Index Home About Blog
From: (Gerald L. Hurst)
Newsgroups: alt.engr.explosives
Subject: Re: Explosive Ingredient Used in Grenades?
Date: 29 Feb 1996 18:23:02 GMT

In article <4h2gqa$>, <> says:

>I always thought that C-4 was the explosive used by the military for use 
>in grenades.  I was told today that C-4 was not used, but some other 
>"chemical explosive."  The source of this information wasn't very 
>trustable, so I'd like to verify this with someone else, thanks.

Fragmentation grenades have used a couple of ounces of composition
B or tetratol or the like. The performance is a little better than 
one could get from the same volume (or for that matter, weight)
of C-4.

Jerry (Ico)

Subject: Re: Antitank .50 Caliber Weapons at Waco
From: (Gerald L. Hurst) 
Date: Jun 01 1995

In article <3qk33f$>, 
(Michael ) says:

>In <3ptbrt$> (Gerald L. Hurst)
>> They used to use 1.9 oz of tetrytol or the explosive equivalent in 
>actually its comp b or rdx

Comp B certainly makes sense as a substitute for tetrytol. Picatinny 
Arsenal did some work on this substitution in primers back in the 1940's. 
Obviously one can run Comp B on an assembly line designed fo tetrytol 
without significant modification of the loading equipment, but the same is 
not true with RDX.

Please tell us what method is used to load the RDX and what the final 
charge density is.

I saw Mr. Segal pour a granular material from what looked like a 
conventional pineapple on the telly last night.  I've seen such material 
used for flash grenades, but not a fragmentation device.  Of course, a 
granular material will work, but it is a bit unlike the military to 
sacrifice fragment velocity for convenience.

Thanks in advance.


Subject: Re: Antitank .50 Caliber Weapons at Waco
From: (Gerald L. Hurst) 
Date: May 23 1995

In article <3pt67b$>, says:

>>Wrong! Weld up the hole, buy fuses at the local gun show, fill with 
>>explosives and you have a live grenade.
>Yes, you do have a grenade, but not a good one.  The resulting grenade
>from your little recipe will send all explosive force downwards,
>resulting in a functional, but not nearly so functional as the real
>thing, grenade.  You'd be just as well off making pipe bombs and
>scoring the exterior with a metal lathe.

Strange forum for this subject, but ...

Nope, if you use a high explosive, it won't care whether there's a hole or 
not.  The enormous and nearly instantaneous detonation pressure will 
fragment the casing and accelerate the metal bits to high velocity long 
before much of the gas can escape.  That's what separates high explosives 
from gunpowder.  They used to use 1.9 oz of tetrytol or the explosive 
equivalent in grenades.


Subject: Re: Antitank .50 Caliber Weapons at Waco
From: (Gerald L. Hurst) 
Date: May 20 1995

>Michael Greb ( wrote:
>      Isn't the alloy of hand grenades to soft for welding?
>      Curious .......

It really doesn't matter, because chewing gum will work just as well when 
a high explosive is used.  Confinement is not needed with such materials. 
It might also be pointed out that ordinary cast iron pipe fragments well 
enough for the horrible purpose of a grenade.  We made pop up wide 
dispersal mines from sections of commercial cast iron pipe for perimeter 
defense systems during the Viet Nam war.


From: (Gerald L. Hurst)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Re: Re
Date: 9 Apr 1996 10:04:57 GMT

In article <>, (Sweden) says:

>In Sweden we use 170 g of pressed TNT in our shrapnel hand grenades. This 
>amount is leathal (by pressure) within 5 m radius according to military

Maybe in Sweden, but nowhere else. 170 grams @ 5 m is a heck of
a hardship on the ears, but it would not generate enough impulse
to kill anyone. The shrapnel is a different matter, of course.


P.S. you're right about there being too many of us off-topic posters
in rec.pyro. I'll set a good example by being the first to go.

Jerry (Ico)

Index Home About Blog