Does anyone have any info on how effective early WWII 7.92 Maroszek and Panzerbusch tear gas projectiles were?
Russian sources could be good if available.
At least it must have been effective enough to inspire the Soviets to develop a respective proj. in 14.5mm for their AT rifles. To what is known it never was officially adopted.
The correct German spelling is “Panzerbüchse” b.t.w…
FWIW I can provide a second hand story heard some 30 years ago, offered by a collector at one of the KCCA cartridge shows. This fellow and a friend decided to pull one of these rounds apart. Which round I do not recall, what I do remember is that he said the learning curve was very steep. Somehow they ruptured the teargas section of the projectile, the effect was immediate and forced them to evacuate the room they were in.
In basic training we had to learn how to use a gas mask & then take it off & put it on again while in a room full of tear gas (no idea which kind). Very uncomfortable, I’d think in a tank the amount of gas from a 7.9 would not be bad enough to make me want to leave the relative safety of a tank for open ground, open a hatch maybe, I don’t really know not having been a tanker, just a poor 2¢ based on a one-time experience.
In a 14.5 I’d think quite a bit of gas could be supplied, but perhaps the bullet wasn’t then efficient enough to deliver it?
The Polish cartridges originally did not have tear gas. The Germans replaced the original bullets with German 318 types.
The substance was what we today know as CN (called O-Salz in German, if I remember correctly).
I have never read a report of its actual effectiveness in combat.
Pete, in the IDF we had a similar drill while doing tasks like weapons assembly/disassembly, but we didn’t take the mask off. Also, we did all kinds of stretcher runs with masks on.
Now the interesting aspect is that the IDF allows beards if you go in with one. Disliking shaving, I grew one for most of my service. It proved to be of great benefit during the stretcher runs, but very not-so-much during the tent/tear gas drills. I’ll leave the reasoning to your imagination.
I figured to chime in as Pete added his $0.02 and I will toss in a nickels worth. There are very few collectors that accumulate tear gas items but I am definitely one of them and have presented a significant display at SLICS on the subject. (partial photo
of the 12’ display)
That aside, I am far from an expert…and not to counter Brian’s story implying that someone “ruptured a tear gas container” in some type of a small arms cartridge…”would not hold water” with anything I know of as any small arms tear gas is some type of a compressed powder that is intended to burn-smoke or to be powder dispersed upon impact.
Some of my earliest tear gas cartridges do have a liquid canister in them (dating to the 50’s-60s with glass canisters (1” and 37 mm examples and most fascinating to me are the “beer can” canister grenades that have been sectioned to show the glass/glassine canisters. I presume anything that is propelled from a cartridge (such as the 37 mm rounds) would effectively become a “muzzle blast dispersion” as any glass container would shatter from the propulsion.
A wonderful historical reference “Tear Gas Munitions” by Thomas Swearengen (1966) is a must have for anyone interested in the subject. He references .22 - .45 ACP round Without specifically reviewing them; these too are a powder/compressed powder irritant compound.
He does make mention of the U.S. Army conducting some tests during World War II with a .50 caliber bullet carrying a payload of CN and an A/P core. They were to be fired from machine guns against armor to determine if a vehicle were penetrated what the incapacitating results would be. As he says “results were rather disappointing”. One of the issues was that the armor penetration of a 0.50 caliber armor piercing core with a CN payload was very disappointing. He mentions the heat produced by the energy of the impact vaporized the CN as the penetrating core carried the chemical through the armor.
One of my favorite .30–06 rounds is an FA 43 Green/Black tipped armor piercing lachrymatory round. It certainly is referenced in HWS (which I do not have in front of me) but it’s “incapacitating tear gas affects” were not worthy of producing the rounds. The more fascinating to me (if my memory serves me right) was the concept of the introduction of a “tear gas material” via a small arms projectile was in violation of one of the “rules of war” as it was thought to be a “chemical weapon” (maybe I just dreamt that up…but that is part of my recollection). It is a very desirable round and has a matching .50 mate with the same color marking. (very happy own them both)
The bottom line… I do not claim to know didilly squat about the effectiveness of rifle caliber tear gas delivery and the only “modern” examples of those found in quantity are the Israeli gray tipped .308’s that appear on all the auction sites for many varied prices.
Thank goodness for voice recognition dictation or I never would’ve tried to hunt and peck this out.
Just to note, the Israeli gray tipped .308s are not AP at all, and I believe they are a rather light, frangible load.
yes…sorry if my Israeli .308 reference seemed to imply “A/P” examples…if they were A/P…the auction site prices would go further out of this world
Since Pepper mentions the .50 BMG here is the bullet above an AP variation.
_I’ve done some checking in HWS 2 after Peppers below post & see further below his, that it is not confirmed that this shown example is a Lachrymatory AP bullet. Nor at the moment do I know exactly what it is.
.50 caliber (sorry…Photobucket looks ok but it is distorted here…any ideas ??)
(in fact the Forum preview looks fine…but obviously this isn’t) ???
.30-06 (yes the case is corroding and I need to give it some love)
Pete, interesting projectile! Thank you for sharing.
Is there any info on the inner construction?
I just noticed Pete and my projo’s have inverted colors and mine has a mid cannulure
I guess I should check HWS to see if there’s any specifics
Just looked at HWS Vol.2 pg 162-163 & see Pepper’s have the green tip as noted in HWS.
So as I can’t see confirmation the one I posted is Lachrymatory AP I’ll have to do some serious checking on it. It was sold to me as that.
As an aside it weighs 1008.7 grains.
sorry no details of construction
It took me a while but finally I have found a Russian article from 2011 which illuminates the Russian experience with the Patrone 319 “S.m.K.H. Rs. L’Spur”.
Effectivity against armor was 40mm at 50m (90° angle).
The projectile contained 0.3 gram CS.
The Russians are stating that due to the CS compound they had high losses of serviceable vehicles which were abandoned by their crews. In the beginning when the CS compound had not yet been encountered many crews were put to war tribunals for abandoning their vehicles. I guess there is no need to explain what happened to them.
Later tests established rather high concentrations of CS inside hit vehicles.
And as most people in the west did not realize: The USSR made a copy of the German AT rifle “Panzerbüchse 39” and it’s ammunition. The gun and ammunition were officially adopted. After serious problems with the steel alloys needed for the weapon (Soviet weapons became unserviceable after about 40 rounds) it was taken out of service.
Are there any photos (or web links) of the Russian version of the German AT rifle “Panzerbüchse 39” and ammunition?
Brian, just Russian ones and here only the gun.
Ammo is impossible to find even in Russia.
Here an image from the Russian web: