Talk:Hand grenade

message: I removed the Dirty tricks section, seen below. I don't see the point of having this section. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think Wikipedia needs to be in the business of providing how-to's on explosive booby-traps. -Rholton (aka Anthropos) 04:01, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Dirty tricks

message: In addition, perhaps this should be moved to "hand grenade"? It only discusses grenades operated by the hand, but what about grenade launchers and rocket propelled grenades? Clearly these are not hand grenades if not operated by the hand, but many of the principles apply. (I'll correct the article's incorrect implicit assertion that all grenades are hand-operated now.) --Furrykef 08:48, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one opposed User:Furrykef, I moved the article. This article doesn't mention anything about any other grenades than those that are thrown. I fixed almost all double-redirects but those that actually need to link to "grenade" instead of "hand grenade". I could also fix other articles that link to grenade when they actually mean hand grenades. We need a separate grenade article. For now it can just redirect to hand grenade. --ZeroOne 19:42, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: I remember reading something about some modern hand grenades having microcontroller/accelerometer controlled detonators, designed so they don't go off if you simply drop them at your feet (think in terms of measuring the duration of zero-g motion). Can anyone confirm/deny this? -- The Anome 09:33, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: safety feature

message: Under which category would high explosive (offensive) grenades, like the British No. 69 fit? Oberiko 02:28, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I reckon that it belongs alongside the Mills bomb, Steilhandgranate, and the like. The problem is that 'fragmentation' is too restrictive, it ought to be renamed anti personnel grenades. Presumabley the flying bakelite did cause some injuries on top of the blast. Go on! You make the change. GraemeLeggett 16:19, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: High explosive grenades

message: Whoever keeps removing what I put up about where to buy smokes grenades needs to STOP.  I don't see what is wrong with providing where to buy them.  They are great for paintball.  No matter how many times you remove it I will continue to post it.  From: The angry Mr. Smokey
: YOU need to stop putting that in. 
:1)because its against the no-advertising policy of wikipedia.
:2) It's only useful to a small number of people - those who want to buy smoke grenades AND live in that geographical area. GraemeLeggett 16:06, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smoke grenades 

message: Didn't early HGs use an acid timing mechanism? Rich Farmbrough 14:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Timeing mechanisms

message: From the article: "A common mistake is grasping the grenade in the weak hand, pulling the pin and then throwing the pin." Now, I'm not in the military, but this doesn't really strike me as a particularly common mistake to make. --193.11.222.179 19:31, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Throwing the pin

message: As a US Soldier two things about this article struck me as off, but perhaps still correct:
(1)
"US and other NATO soldiers (with the exception of the US Marines) are trained not to "burn off" or "cook off" grenades..." 
I went threw basic training at Ft. Knox in 2000 and did train on cooking off grenades. Perhaps that isn't what they were suppose to train me in, but in my 6-year military career (including a deployment to Iraq) I have never been told not to cook-off my grenades.
(2)
All US soldiers going through Basic Combat Training (BCT) for the US Army must throw a live grenade. So the caption on the picture of the soldier throwing a grenade that says throwing a dummy grenade is a part of Basic Training is misleading (though that might be what the soldier pictured is in fact doing).
Same. In the UK armed forces you use them in training (but only one or two, mainly its dummies) and you are told how to cook off, although you are advised not to use it unless you need to.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.93.46 (talk) 00:23, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccurate? 

message: Gents, your initial picture of what you call "A WWII-era MkIIA1 "pineapple" fragmentation hand grenade" is actually a commercial reproduction of an M21 practice grenade body using an M228 practice grenade fuze (that is normally used with the M69 practice grenade). Just letting you know that I will be changing the picture to one that actually shows what you describe.
--Eodtek 21:12, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial picture wrong 

message: I read in an older book and another source that the German forces during the Second World War actually produced hand and rifle grenades containing propaganda leaflets.  I can't imagine them being even vaguely effective, but wonder if something could or should be added to this wiki article.
:They indeed did exist.  I'll add some info. shortly.--Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs) 21:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda Grenades? 

message: What is the level of risk of damage to the target individual?  I would think such a device could put out an eye at the very least, and perhaps do serious soft-tissue damage.  This could be lethal if the soft tissue in question were the throat.
Anyone have any information on this?
Septegram 02:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sting Grenade 

message: The passage "Thermate and white phosphorus" was changed to "Thermite and white phosphorous."  However, elsewhere in the article we do see references to thermate.  (all italics mine)
Which is correct in this context?
Septegram 16:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incendiary Grenades 

message: An example of a MILES (laser light stimulation) grenade, developed by Sandia labs for the US Gov't, is found here: .  These grenades can be used in MILES training (training using blanks and laser light)  Raylopez99 22:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MILES Grenades 

message: Easily a B-class. I don't know if this is quite ready for GA or A-class nomination, but within my personal conception of the assessment system, it's at the top edge of B-class. Length and depth is great - you've discussed not only the basic grenade, but its history, the etymology of the word, and a good number of the most common types of grenades. Plus there's tons of pictures. Thank you for mentioning the Chinese origins and pre-modern history of the grenade concept. Far too many articles on modern militaries skip that part entirely. Good work. LordAmeth 00:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WP:MILHIST Assessment

message: Is this correct? (I've been close to more than one flash powder detonation in my time, and the noise is truly mind-buggering). However, according to the Acoustic Weapons Page, anything over 160 dB, even at short exposure, can cause eardrum rupture and permanent hearing loss. (120 dB is the pain threshold). Can someone fact-check this?
:Sound level depends on distance, and there's no standard measuring distance.  A flashbang might measure 180 dB at six inches, but 160 dB at ten feet. --Carnildo 06:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Flashbang - 180 dB?

message: Under the heading "Characteristics" and the subheading "Using grenades," the article describes the safety handle as "sometimes incorrectly called a 'spoon.'" But I think this term is popular enough among actual members of the armed forces that it should be considered a nickname, not a mistake. It’s not like they don’t know the proper name, they just choose to call it a spoon.
yeah its a spoon to most soldiers
Yeah its a called both here in the UK 86.16.153.191 (talk) 02:12, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Safety handle incorrectly called a spoon? 

message: are they legal in the US?
:Well, obviously if you're walking around downtown wearing a belt of frag grenades you're bound to raise some sort of suspicion, and I can't think of any scenarios where actually discharging one would be justified (impractical for hunting, too dangerous for self-defense), so my guess would be no. It's a hard subject to track down... Phort99 05:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're as legal as any other explosive weapon or ammunition round is in the United States - They're classified as a "Destructive Device" under Federal law, and you have to have either a Destructive Devices manufacturers, importers, or dealers Federal Firearms License, or BATF item-by-item approval, and a $200 transfer tax payment per item you purchase as an individual.  There is no blanket prohibition (the Military buys its materiel from manfacturers licensed under these laws, and there are legal arms import/export dealers, and others who have permits for them).  Georgewilliamherbert 05:26, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Legality?

message: My friend claimed that grenades are not timed. He says this because he saw a video of a man holding a few people hostage with a grenade. The man pulled the pin and the grenade did not explode for the duration of the entire video. I thought it was possible to prevent the fuse from lighting by holding a safety switch down? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.66.82 (talk • contribs) 
:The timer starts once the lever is released. It's so that you don't have to pull the pin and throw immediately (among other things). — SheeEttin {T/C} 23:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not entirely there are granades that detonate on impact.--Tresckow 23:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timer 

message: Anyone like the images  or ? The first is a model from the game America's Army, so it's PD-Government, I think. The second is a replica M84, probably copyrighted. — SheeEttin {T/C} 23:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flashbang image 

message: In the "History" section, I find it odd that it skips from "ineffective" grenades in the English Civil War to the American Civil War two centuries later; in between, grenades were obviously used and improved as well.  Reading through Tolstoy's War and Peace, I find that grenades are often mentionned; not only that, but, obviously, there are soldiers reffered to as "grenadiers".  So it seems to me that, perhaps, there would be something worth mentionning with regards to eighteenth and early nineteenth century usage as well, no?70.81.243.107 13:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They were used extensively in formal siege warfare in the final stage of the assault on the covered way and defense of the ramparts. I have some references -including on to a stock of 36,000 grenades in store at one fortress- which I can hopefully addBenvenuto (talk) 06:12, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This fault is still there in the article, skipping two hundred years of history that included the development of grenadiers as specialist elite assault troops around the War of the Spanish Succession. "When e'er we are commanded To storm the palisades Our leaders march with fusees And we with hand-grenades..." Cyclopaedic (talk) 10:36, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Napoleonic Wars

message: Hello everybody, and sorry for my bad english.
	
It is right to warn you that I have just made this diagram, and I made an [[english version version. Here!
Cordially
83.203.246.253 19:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Image:Schema Grenade-en.svg]] 

message: No disrespect to the Chinese who almost certainly invented gun powder, but am I the only one who is sceptical about that picture of a "hand grenade"? It looks to me like a demon carrying a flaming orb.--MacRusgail 19:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  That Chinese picture 

message: Hi guys, great article!
I heard somewhere that you need 5lbs of pressure to pull out a grenade pin (I have no way of verifying this, in fact I think my crusty old dad said it to me, and I have not idea what 5lbs of pressure equates to) and therefore it can't be done with your teeth. 
Do we think this should be mentioned in the article somewhere, as most people seem to believe that it can be done. I've had a bit of trouble finding good sources but I have these; 
*4th paragraph
*just above where it says "Technical Note"
*4th picture
*8th paragraph (in brackets)
Let me know what you think guys.
Also I know one of the presenters tried it and couldn't do it on Mythbusters Episode 81 - Grenades and Guts (Hand Grenade Hero). Ryan4314 (talk) 12:12, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If your teeth can't stand five pounds of lateral force, you need to see a dentist.  Key point is that you don't grip it between your incisors, you grip it between your molars. --Carnildo (talk) 03:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't think it was possible, I just can't find a decent source. Ryan4314 (talk) 05:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Much as I love Mythbusters, that Adam couldn't pull a pin out of a modern grenade doesn't mean it couldn't be done with WWII American grenades, or foreign grenades, or antique grenades, or by someone who was really desperate. Piano non troppo (talk) 06:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pulling out the pin with your teeth! 

message: I introduced the paragraph about grenade use in American Civil War and revised the text about "Vasic" granade, written in poor English (although the mine is also not perfect). The possible Serbian participation in the plot was subject of POV Dispute in the article on Assassination in Sarajevo, so I found better to drop "false accussation"  and use "alleged participation".201.53.214.97 (talk) 20:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Civil War and "Vasic" 

message: There were several occasions in Vietnam in which people died when trying to saw grenades. They did that to sell the metals as recyclable materials or to get the explosives.
Is there any possible way to saw a grenade without causing an explosion? I wonder if it's 100% sure that sawing a grenade will cause it to explode, no matter whether the safety pin is removed or not.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophisticate20 (talk • contribs) 08:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be nice to have a newspaper citation for your Vietnam statement, then we could add it to the article.  Let us know what you find out on your other question.  --CliffC (talk) 13:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the effort, but unfortunately these links would not be of use in the English language Wikipedia.  --CliffC (talk) 02:52, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grenades explode if being sawn 

message: People died when trying to saw grenades (http://vnexpress.net/GL/Xa-hoi/2007/12/3B9FD40B/ and saw 105-mm shells as well (http://vnexpress.net/GL/Xa-hoi/2008/06/3BA0308E/ and http://www.tin247.com/thiet_mang_vi_cua_dan_105_ly-1-21329722.html). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophisticate20 (talk • contribs) Sophisticate20 (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the effort, but unfortunately these links would not be of use in the English language Wikipedia.  --CliffC (talk) 02:52, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Sawing' links, in Vietnamese

message: Because they are not intended to be thrown, thermate incendiary grenades generally have a shorter delay fuse than other grenades (e.g. two seconds).
And if they're not thrown, they're used how? Teleportation? It would make sense to explain how it's supposed to work.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.98.109.190 (talk) 19:59, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incendiary grenades are not indended to be thrown. 

message: Is there a reason why this photo is up-side-down? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RGD5_b.jpg
68.52.114.60 (talk) 19:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Photo 

message: I made a few edits to the article, and moved or removed pictures to reduce a lot of white space. Also seemed to be too many pictures (was ≈27 now ≈22), some of which were not referred to in the text. Here is what I have left out, 5 of the 6 photos that were towards the top of the page:
* 
* 
*  
*  
* 
- 220.101 talk\Contribs 12:45, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos moved and/or removed 

message: <Strike>Is anyone aware that there's a page called 'Grenade' Something makes me feel like that should be merged into this... Anyone want to look into it?</strike>--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 04:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Article is about all types of grenade. Marcus Qwertyus  04:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I missed the recent move request. Never mind.--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 05:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  <strike>Two articles</strike> 

message: I've spoken to two vietnam vets who've told me stories of throwing concussion or frag grenades into rivers to stun/kill fish (and then cooked them on a C4 brick...) Never heard of them doing this to kill swimmers. It seems reasonable to me, but...it just doesn't seem likely that the only reason they threw grenades in the river was to kill VC. I don't know if there should be something about this, but...the 'unofficial' story sounds slightly different to me. Khallus Maximus (talk) 04:30, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grenade Fishing... 

message: Copied here from Sjö's talk page:
Hi Sjö,
I saw your revert of the edit on the page & you asked me to come to talk.
 
While Stars & Stripes is the "independent news and information to the U.S. military community" they're staffed by journalists who often do not have the depth of knowledge of munitions that serving soldiers do, this is the same for newspapers, military or otherwise, in most countries.  I'm sure you've noticed this in Sweden too.
The threat for which slat armour had been developed was the anti-armour RPG which, for the unitiated, may easily be confused with anti-armour RKG.
Further to that I've been in many MRAPs and seen far more but have yet to find any with overhead slat armour.
I believe when Specialist Parrish of the 5th Eng Bn, 4th Maneuver Enhancement Bde was killed it was again a top attack.
The RKG-3 is as you know a hand deployed anti-armour device of about one kilo in weight. and it is extremely difficult to obtain an effective side impact on a vehicle, moving or otherwise. Coupled with this the frag radius of the RPK-3 exceeds it's accurate range making anything but a top attack a questionable and dangerous operation.
The armed forces are also limited by budgetary constraints, and modifying a complete series of vehs from one single fatal incident is not something they'd usually consider.
I'd be interested in your comments.
Kind regards,  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiredcleangate3 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi! Well, Wikipedia is very much about using reliable sources to support the statements in the article. Personal experience is valuable to vet and interpret the sources, but it's not really enough on its own. I'm going to put a "dubious" tag on the section to flag it as questionable, and I'll take the liberty of copying this section to Talk:Hand grenade so more editors can join the discussion. What you could do in the mean time is to find a reliable source that says that the slat armour on these lightly armoured vehicles s against RPGs. There are just a couple of things I'd like to say. First, I think the article could mention that anti-tank grenades have been used recently, even if they are rather obsolete. Second, I think that a reporter for Stars and Stripes is in a better position to get the facts right than a reporter from a common newspaper, due to contacts and experience. That makes that source more reliable than an article from, say, a small-town newspaper written by a reporter without special knowledge. Sjö (talk) 04:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

text: Tiredcleangate posted some links at my talk page. The show that anti-tank grenades aren't mentioned as a reason for fitting slat armour, so I'm removing that statement. http://www.vietvet.org/bararmor.htm http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/baes-lrod-cage-armor-03473/ http://science.howstuffworks.com/stryker2.htm http://gizmodo.com/how-armor-is-evolving-to-beat-tank-smashing-rpgs-1555422743 . Sjö (talk) 07:20, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-tank grenade and slat armour 

message: The French word for "pomegranate" is "grenade." The Old French name was "pome grenate," not "pomegranate."
Googling "etymology of pomegranate" gets this as the top answer:
pome·gran·ate
Origin
Middle English: from Old French pome grenate, from pome ‘apple’ + grenate ‘pomegranate’ (from Latin (malum) granatum ‘(apple) having many seeds,’ from granum ‘seed’).''
Second, looking online, I don't find any evidence that "'grenade' derives from the French word for a 'small explosive shell.'" It seems more likely that they named "hand grenades" after "grenades" (pomegranates), and that the English copied that.
JMassengale (talk) 16:13, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology