PIAT | Military Wiki | Fandom powered by Wikia mechanism Impact The Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank (PIAT) was a British man-portable anti-tank weapon developed during the Second World War . The PIAT was designed in 1942 in response to the British Army 's need for a more effective infantry anti-tank weapon, and entered service in 1943. The PIAT was based on the spigot mortar system, that launched a 2.5 pounds (1.1 kg) bomb using a powerful spring and a cartridge on the tail of the projectile. It possessed an effective range of approximately 115 yards (110 m) [3] in a direct fire anti-tank role, and 350 yards (320 m) [3] in an indirect fire 'house-breaking' role. The PIAT had several advantages over other infantry anti-tank weapons of the period, which included a lack of muzzle smoke to reveal the position of the user, and an inexpensive barrel; however, this was countered by, amongst other things, a difficulty in cocking the weapon, the bruising the user received when firing it, and problems with its penetrative power.

The PIAT was first used during the Allied invasion of Sicily in 1943, and remained in use with British and Commonwealth forces until the early 1950s. PIATs were supplied to or obtained by other nations and forces, including the Soviet Union (through Lend Lease), the French resistance , the Polish Underground , and the Israeli Haganah (which used PIATs during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War ). Six members of the British and Commonwealth armed forces received Victoria Crosses for their use of the PIAT in combat. Contents Edit At the beginning of the Second World War, the British Army possessed two primary anti-tank weapons for its infantry: the Boys anti-tank rifle [5] and the No. 68 AT Rifle Grenade . [2] However, neither of these were particularly effective as anti-tank weapons. The No. 68 anti-tank grenade was designed to be fired from a discharger fitted onto the muzzle of an infantryman's rifle, but this meant that the grenade was too light to deal significant damage, resulting in it rarely being used in action. [6] The Boys was also inadequate in the anti-tank role.

It was heavy, which meant that it was difficult for infantry to handle effectively, and was outdated; by 1940 it was only effective at short ranges, and then only against armoured cars and light tanks . In November 1941 during Operation Crusader , part of the North African Campaign , staff officers of the British Eighth Army were unable to find even a single example of the Boys knocking out a German tank. [7] Due to these limitations, 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 Charles Edward Munroe was experimenting with guncotton ; he discovered that the explosive would yield a great deal more damage if there were a recess in it facing the target. Known as the ' Munroe effect ', this was developed upon further by the German scientist Egon Neumann, who found that lining the recess with metal enhanced the damage dealt even more.

[2] By the 1930s Henry Mohaupt, a Swiss engineer, had developed this technology even further and created hollow charge ammunition. This consisted of a recessed metal cone placed into an explosive warhead; when the warhead hit its target, the explosive detonated and turned the cone into an extremely high-speed spike. The speed of the spike, and the immense pressure it caused on impact, allowed it to create a small hole in armour plating and send a large pressure wave and large amounts of fragments into the interior of the target. It was this technology that was utilized in the No. 68 anti-tank grenade. [2] PIAT and ammunition case at the Canadian War Museum Although the technology existed, it remained for British designers to develop a system that could deliver hollow-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 hollow-charge ammunition, Lieutenant Colonel Stewart Blacker of the Royal Artillery was investigating the possibility of developing a lightweight platoon mortar . [8] However, rather than using the conventional system of firing the mortar shell from a barrel fixed to a baseplate, Blacker wanted to use the spigot mortar system.

Instead of a barrel, there was a steel rod known as a 'spigot' fixed to a baseplate, and the bomb itself had a propellant charge inside its tail. When the mortar was to be fired, the bomb was pushed down onto the spigot, which exploded the propellant charge and blew the bomb into the air. [8] By effectively putting the barrel on the inside of the weapon, the barrel diameter was no longer a limitation on the warhead size. [9] Blacker eventually designed a lightweight mortar that he named the 'Arbalest' and submitted it to the War Office , [10] but it was turned down in favour of a Spanish design. Undeterred, however, Blacker continued with his experiments and decided to try and invent a hand-held anti-tank weapon based on the spigot design, but found that the spigot could not generate sufficient velocity needed to penetrate armour.

But he did not abandon the design, and eventually come up with the Blacker Bombard , a swivelling spigot-style system that could launch a 20-pound (9 kg) bomb approximately 100 yards (90 m); although the bombs it fired could not actually penetrate armour, they could still severely damage tanks, and in 1940 a large number of Blacker Bombards were issued to the Home Guard as anti-tank weapons. [11] PIAT in use by Canadian airborne troops. When Blacker became aware of the existence of hollow-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.

[12] Blacker then developed a hollow-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. [12] 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. [13] 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 MD1 , which was given the task of developing and delivering weapons for use by guerilla and resistance groups in Occupied Europe.

[1] Shortly after the trial of the Baby Bombard, Blacker was posted to other duties, and left the anti-tank weapon in the hands of a colleague in the department, Major Millis Jefferis . [1] Jefferis took the prototype Baby Bombard apart on the floor of his office in MD1 and rebuilt it, and then combined it with a hollow-charge mortar bomb to create what he called the 'Jefferis Shoulder Gun'. Jefferis then had a small number of prototype armour-piercing HEAT rounds made, and took the weapon to be tested at the Small Arms School at Bisley . [14] A Warrant Officer took the Shoulder Gun down to a firing range, aimed it at an armoured target, and pulled the trigger; the Shoulder Gun pierced a hole in the target, but unfortunately also wounded the Warrant Officer when a piece of metal from the exploding round flew back and hit him. [15] Jefferis himself then took the place of the Warrant Officer and fired off several more rounds, all of which pierced the armoured target but without wounding him.

Impressed with the weapon, the Ordnance Board of the Small Arms School had the faults with the ammunition corrected, renamed the Shoulder Gun as the Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank, and ordered that it be issued to infantry units as a hand-held anti-tank weapon. [16] Production of the PIAT began at the end of August 1942. [1] 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. [17] The Ministry of Supply had already paid Blacker £50,000 for his expenses in relation to the Bombard and PIAT. [18] 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." [18] Churchill supported Jefferis claims, but he did not get his way. [18] For his part Blacker received £25,000 (equivalent to £964,000 in 2017). [19] from the Inventions Board. [9] Design PIAT HEAT Projectile. 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 (110 m) and a maximum indirect fire range of 350 yards (320 m). [3] It could be carried and operated by one man, [3] but was usually assigned to a two-man team, [20] the second man acting as an ammunition carrier and loader. The PIAT launcher was a tube constructed out of thin sheets of steel, and contained the trigger mechanism and firing spring. At the front of the launcher was a small trough in which the bomb was placed, and the spigot ran down the middle of the launcher and into the trough.

[6] Padding for the user's shoulder was fitted to the other end of the launcher, and rudimentary aperture sights were fitted on top for aiming; the bombs launched by the PIAT possessed hollow tubular tails, into which a small propellant cartridge was inserted, and hollow-charge warheads. [6] To fire the weapon the trigger mechanism, which was essentially just a large spring, had to be cocked, and to do this was an extremely difficult process. The user had to first place the PIAT on its butt, then place two feet on the shoulder padding and turn the weapon to unlock the body and simultaneously lock the firing pin to the butt; the user would then have to bend over and pull the body of the weapon upwards, thereby pulling the spring back until it attached to the trigger and cocking the weapon. Once this was achieved, the body was then lowered and turned to reattach it to the rest of the weapon, and the PIAT could then be fired.

[21] Users of a small stature often found this difficult to achieve, as they did not have the sufficient height required to pull the body up far enough to cock the weapon; it was also difficult to do when lying in a prone position , as was often the case when using the weapon in action. [22] When the trigger was pulled, the spring pushed the firing pin forwards into the bomb, which ignited the propellant in the bomb and launched it out of the trough and into the air. The recoil caused by the detonation of the propellant then blew the firing pin backwards onto the spring; this automatically cocked the weapon so it could be fired. [6] [21] An Australian PIAT team during the Battle of Balikpapan in 1945 Training for using the PIAT emphasized that it was best utilized from a slit trench 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.

[23] It was possible to use the PIAT as a crude mortar by placing the shoulder pad of the weapon on the ground and supporting it with a monopod , giving the weapon an approximate range of 350 yards (320 m). [24] The PIAT was often also used in combat to knock out enemy positions located in houses and bunkers. [23] Despite the difficulties in cocking and firing the weapon, it did have several advantages; its barrel did not have to be replaced or require high-grade materials that were expensive to produce, there was little muzzle blast that could give the user's position away, and the size of the barrel meant it could accommodate relatively large calibre munitions. [6] However, the weapon did have drawbacks. It was very heavy and bulky, which meant that it was quite unpopular with the British and Commonwealth troops who were issued with it. [20] There were also problems with its penetrative power; 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, confirmed otherwise.

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. [7] Operational history Warsaw Uprising combatants display PIAT weapons. The PIAT entered service with British and Commonwealth units in mid-1943, and was first used in action by Canadian troops during the Allied invasion of Sicily . [15] The 1944 war establishment for a British platoon , which contained 36 men, had a single PIAT attached to the platoon headquarters, alongside a 2-inch (51 mm) mortar detachment. [25] Three PIATs were issued to every company at the headquarters level for issuing at the CO discretion - allowing one weapon for each platoon. [23] British Army and Royal Marines commandos were also issued with PIATs and used them in action.

[26] The Australian Army allocated a PIAT (which was also known as Projector Infantry Tank Attack in Australian service) to each infantry platoon in its 'jungle divisions ', which differed from the standard British organisation, from late 1943. [27] 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 “outstandlingly effective” weapon, followed by the Bren gun in second place. [28] An analysis by British staff officers of the initial period of the Normandy campaign found that 7% of all German tanks destroyed by British forces were knocked out by PIATs, compared to 6% by rockets fired by aircraft. However, they also found that once German tanks had been fitted with armoured skirts that detonated hollow-charge ammunition before it could penetrate the tank's armour, the weapon became much less effective.

[7] PIAT in 1948 museum (Beyt Gidi), Tel Aviv, Israel The PIAT was used in all theatres in which British and Commonwealth troops served, and remained in service until the early 1950s, when it was replaced by the American bazooka . [15] 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". [29] As part of the Lend Lease agreement, between October 1941 and March 1946 the Soviet Union was supplied with 1,000 PIATs and 100,000 rounds of ammunition. [30] The PIAT was also utilized by resistance groups in Occupied Europe . During the Warsaw Uprising , it was one of many weapons that Polish Underground resistance fighters used against German forces. [31] And in occupied France, the French resistance used the PIAT in the absence of mortars or artillery.

[32] After the end of the Second World War, the Israeli Haganah used PIATs against Arab armour during the 1948 Israeli War of Independence . [33] A soldier of the Duke of Cornwall's Light Infantry carrying a PIAT, November 1944 Six Victoria Crosses were awarded to members of the British and Commonwealth armed forces for actions using the PIAT: [34] 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 . [35] 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. [36] On 12 June 1944 Rifleman Ganju Lama used a PIAT to knock out several Japanese tanks that were preventing his unit from advancing in an area of Burma.

[37] Between 19–25 September 1944, during the Battle of Arnhem , Major Robert Henry Cain used a PIAT to disable a Tiger tank that was advancing on his company position, and force another three German Panzer IV tanks to retreat during a later assault. [38] On the night of 21/22 October 1944, Private Ernest Alvia ("Smokey") Smith used a PIAT to destroy a German Mark V Panther tank, one of three Panthers and two self-propelled guns attacking his small group. The SPs were also knocked out. He then used a Thompson submachine gun to kill or repel about 30 enemy soldiers. His actions secured the bridgehead on the Savio River in Italy. [39] On 9 December 1944, Captain John Henry Cound Brunt utilised a PIAT, amongst other weapons, to help repel an attack by the German 90th Panzergrenadier Division .

[40] Users PIAT (Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank) - Anti-Tank Grenade Launcher - Specifications, History and Images Overall Length: 990 mm (38.98 inches) Barrel Length: 990 mm (38.98 inches) Weight (Empty): 33.07 lb (15.00 kg) Muzzle Velocity: 250 feet/sec (76 m/sec) Rate-of-Fire: 2 rounds-per-minute (rpm) Range: 300 feet (91 m; 100 yards) Captain Jack (Updated: 7/24/2014): With the large loss of anti-tank weaponry at the Battle of Dunkirk in northern France, the British were forced to develop all-new, modern anti-tank measures for expected German invasion of the British mainland. The PIAT ("Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank") was the offspring of rather hurried design and development period, bypassing much of the hard testing usually done by British Army authorities concerning such weapons.

The PIAT made use of a "hollow charge" projectile which was launched from a spring-loaded, tube-shaped launcher and became a proven commodity against all known enemy armor types of the day - despite the unit's cumbersome handling qualities and dangerous recoil forces. The weapon was typically crewed by two personnel though it could be just as effective under the direction of one if need be and went on to become one of the most famous anti-tank weapons of the war alongside well-known contemporaries such as the German "Panzerschreck" and American "Bazooka". The PIAT saw considerable use with British forces and found homes in the inventories of Australia, Canada, France (Free French), Greece, India, Israel (post-war), Italy (post-1943), Luxembourg, New Zealand, Poland (by resistance forces), the Soviet Union (via Lend-Lease) and Yugoslavia. It was effective against any of the lighter German vehicles and could stop a Panzer IV and Panther tank while also able to disable even the mighty Tiger I heavy tank (as it did during the engagement at Arnhem).

Prior to the arrival of the PIAT, the primary anti-tank weapon used by the British Army was the Boys Anti-Tank Rifle to which the PIAT succeeded and saw frontline service from 1942 to 1950. Despite its intended use as an anti-armor weapon by way of its High-Explosive, Anti-Tank (HEAT) standard projectile, the tactical value of the PIAT was slightly greater than that of the famous Panzerschreck and Bazooka for it was also cleared to fire a High-Explosive (HE) grenade and a smoke version - the former useful against "soft" targets such as infantry while the latter holding value as an effective smoke screen to cover movements by friendly forces or shroud enemy vision. The PIAT also became a low-cost weapon that could be produced quickly during a time desperation for the British Empire. It did, however, serve its faults for the PIAT held a clunky, rigorous reloading scheme and was bulky to manage in the heat of battle at 32lbs with a 3lb projectile. Engagement ranges reached out to approximately 370 yards though effective ranges were within 110 yards and typically shorter for sure "kill".

Such ranges forced the PIAT crew to remain dangerously close to their intended target. It was at these short ranges, however, that the PIAT's strength shown through with its armor-defeating qualities. It proved particularly effective in the close confines of urban warfare where hidden PIAT crews certainly held an edge against unsuspecting enemy tank crews. As built, the PIAT measured a length of 3 feet and each projectile featured a 2.5lb hollow charge filling designed for impact detonation. The grenades exited the launcher at 250 feet per second and sighting was accomplished through an aperture device affixed to the upper left side of the weapon. The PIAT's general shape was tubular with a shoulder pad fitted to the rear and an open "trough", or tray, held at the front. The compressed spring, the heart of the PIAT's action, was contained in the body with a rudimentary trigger system slung underneath. An adjustable monopod was installed ahead of the trigger group for forward support. Grenades were fed into the open trough at the front and the system actuated by the trigger in the usual way.

Production of PIATs was charged to Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd and manufacture was soon joined by others as the need for anti-tank weapons grew. Final approval for the weapon came on August 31st, 1942 and some 115,000 examples then followed. The design was attributed to Major Millis Jefferis who headed the Ministry of Supply, delving into the development of "special" weapons for the British military. Another notable, unorthodox weapon brought to light by this group became the "Sticky Bomb", otherwise known as the "Grenade, Hand, Anti-Tank No. 74" or "S.T. Grenade". © PIAT Launcher | World War II Database World War II Database Contributor: C. Peter Chen ww2dbase"Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank", or PIAT for short, were anti-tank projectile weapons developed in response to the British Army's need for a more effective infantry anti-tank weapons than the existing Boys anti-tank rifles and the No. 68 AT Rifle Grenades. The design could be attributed to both Lieutenant Colonel Stewart Blacker of the British Royal Artillery and Major Millis Jefferis, although there were some disagreements in this matter.

The production of PIAT launchers and shells began in late Aug 1942 by Imperial Chemical Industries Limited and other firms. They entered service in 1943. They fired shells spring in each launcher and a cartridge at the tail of each shell, with maximum direct fire range of 110 meters (115 yards) and maximum indirect fire range of 320 meters (350 yards). They were constructed of thin sheets of steel, and had very simple top-mounted aperture sights. Although designed for operation by a single soldier, each weapon was usually assigned to a team of two, with one person being the main operator while the other acted as the loader and ammunition carrier. They were first used in combat by Canadian troops during the Allied invasion of Sicily, Italy in mid-1943. Troops from the front reported that the coking and firing of the weapon was difficult and they were bulky, but they were nevertheless well liked; results from a 1944-1945 Canadian Army survey noted that these weapons were ranked first in terms of effectiveness for their designed purpose.

Another study, conducted by the British, found that 7% of German tanks destroyed by British forces during the 1944 Normandy campaign were destroyed by PIAT launchers. From a manufacturing standpoint, their simple construction kept the costs low. In terms of usage outside of British and Commonwealth forces, between Oct 1941 and Mar 1946, the Soviet Union received 1,000 PIAT launchers and 100,000 rounds of ammunition. European resistance groups also received these weapons during WW2; a number of these weapons saw action during the 1944 Warsaw Uprising. Production ceased in 1950; between 1942 and 1950, 115,000 examples were built. After WW2, the British and Commonwealth troops used them during the Korean War, but shortly after they were replaced by the American bazooka-series of anti-tank weapons. In later conflicts, PIAT weapons were used by the Israeli Haganah against Arab armored vehicles during the 1948 Arabï¿½Israeli War, and by both sides of the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War.

Source: Wikipedia PIAT PIAT The Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank (PIAT) Mk I was a British man-portable anti-tank weapon developed during the Second World War. The PIAT was designed in 1942 in response to the British Army's need for a more effective infantry anti-tank weapon, and entered service in 1943. The PIAT was based on the spigot mortar system, that launched a 2.5 pound (1.1 kg) bomb using a powerful spring and a cartridge in the tail of the projectile. It possessed an effective range of approximately 115 yards (110 m) in a direct fire anti-tank role, and 350 yards (320 m) in an indirect fire 'house-breaking' role. The PIAT had several advantages over other infantry anti-tank weapons of the period, which included a lack of muzzle smoke to reveal the position of the user, and an inexpensive barrel; however, this was countered by, amongst other things, a difficulty in cocking the weapon, the fragility of the barrel, the bruising the user received when firing it, and problems with ammunition reliability.

The PIAT was first used during the Allied invasion of Sicily in 1943, and remained in use with British and Commonwealth forces until the early 1950s. PIATs were supplied to or obtained by other nations and forces, including the Soviet Union (through Lend Lease), the French resistance, the Polish Underground, and the Israeli Haganah (which used PIATs during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War). Six members of the British and Commonwealth armed forces received Victoria Crosses for their use of the PIAT in combat. United Kingdom - UK (Great Britain) 1943 Design And Development 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 (110 m) and a maximum indirect fire range of 350 yards (320 m). It could be carried and operated by one man, but was usually assigned to a two-man team, the second man acting as an ammunition carrier and loader. The PIAT launcher was a tube constructed out of thin sheets of steel, and contained the trigger mechanism and firing spring.

At the front of the launcher was a small trough in which the bomb was placed, and the spigot ran down the middle of the launcher and into the trough. Padding for the user's shoulder was fitted to the other end of the launcher, and rudimentary aperture sights were fitted on top for aiming; the bombs launched by the PIAT possessed hollow tubular tails, into which a small propellant cartridge was inserted, and hollow-charge warheads. At the beginning of the Second World War, the British Army possessed two primary anti-tank weapons for its infantry: the Boys anti-tank rifle and the No. 68 AT Rifle Grenade. However, neither of these was particularly effective as an anti-tank weapon. The No. 68 anti-tank grenade was designed to be fired from a discharger fitted onto the muzzle of an infantryman's rifle, but this meant that the grenade was too light to deal significant damage, resulting in it rarely being used in action. The Boys was also inadequate in the anti-tank role. It was heavy, which meant that it was difficult for infantry to handle effectively, and was outdated; by 1940 it was effective only at short ranges, and then only against armoured cars and light tanks.

In November 1941 during Operation Crusader, part of the North African Campaign, staff officers of the British Eighth Army were unable to find even a single instance of the Boys knocking out a German tank. Due to these limitations, 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 Charles Edward Munroe was experimenting with guncotton; he discovered that the explosive would yield a great deal more damage if there were a recess in it facing the target. This phenomenon is known as the 'Munroe effect'. The German scientist Egon Neumann, found that lining the recess with metal enhanced the damage dealt even more. By the 1930s Henry Mohaupt, a Swiss engineer, had developed this technology even further and created hollow charge ammunition. This consisted of a recessed metal cone placed into an explosive warhead; when the warhead hit its target, the explosive detonated and turned the cone into an extremely high-speed spike.

The speed of the spike, and the immense pressure it caused on impact, allowed it to create a small hole in armour plating and send a large pressure wave and large amounts of fragments into the interior of the target. It was this technology that was utilized in the No. 68 anti-tank grenade. Although the technology existed, it remained for British designers to develop a system that could deliver hollow-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 hollow-charge ammunition, Lieutenant Colonel Stewart Blacker of the Royal Artillery was investigating the possibility of developing a lightweight platoon mortar. However, rather than using the conventional system of firing the mortar shell from a barrel fixed to a baseplate, Blacker wanted to use the spigot mortar system. Instead of a barrel, there was a steel rod known as a 'spigot' fixed to a baseplate, and the bomb itself had a propellant charge inside its tail. When the mortar was to be fired, the bomb was pushed down onto the spigot, which exploded the propellant charge and blew the bomb into the air.

By effectively putting the barrel on the inside of the weapon, the barrel diameter was no longer a limitation on the warhead size. Blacker eventually designed a lightweight mortar that he named the 'Arbalest' and submitted it to the War Office, but it was turned down in favour of a Spanish design. Undeterred, however, Blacker continued with his experiments and decided to try to invent a hand-held anti-tank weapon based on the spigot design, but found that the spigot could not generate sufficient velocity needed to penetrate armour. But he did not abandon the design, and eventually come up with the Blacker Bombard, a swivelling spigot-style system that could launch a 20-pound (9 kg) bomb approximately 100 yards (90 m); although the bombs it fired could not actually penetrate armour, they could still severely damage tanks, and in 1940 a large number of Blacker Bombards were issued to the Home Guard as anti-tank weapons.

When Blacker became aware of the existence of hollow-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. Blacker then developed a hollow-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. 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.

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 MD1, which was given the task of developing and delivering weapons for use by guerilla and resistance groups in Occupied Europe. Shortly after the trial of the Baby Bombard, Blacker was posted to other duties, and left the anti-tank weapon in the hands of a colleague in the department, Major Millis Jefferis. Jefferis took the prototype Baby Bombard apart on the floor of his office in MD1 and rebuilt it, and then combined it with a hollow-charge mortar bomb to create what he called the 'Jefferis Shoulder Gun'. Jefferis then had a small number of prototype armour-piercing HEAT rounds made, and took the weapon to be tested at the Small Arms School at Bisley. A Warrant Officer took the Shoulder Gun down to a firing range, aimed it at an armoured target, and pulled the trigger; the Shoulder Gun pierced a hole in the target, but unfortunately also wounded the Warrant Officer when a piece of metal from the exploding round flew back and hit him.

Jefferis himself then took the place of the Warrant Officer and fired off several more rounds, all of which pierced the armoured target but without wounding him. Impressed with the weapon, the Ordnance Board of the Small Arms School had the faults with the ammunition corrected, renamed the Shoulder Gun as the Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank, and ordered that it be issued to infantry units as a hand-held anti-tank weapon. Production of the PIAT began at the end of August 1942. 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. The Ministry of Supply had already paid Blacker £50,000 for his expenses in relation to the Bombard and PIAT. 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." Churchill supported Jefferis claims, but he did not get his way. For his part Blacker received £25,000 (equivalent to £964,000 in 2015). from the Inventions Board. Combat History The PIAT entered service with British and Commonwealth units in mid-1943, and was first used in action by Canadian troops during the Allied invasion of Sicily. The 1944 war establishment for a British platoon, which contained 36 men, had a single PIAT attached to the platoon headquarters, alongside a 2-inch (51 mm) mortar detachment. Three PIATs were issued to every company at the headquarters level for issuing at the CO discretion - allowing one weapon for each platoon. British Army and Royal Marines commandos were also issued with PIATs and used them in action. The Australian Army allocated a PIAT (which was also known as Projector Infantry Tank Attack in Australian service) to each infantry platoon in its 'jungle divisions', which differed from the standard British organisation, from late 1943.

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 “outstandlingly effective” weapon, followed by the Bren gun in second place. An analysis by British staff officers of the initial period of the Normandy campaign found that 7% of all German tanks destroyed by British forces were knocked out by PIATs, compared to 6% by rockets fired by aircraft. However, they also found that once German tanks had been fitted with armoured skirts that detonated hollow-charge ammunition before it could penetrate the tank's armour, the weapon became much less effective. The PIAT was used in all theatres in which British and Commonwealth troops served, and remained in service until the early 1950s, when it was replaced by the American bazooka. 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".

As part of the Lend Lease agreement, between October 1941 and March 1946 the Soviet Union was supplied with 1,000 PIATs and 100,000 rounds of ammunition. The PIAT was also utilized by resistance groups in Occupied Europe. During the Warsaw Uprising, it was one of many weapons that Polish Underground resistance fighters used against German forces. And in occupied France, the French resistance used the PIAT in the absence of mortars or artillery. After the end of the Second World War, the Israeli Haganah used PIATs against Arab armour during the 1948 Israeli War of Independence Six Victoria Crosses were awarded to members of the British and Commonwealth armed forces for actions using the PIAT: 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. 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.

On 12 June 1944 Rifleman Ganju Lama of the 7th Gurkha Rifles used a PIAT to knock out two Japanese tanks attacking his unit at Ningthoukhong, Manipur, India (given as Burma in the official citation). Despite sustaining injuries, Ganju Lama approached within thirty yards of the enemy tanks, and having knocked them out moved on to attack the crews as they tried to escape. When asked by his Army Commander, William Slim, why he went so close, he replied he was not certain of hitting with a PIAT beyond thirty yards. Between 19–25 September 1944, during the Battle of Arnhem, Major Robert Henry Cain used a PIAT to disable a Tiger tank that was advancing on his company position, and to force another three German Panzer IV tanks to retreat during a later assault. On the night of 21/22 October 1944, Private Ernest Alvia ("Smokey") Smith used a PIAT to destroy a German Mark V Panther tank, one of three Panthers and two self-propelled guns attacking his small group. The self-propelled vehicles were also knocked out.

He then used a Thompson submachine gun to kill or repel about 30 enemy soldiers. His actions secured a bridgehead on the Savio River in Italy. On 9 December 1944, Captain John Henry Cound Brunt utilised a PIAT, amongst other weapons, to help repel an attack by the German 90th Panzergrenadier Division. PIAT Pictures The retreat to Dunkirk, in May 1940, had proved to the British Army that it was equipped to fight a war that had ended 20 years earlier. Anti-Tank weaponry of any kind was very poor and the principle armament of the infantry at the time, the Boys anti-tank rifle, could only penetrate light armour and as such was wholly ineffective against the modern German Panzers, which were at liberty to break through the Allied lines at will. Rocket-propelled anti-tank weaponry was still in their infancy at this stage in the war and so the several earmarked replacements were based on the design of the spigot mortar, a simple projectile weapon.

The retired Lieutenant-Colonel Blacker had, prior to the war, specialised in inventing a range of inexpensive home-made weaponry in his work shop, amongst which was the large "Blacker Bombard" spigot mortar. With a view to making a single-handed variant for the infantry, he turned his attention towards designing the "Baby Bombard". Major Jefferis took over the design when Blacker was posted to other duties, and so emerged the Jefferis Shoulder Gun. The weapon was so simple in its design and so crudely constructed that at a glance it appeared to be amongst the very worst of amateurish efforts. Its main component was a cylindrical steel tube housing a powerful spring, at the end of which was a spigot and a trough, into which one placed a high-explosive projectile, and this was fired by pulling an almost comically large trigger. It was a most unlikely weapon and initial trials were not promising when the projectile struggled to make much of an impression upon armoured targets, however it was found that by shaping the tip of the bomb into a long point its effectiveness was considerably improved.

Towards the end of 1942, the War Office took on board the design and christened it the PIAT (Projector Infantry Anti-Tank). It became the undisputed anti-tank weapon of the British infantryman during the Second World War, and by 1945 a total of 115,000 were in circulation. The PIAT entered service during 1943 and was first used by Canadian troops in Sicily. Its debut performance was not a happy one due to a fault in the bomb which misfired if it struck a target from any position other than square-on, and as a result the confidence of soldiers in the PIAT was greatly undermined. There followed a considerable effort to remedy the problem and restore the Army's faith before the weapon was used on French soil. Even so the bomb remained, throughout the war, considerably volatile due to the premature detonation of fuses. Such was the extent of the problem that live firing exercises were banned when the war came to an end. In spite of its unlikely appearance, the PIAT was amongst the most effective infantry anti-tank weapons of its day, with a performance equal to that of the visually more sophisticated American bazooka.

Although it was a cumbersome device, it possessed a number of advantages over such rocket weapons, namely that there was no back-blast from firing, and so not only could it be safely fired from an enclosed space, but it would also not give away its handlers position to the enemy. The PIAT could also be used as a makeshift mortar, by rotating the T-shaped shoulder stock through 90 degrees and wedging the weapon into any solid foundation, such as a tree or a wall. The range of the PIAT was, however, very short. It was effective against large targets, such as buildings, at 350 yards, but it was only truly effective against armour at a range of 100 yards, although many operators preferred their target to be closer still. The PIAT bomb could penetrate 75mm of armour plate and so was ideally suited to dealing with light or medium armoured targets, however given the right conditions it was capable of dispatching any tank in service. Despite its effectiveness, the PIAT could be a brute to handle and it was not the soldier's best friend. It was heavy and awkward to carry, and commonly two soldiers were needed for its use: one to carry the weapon, the other the ammunition.

The mechanism was not easy to load, although once cocked for a first time it was designed so that the recoil would, in theory but not always in practice, reload the spring automatically. With a 90kg draw, reloading required both strength and the acquired skill. Although it was relatively easy to prime whilst in a standing position, this was not often practical under battle conditions, yet it was possible, albeit difficult, to cock it whilst lying down. The trigger required at least two fingers to pull and there was always a slight delay in firing, during which time an inexperienced operator might not hold the trigger back long enough, causing the spring reload to fail, not to mention the weight of the recoil being redirected into their shoulder, leaving it stunned. Also there was a 12lb shift in weight towards the front of the PIAT a tenth of a second before the round was released, thus the operator had to be ready to counter this effect. Following the end of the war, technology in other methods of anti-tank weaponry were improved and the PIAT soon become obsolete, however it did experience a swansong during the Korean War before being finally retired from service in 1951.

The Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank (PIAT) Was it effective? The Projector, Infantry, Anti Tank (PIAT) Was it effective? Apologies, this content is no longer available. In the meantime, here are a selection of our favorite videos you may like… FEATURED VIDEO PIAT (Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank) - Anti-Tank Grenade Launcher - Page 2 of 2 PIAT (Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank) Anti-Tank Grenade Launcher (1942) PIAT (Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank) Anti-Tank Grenade Launcher (1942) Continuation of the PIAT (Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank) Anti-Tank Grenade Launcher development period and operational history. While other global militaries had settled on rocket-propelled grenades (chemical energy) for their anti-tank solution, the British Army's adoption of the PIAT was unusual in that the weapon relied on the "spigot mortar" principle requiring no complex rocket function or launching properties, keeping production costs in check and manufacture numbers steady. Basic operation involved the main spring interacting with a centrally-positioned spigot which fit inside the hollowed tail of the grenade projectile.

The operator unlatched the shoulder pad and held it down with his feet with the muzzle of the weapon pointed upwards. The body of the PIAT was then pulled up which moved both spring and spigot to an awaiting sear. The body could then be lowered to the shoulder pad, the pad re-latched and the system considered "cocked" (the process was reminiscent of a medieval crossbow). Now that the internal main spring was fully compressed, ready produce a substantial amount of force, a projectile was inserted into the awaiting trough. Once the trigger was pulled and the spring released, the resulting action activated the grenade's propellant charge. The resulting detonation served two purposes - it launched the projectile clear of the trough and onto its flight path while the recoil force was used to re-cock the main spring to ready the weapon for a successive shot. If the weapon failed to re-cock for whatever reason, the crew needed to manually reset the spring once more - this could prove detrimental as a standing PIAT man made for a clear target to enemy infantry. It was often recommended that two persons assist in the cocking of the weapon, such were the physical forces in play.

Unlike the Panzerschreck and Bazooka, the PIAT was not a true shoulder-fired weapon but instead set along the ground or atop a raised natural/structural support on its given monopod. The butt was then held firmly against the shoulder prior to firing. A standing operator could suffer serious physical injury due to the inherently violent recoil action of the weapon. The adjustable nature of the monopod allowed for a wide range of trajectories to be reached. The spigot mortar concept was not a new one as it already circulated in the British inventory through the 29mm "Blacker Bombard" anti-tank mortar device. The Blacker Bombard was the brainchild of one Lt Col Stewart Blacker and developed in the early stages of World War 2, primarily issued to Home Guard units who lacked proper tank-stopping weaponry. The platform served beginning in 1941 and utilized the same launching principle as the PIAT. Some 22,000 were produced and some issue occurred in the ranks of both the Army and Royal Navy.

It was this weapon that lay the foundation for the famous PIAT series for it was actually born of The PIAT was actually born of Blacker's work when he attempted to develop a handier, portable version that came to be known as the "Baby Bombard". When Blacker left for another position, Jefferis continued work on the weapon which was given the designation of "Bombard Baby, 0.625 inch No. 1" during trials with the Ordnance Board. The British Army was the sole mainstream adopter of a spigot mortar-type weapon for all others chose to accept rocket-propelled forms in time. Beyond its low complexity and low-cost nature, such weapons, inherently gave off no smoke from a launching projectile, keeping the crew's position safe from spotters. Additionally, no rocket propulsion meant that there was no back-blast to injure allies positioned aft of the weapon, allowed the weapon to fire relatively safely from confined spaces. PIAT systems were issued beyond standard anti-tank formations and many were used by light armored vehicle groups for self-defense or ambush. Some tracked carriers were outfitted with up to 14 PIATs atop a special mounting to form an ad hoc mortar system in-the-field.

Not an entirely popular weapon, the PIAT certainly filled a role and filled it effectively. First use of the weapon came from Canadian forces during the invasion of Sicily of July 1943 and the weapon did not disappoint. British elements found similar success during their romp through northern France following the D-Day landings of June 1944. The success of weapons such as the PIAT forced the Germans to increase use of armored skirts to protect their vital track components. A stranded tank was a sitting duck for artillery, anti-tank cannon or infantry ready to grenade and gun down the crew inside. The British Army eventually followed many Western forces when it adopted the American Bazooka and it was this weapon that officially ended the PIAT's reign. Israel fielded the weapon during the 1948 War of Independence and some PIATs were still in circulation during the upcoming Korean War (1950-1953) by Australia. The base long form PIAT designation was "Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank MK I".

© Britain's Bumbling Tank Killer - Drive A Tank of Tuesday, the 11th of July, 1944 Published by Authority War Office, 13th July, 1944. The KING has been graciously pleased to approve awards of the VICTORIA CROSS to the undermentioned”:— No. 3663590 Fusilier Francis Arthur Jefferson, The Lancashire Fusiliers (Ulverston, Lanes.). On i6th May, 1944, during an attack on the Gustav Line, an anti-tank obstacle held, up some of our tanks, leaving the leading Company of Fusilier Jefferson’s Battalion to dig in on the hill without tanks or anti-tank guns. The enemy counter-attacked with infantry and two Mark IV tanks, which opened fire at short range causing a number of casualties, and eliminating one P.I.A.T. group entirely. As the tanks advanced towards the partially dug trenches, Fusilier Jefferson, entirely on his own initiative, seized a P.I.A.T.

and running forward alone under heavy fire, took up a position behind a hedge; as he could not see properly, he came into the open, and standing up under a hail of bullets, fired at the leading tank which was now only twenty yards away. It burst into flames and all the crew were killed. Fusilier Jefferson then reloaded the P.I.A.T. and proceeded towards the second tank, which withdrew before he could get within range. By this time our own tanks had arrived and the enemy counter-attack was smashed with heavy casualties. Fusilier Jefferson’s gallant act not merely saved the lives of his Company and caused many casualties to the Germans, but also •broke up the enemy counter-attack and had a decisive effect on the subsequent operation. His supreme gallantry and disregard of personal risk contributed very, largely to the success of the action. of Tuesday, the 15th of August, 1944 Published by Authority War Office, 17th August, 1944. The KING has been graciously pleased to approve the award of the VICTORIA CROSS to:— No.

4390973 Warrant Officer Class II (Company Sergeant-Major) Stanley Elton Hollis, The Green Howards (Alexandra, Princess of W ales’s Own Yorkshire Regiment) (Middles- brough). In Normandy on 6th June, 1944, during the assault on the beaches and the Mont Fleury Battery, C.S.M. Hollis’s Company Commander noticed that two of the pill-boxes had been by-passed, and went with C.S.M. Hollis to see that they were clear. When they were 20 yards from the pillbox, a machine-gun opened fire from the slit and C.S.M. Hollis instantly rushed straight at the pillbox, firing his Sten gun. He jumped on top of the pillbox, re-charged his magazine, threw a grenade in through the door and fired his Sten gun into it, killing two Germans and making the remainder prisoner. He then cleared “several Germans from a neighboring trench. By his action, he undoubtedly saved his Company from being fired on heavily from the rear and enabled them to open the main beach exit.

Later the same day, in the village of Crepon, the Company encountered a field gun and crew armed with Spandaus at 100 yards range. C.S.M. Hollis was put in command of a party to cover an ‘attack-on the gun, but the movement was held up. Seeing this, C.S.M. Hollis pushed right forward to engage the gun with a P.I.A.T. from a house at 50 yards range. He was observed by a sniper who fired and grazed his right cheek, and at the same moment the gun swung round and fired at point-blank range into the house. To avoid the fallen- masonry C.S.M. Hollis moved his’ party to an alternative position. Two of the enemy gun crew had by this time been killed, and the gun was destroyed shortly afterwards. He later found that two of his men had stayed behind in the house and immediately volunteered to get them out. In full view of the enemy who were continually firing at him he went forward alone using a Bren gun to distract their attention from the other men. Under cover of his diversion, the two men were able to get back. Wherever fighting was heaviest, C.S.M.

Hollis appeared and in the course of a magnificent day’s work, he displayed the utmost gallantry and on two separate occasions his courage and initiative prevented the enemy from holding up the advance at critical stages. It was largely through his heroism and resource that the Company’s objectives were gained and casualties were not heavier, and by his own bravery he saved the lives of many of his men. of Tuesday, the 19th of December, 1944 Published by Authority Department of National Defense, Ottawa. 19th December, 1944. The KING has been graciously pleased to approve the award of the VICTORIA CROSS to:— No. K 52880 Private Ernest Alvia Smith, The Seaforth Highlanders of Canada. In Italy on the night of 2ist/22nd October, 1944, a Canadian Infantry Brigade was ordered to establish a bridgehead across the Savio River. The Seaforth Highlanders of Canada were selected as the spearhead of the attack and in weather most unfavorable to the operation they crossed the river and captured their objectives in spite of strong opposition from the enemy.

Torrential rain had caused the Savio River to rise six feet in five hours and as the soft vertical banks made it impossible to bridge the river no tanks or anti-tank guns could be taken across, the raging stream to the sup- port of the rifle companies. As the right forward company was consolidating its objective it was suddenly counter-attacked by a troop of three Mark V Panther tanks supported by two self-propelled guns and about thirty infantry and the situation appeared almost hopeless. Under heavy fire from the approaching enemy tanks, Private Smith, showing great initiative and inspiring leadership, led his Piat Group of two men across an open field to a position from which the Piat could best be employed. Leaving one man on the weapon, Private Smith crossed the road with a companion, and obtained another Piat. Almost immediately an enemy tank came down the road firing its machine guns along the line of the ditches. Private Smith’s comrade was wounded. At a range of thirty feet and having to expose himself to the full view of the enemy, Private Smith fired the Piat and hit the tank, putting it out of action. Ten German infantry immediately jumped off the back of the tank and charged him with Schmeissers and grenades.

Without hesitation Private Smith moved out onto the road and with his Tommy gun at point blank range, killed four Germans and drove the remainder back. Almost immediately another tank opened fire and more enemy infantry closed in on Smith’s position. Obtaining some abandoned Tommy gun magazines from a ditch, he steadfastly held his position, protecting his comrade and fighting the enemy with his Tommy gun until they finally gave up and withdrew in disorder. One tank and both self-propelled guns had been destroyed by this time, but yet another tank swept the area with fire from a longer range. Private Smith, still showing utter contempt for enemy fire, helped his wounded friend to cover and obtained medical aid for him behind a nearby building. He then returned to his position beside the road to await the possibility of a further enemy attack. No further immediate attack developed, and as a result the battalion was able to consolidate the bridgehead position so vital to the success of the whole operation, which led to the eventual capture of San Giorgio Di Cesena and a further advance to the Ronco River.

Thus, by the dogged determination, outstanding devotion to duty and superb gallantry of this private soldier, his comrades were so inspired that the bridgehead was held firm against all enemy attacks, pending the arrival of tanks and anti-tank guns some hours later.

Question: What kind of weapon is the British Army's PIAT
Answer: Anti tank gun