head again....I need my fix....

 

Simon Haines' book you can get from..Simon Haines (!) and the B Company book can again be obtained via the Airborne Museum Hartenstein ( or, in the UK, direct from Niall Cherry ).

Although I must admit that I bought my copy from a lovely bookshop called 'Meijer & Siegers' at Utrechtseweg 208, Oosterbeek who actually stock a good selection of 'Arnhem' books in both Dutch and English.

 

Thanks Martin,

I have been in touch with Simon Haines and have a copy of his book coming my way. I guess a trip to Hartenstein becomes more and more imminent. The bookshop you mention rings a bell. I can hear it ringing, vaguely, in de back of my mind. Think I will visit those places sometime soon and also visit an excellent bookstore in Apeldoorn, where they have a lot of OOP titles too.

Maybe....

 

Couple of points they don’t press. Firstly the PIAT took strength to cock for the first round, almost impossible from anything other than a standing position. The base/shoulder piece had to be unlocked from the body then the two items pulled apart to prime the spring.

Secondly, the shell was designed to tackle up to 75mm (3”) of armour, but, only achievable with square impact. Effectiveness was reduced at any angle greater or smaller than 90%. Though the shell could be projected several hundred metres, the greater the distance the more you had to fire in an arc trajectory. Added to this the angled surfaces of a tank, the greater the probability of a considerably less than square-on 90% impact. A nice square walled building on the other hand?

I’ve have a record of a section of No.2 Commando having one of these at Comacchio. They came under fire from a wood across a field. The PIAT gunner fired a round into the trees and things went quiet. Later on he went to the area where he fired and found a dozen or so bodies. The PIAT shell had hit quite a substancial tree about 5 feet from the ground. There were splinters blasted everywhere while the tree trunk was about half blown away in its centre.

PIAT’s incidentally, were not always used by Commandos though they were at times as were flame-throwers to a lesser extent. Normal armament were Bren guns and 2” mortars, and their Heavy Weapons Troop were equipped with Vickers MG’s and 3” mortars.

With a Hollow Charge, the compartment holding the charge is concave or tapered, smallest at the rear and belling forwards. The long protruding firing pin is an attempt to detonate the shell several inches from the surface. The shape of the charge chamber is calculated according to an estimated stand off distance and speed and angle of impact. These of course could not be guaranteed in practice so there were variations of effectiveness. The principal is that the force generated by detonation works in an ‘X’ pattern. The central point of the ‘X’, ideally, being the outer surface of the object to be penetrated. Hence a relatively small hole on the outside, and a hole several times that size on the inside.



There’s several instances of PIAT use by the Regina Rifles in the first half of this article.
http://www.warchronicle.com/canadian_third_div/regimentals_wwii/reginas_normandy.htm

No.9