PIAT
Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank | |
---|---|
Museum of Army Flying | |
Type | Anti-tank weapon |
Place of origin | United Kingdom |
Service history | |
In service | 1943–1950 |
Used by | British Empire & Commonwealth |
Wars |
|
Production history | |
Designer | Aperture sight |
Filling | Shaped charge[4] |
Detonation mechanism | Impact |
The Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank (PIAT) Mk I was a British man-portable
The PIAT was based on the
The PIAT was first used during the
Development
At the beginning of the Second World War, the British Army possessed two primary anti-tank weapons for its infantry: the
Due to these limits, a new infantry anti-tank weapon was required, and this ultimately came in the form of the Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank, commonly abbreviated to PIAT. The origins of the PIAT can be traced back as far as 1888, when an American engineer by the name of
Although the technology existed, it remained for British designers to develop a system that could deliver shaped charge ammunition in a larger size and with a greater range than that possessed by the No. 68. At the same time that Mohaupt was developing shaped charge ammunition,
When Blacker became aware of the existence of shaped charge ammunition, he realized that it was exactly the kind of ammunition he was looking for to develop a hand-held anti-tank weapon, as it depended upon the energy contained within itself, and not the sheer velocity at which it was fired.[14] Blacker then developed a shaped charge bomb with a propellant charge in its tail, which fitted into a shoulder-fired launcher that consisted of a metal casing containing a large spring and a spigot; the bomb was placed into a trough at the front of the casing, and when the trigger was pulled the spigot rammed into the tail of the bomb and fired it out of the casing and up to approximately 140 metres (150 yd) away. Blacker called the weapon the 'Baby Bombard', and presented it to the War Office in 1941.[14] However, when the weapon was tested it proved to have a host of problems; a War Office report of June 1941 stated that the casing was flimsy and the spigot itself did not always fire when the trigger was pulled, and none of the bombs provided exploded upon contact with the target.[15]
At the time that he developed the Baby Bombard and sent it off the War Office, Blacker was working for a government department known as
Jefferis took the prototype Baby Bombard apart on the floor of his office in MD1 and rebuilt it, and then combined it with a shaped charge mortar bomb to create what he called the 'Jefferis Shoulder Gun'. Jefferis then had a small number of prototype armour-piercing
There was disagreement over the name to be given to the new weapon. A press report in 1944 gave credit for both the PIAT and the Blacker Bombard to Jefferis. Blacker took exception to this and suggested to Jefferis that they should divide any award equally after his expenses had been deducted.[18] The Ministry of Supply had already paid Blacker £50,000 for his expenses in relation to the Bombard and PIAT.[19] Churchill himself got involved in the argument; writing to the Secretary of State for war in January 1943 he asked "Why should the name Jefferis shoulder gun be changed to PIAT? Nobody objected to the Boys rifle, although that had a rather odd ring." [19] Churchill supported Jefferis claims, but he did not get his way.[19] For his part Blacker received £25,000 from the Royal Commission on Awards to Inventors.[11][a]
Design
The PIAT was 39 inches (0.99 m) long and weighed 32 pounds (15 kg), with an effective direct fire range of approximately 115 yards (105 m) and a maximum indirect fire range of 350 yards (320 m).
Conventional spigot mortar designs have a fixed spigot rod, for example the Blacker Bombard. The moving spigot rod in the PIAT design was unusual, and served to help reduce recoil sufficiently to make it a viable shoulder fired weapon.[3]
The PIAT was a little lighter by about 1 kg (2 lb 3 oz) and about 0.6 m (2.0 ft) shorter than its predecessor, the Boys anti-tank rifle, although it was heavier than the 18 lb (8.2 kg) Bazooka.
To prepare the weapon for firing the spigot mechanism, which was operated by a large spring, had to be cocked, and to do this was a difficult and awkward process. The user had to first place the PIAT on its
Note, however, that troops were trained to cock the PIAT before expected use, and "in action the projector will always be carried cocked" (but unloaded).[3] Unless a stoppage occurred, it would not normally be necessary to manually re-cock the weapon in action.
When the trigger was pulled, the spring pushed the spigot rod (which has a fixed firing pin on the end) forwards into the bomb, which aligned the bomb, ignited the propellant cartridge in the bomb and launched it along the rod and into the air. The recoil caused by the detonation of the propellant blew the spigot rod backwards onto the spring, similar to that of a blowback operation; this reduced the shock of recoil and automatically cocked the weapon for subsequent shots, eliminating the need to manually re-cock.[8][22]
Tactical training emphasized that it was best used with surprise and concealment on the side of the PIAT team, and where possible enemy armoured vehicles should be engaged from the flank or rear. by placing the shoulder pad of the weapon on the ground and supporting it.
Despite the difficulties in cocking and firing the weapon, it did have several advantages. The Spigot mortar design allowed a large calibre powerful shaped charge bomb[8] giving greatly increased penetration power over the previous anti-tank rifles, allowing it to remain effective for the rest of the war; its construction was relatively simple and robust without a conventional barrel; there was no back-blast (unlike the contemporary American bazooka) that might endanger friendly troops and give the user's position away, this also meant that the PIAT could be used in confined spaces as in urban warfare; compared to the previous anti-tank rifles the muzzle blast was minimal, also a potential concealment issue. However, the weapon did have drawbacks. It was very heavy and bulky, which meant that it was often unpopular with infantry required to carry it.[21] There were also problems with early ammunition reliability and accuracy. Although the PIAT was theoretically able to penetrate approximately 100 millimetres (4 in) of armour, field experience during the Allied invasion of Sicily, which was substantiated by trials conducted during 1944, demonstrated that this capability was often nullified by problems of accuracy and round reliability. During these trials, a skilled user was unable to hit a target more than 60% of the time at 100 yards (90 m), and faulty fuses meant that only 75% of the bombs fired detonated on-target.[9]
Ammunition and effect
The PIATs' ammunition used the shaped charge principle, which, if the often unreliable early round design delivered it correctly to the target, allowed the warhead to penetrate almost all enemy armour types at close range.[25]
The following ammunition types were available in 1943.[3]
- Service Bomb - "Bomb, HE/AT"
- Manual says green, but museum examples seem to be brown.
- AT shaped charge warhead design. Supplied with the propellant cartridge fitted and the fuse separate.
- Versions:
- Mark I, 1942, Nobels 808 plastic explosive filling, green band
- Mark IA, Reinforced central tube
- Mark II, Revised nose fuse
- Mark III, Revised nose fuse, TNT filling, blue band
- Mark IV, July 1944, Revised construction to reduce rearward fragmentation and "back blast" of warhead explosion.
- Also useful as a general-purpose HE blast type round.
- Drill -"Bomb, Drill/AT"
- Black, marked "Drill"
- Same shape as a live round, for dry loading practice. Cannot be fired or dry fired.
- Practice Bomb - "Shot, Practice/AT"
- White
- Cylindrical thick steel construction, effectively a sub-calibre practice round. The PIAT requires a trough-like adapter to use it. Economical as it may be fired many times with new propellant cartridges. Trajectory slightly different to service bomb.
- Inert - "Bomb, Practice Inert/AT"
- Black, yellow ring, marked "Inert"
- Same size and weight as a live round, no warhead, but has a live propellant cartridge. It can be fired once from a standard PIAT, it is not re-usable.
Rounds were supplied in three-round ammunition cases with the propellant cartridge fitted and the fuses separate.
Getting the bomb to detonate reliably against angled targets was troublesome and was addressed with revised fusing. See also the bazooka, which had similar early problems.
The 1943 manual simply describes the service bomb as "H.E." or "HE/AT" and does not mention shaped charge as such. It notes that the bomb has "Excellent penetration. The bomb can penetrate the armour of the latest known types of enemy A.F.Vs. and a considerable thickness of reinforced concrete". It also notes that it may be used "as a house-breaker".
Operational history
World War II
The PIAT was used in all theatres in which British and other Commonwealth forces served.[16]
It entered service in early-1943, and was first used in action in March near
In
A contemporary (1944–45) Canadian Army survey questioned 161 army officers, who had recently left combat, about the effectiveness of 31 different infantry weapons. In that survey the PIAT was ranked the number one most "outstandingly effective" weapon, followed by the
An analysis by British staff officers of the initial period of the
As part of the
Six Victoria Crosses were awarded to members of the British and other Commonwealth armed forces for actions using the PIAT:[36]
- On 16 May 1944, during the Italian Campaign, Fusilier Frank Jefferson used a PIAT to destroy a Panzer IV tank and repel a German counterattack launched against his unit as they assaulted a section of the Gustav Line.[37]
- On 6 June 1944, Company Sergeant Major Stanley Hollis, in one of several actions that day, used a PIAT in an attack against a German field gun.[38]
- On 12 June 1944 Rifleman William Slim, why he went so close, he replied he was not certain of hitting with a PIAT beyond thirty yards (27 m).[40]
- Between 19 and 25 September 1944, during the
- On the night of 21/22 October 1944, Savio River in Italy.[42]
- On 9 December 1944, while defending positions in Faenza, Italy, Captain John Henry Cound Brunt used a PIAT, amongst other weapons, to help repel an attack by the German 90th Panzergrenadier Division.[43]
After World War II
The PIAT remained in service until the early 1950s, when it was replaced initially by the ENERGA anti-tank rifle grenade and then the American M20 "Super Bazooka".[16] The Australian Army briefly used PIATs at the start of the Korean War alongside 2.36-inch (60 mm) bazookas, but quickly replaced both weapons with 3.5-inch (89 mm) M20 "Super Bazookas".[44]
The
PIATs were also used by French and
The
Users
- Australia[31]
- Belgium[48]
- Canada[16]
- Free French Forces[35]
- Kingdom of Greece
- India[49]
- Israel[45]
- Luxembourg
- Netherlands known in Dutch service as granaatwerper tp (tegen pantser) ("grenade launcher anti-tank") entered service in 1943, with Dutch forces fighting under British command. It served into the 1950s.[51]
- New Zealand[52]
- Polish Underground[34]
- Soviet Union[33]
- United Kingdom[16]
- Yugoslav partisans[53]
- Malaysia
- Philippines
- North Vietnam Captured from France
Combat use
World War II:
- Battle of Normandy (France 1944)
- Battle of Arnhem (Netherlands, 1944)
- Battle of Ortona (Italy, 1943)
- Battle of Villers-Bocage (Normandy, France, 1944)
- Operation Epsom (Normandy, France, 1944)
- Operation Perch (Normandy, France, 1944)
- Warsaw Uprising (1944)
- Battle of Yad Mordechai (Israel, 1948)
- Battles of the Kinarot Valley (Israel, 1948)
- Battle of Longewala (India, 1971)[47]
See also
- Panzerfaust
- Bazooka
- RPG-1
- Type 4 70 mm AT Rocket Launcher
- Blacker Bombard
Notes
References
- ^ a b c d Hogg, p. 44
- ^ a b c d e f g Khan, p. 2
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j Small Arms Training P.I.A.T, The War Office, Army Council, June 1943, p. 1.
- ^ French, p. 89
- ISBN 9781131235172.
- ^ Moss, p.4
- ^ Khan, p. 1
- ^ a b c d e Weeks, p. 84
- ^ a b c French, pp. 88–89
- ^ a b Hogg, p. 42
- ^ required.)
- ^ Edgerton 2011, p. 261.
- ^ Hogg, pp. 42–43
- ^ a b Hogg, p. 43
- ^ Hogg, pp. 43–44
- ^ a b c d e f Khan, pp. 2–3
- ^ Khan, p. 4
- ^ Edgerton 2011, p. 160.
- ^ a b c Edgerton 2011, p. 161.
- ^ Cohen Commission 1957, p. 46.
- ^ a b Bishop, p. 211
- ^ a b Hogg, p. 45
- ^ Hogg, pp. 45–46
- ^ a b c Bull, p. 42
- ISBN 978-1-58663-762-0.
- ^ Moss, p.38
- ^ Moore, Craig. How to kill a Panther tank. p. 424.
- ISBN 9781739354725.
- ^ Neillands, p. 214
- ^ Moreman, p. 47
- ^ a b Kuring, p. 173
- ^ Library and Archives Canada, Record Group 24, Battle Experience Questionnaires, Vol. 10,450, Weekly Reports, Canadian Small Arms Liaison Officer Overseas, 1941–1945, C-5167
- ^ a b "Russia (British Empire war assistance)", Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), vol. 421, cc2517, 16 April 1946, archived from the original on 22 April 2023, retrieved 27 April 2009
- ^ a b Bruce, p. 145
- ^ a b Crowdy, p. 63
- ^ Khan, p. 3
- ^ "No. 36605". The London Gazette (Supplement). 11 July 1944. p. 3273.
- ^ "No. 36658". The London Gazette (Supplement). 15 August 1944. p. 3807.
- ^ "No. 36690". The London Gazette (Supplement). 7 September 1944. pp. 4157–4158.
- ^ Lt.Gen. Sir Geoffrey Evans and Anthony Brett-James Imphal- A Flower on Lofty Heights, Macmillan & Co., London, 1962, p. 310
- ^ "No. 36774". The London Gazette (Supplement). 31 October 1944. p. 5015.
- ^ "No. 36849". The London Gazette (Supplement). 19 December 1944. p. 5841.
- ^ "No. 36928". The London Gazette (Supplement). 6 February 1945. p. 791.
- ^ Kuring, p. 245
- ^ a b Laffin, p. 30
- ISBN 9781472828910.
- ^ a b Sharma 1990. Valour and Sacrifice: Famous Regiments of the Indian Army p.42
- ^ Guide Technique de Sous-Officiers du l'Infanterie 1954
- ^ Sharma, Gautam, Valour and Sacrifice: Famous Regiments of the Indian Army, Allied Publishers, 1990, p42
- ISBN 978-88-7904-001-3.
- ^ Talens, Martien. De ransel op de rug deel 2. Brabantia Nostra. p. 392
- ^ Phillips, p. 34
- ^ 12th Vojvodina Brigade 1983, p. 49.
Bibliography
- Bishop, Chris (2002). The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II: The Comprehensive Guide to Over 1,500 Weapons Systems, Including Tanks, Small Arms, Warplanes, Artillery, Ships and Submarines. Sterling Publishing Company, Inc. ISBN 978-1-58663-762-0.
- Bruce, George (1972). Warsaw Uprising. Harper Collins. ISBN 978-0-246-10526-4.
- Bull, Stephen; Dennis, Peter; Delf, Brian; Chappell, Mike; Windrow, Martin (2004). World War II Infantry Tactics. Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84176-663-8.
- Cohen Commission (1957). Awards to Inventors - Use of Inventions and Designs by Government Departments – via Archive.org.
- Copp, Terry (2004). Fields of Fire: The Canadians in Normandy. University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-0-8020-3780-0.
- Crowdy, Terry; Steve Noon (2007). French Resistance Fighter: France's Secret Army. Osprey. ISBN 978-1-84603-076-5.
- French, David (2001) [2000]. Raising Churchill's Army: The British Army and the War against Germany 1919-1945. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-924630-4.
- ISBN 978-0-19-983267-5.
- Hogg, Ian (1995). Tank Killers: Anti-Tank Warfare by Men and Machines. Pan Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-330-35316-8.
- Kuring, Ian (2004). Red Coats to Cams. A History of Australian Infantry 1788 to 2001. Sydney: Australian Military History Publications. ISBN 978-1-876439-99-6.
- Khan, Mark (April 2009). "The PIAT". Britain at War. April 2009 (24).
- Laffin, John; Chappell, Mike (1982). The Israeli Army in the Middle East Wars 1948-73. Osprey. ISBN 978-0-85045-450-5.
- Moreman, Tim (2006). Anderson, Duncan (consultant) (ed.). British Commandos 1940–1946. Battle Orders. Botley: Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84176-986-8.
- Moss, Matthew (2020). The PIAT Britain's anti-tank weapon of World War II. Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4728-3813-1.
- Neillands, Robin (2002). The Battle of Normandy 1944. Cassell. ISBN 978-0304358373.
- Rottman, Gordon L.; Noon, Steve; Windrow, Martin (2005). World War II Infantry Anti-Tank Tactics. Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84176-842-7.
- Phillips, Neville Crompton (1957). Italy Volume I: The Sangro to Cassino. The Official History of New Zealand in the Second World War 1939–1945. Wellington: Historical Publications Branch. Archived from the original on 26 March 2023.
- Weeks, John (1975). Men Against Tanks: A History of Anti-Tank Warfare. David & Charles. ISBN 978-0-7153-6909-8.