Germ. vacuum bombs vs. Soviet chemical weapons
Germ. vacuum bombs vs. Soviet chemical weapons
I read in book "Cholm fortress" by Oskars Perro, that Germans had a vacuum bombs and they had a pretty good results when they used it. The Soviets said that they will use chemical weapons and Germans stopped using these vacuum bombs.
Why? Were the Germans afraid of chemical weapons?
P.S.
Oskars Perro is the first Latvian who earned 1st class Iron Cross.
Why? Were the Germans afraid of chemical weapons?
P.S.
Oskars Perro is the first Latvian who earned 1st class Iron Cross.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1583
- Joined: 01 Aug 2002, 04:11
- Location: ITALY
I've also not heard of a vacuum bomb, however some descriptions of the effects of massed rocket fire state the dead showed no sign of injury. The rapid multiple explosions had caused severe lung damage due to rapid variations in air pressure. Perhaps this is the "vacuum bomb" guntis refers to? Having suggested that the Germans certainly did not stop using their Nebelwerfers.
As regards the use of chemical weapons, the Germans had supplies of such weapons, as well various types of nerve gas. It appears that the deterence effect of knowing that the Allies had at least some chemical weapons was sufficient to stop thier use on the battlefront in WW2. German intelligence was aware of Soviet plans to use aerial delivery systems for chemical weapons. This could have led to widespread chemical contamination greatly affecting logistical support.
Some people also state that Hitler prohibited the use of chemical weapons as a result of his being gassed in WW1.
As regards the use of chemical weapons, the Germans had supplies of such weapons, as well various types of nerve gas. It appears that the deterence effect of knowing that the Allies had at least some chemical weapons was sufficient to stop thier use on the battlefront in WW2. German intelligence was aware of Soviet plans to use aerial delivery systems for chemical weapons. This could have led to widespread chemical contamination greatly affecting logistical support.
Some people also state that Hitler prohibited the use of chemical weapons as a result of his being gassed in WW1.
I think he means fuel-air explosives aka aerosol bombs. I don't know if those were used in WWII.
They are quite effective against troops that are dug in, but using them should not provoke the enemy to use chemical weapons in response.
Info on (modern) fuel-air explosives can be found here:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/fae.htm
They are quite effective against troops that are dug in, but using them should not provoke the enemy to use chemical weapons in response.
Info on (modern) fuel-air explosives can be found here:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/fae.htm
Hi Gespenst welcome to the Forum
I have no reference to any fuel-air bombs being used in WW2. As far as I understood such weapons were a development of the 1960s on.
Some of the effects in terms of massve over pressures do sound similar to, though more powerful than, a nebelwerfer strike. Thanks for the reference, an awesome coventional weapon.
I have no reference to any fuel-air bombs being used in WW2. As far as I understood such weapons were a development of the 1960s on.
Some of the effects in terms of massve over pressures do sound similar to, though more powerful than, a nebelwerfer strike. Thanks for the reference, an awesome coventional weapon.
-
- Member
- Posts: 7051
- Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 01:58
- Location: Mississippi
There has always been a point of contention, as to wheather or not "fire" weapons like fuel-air, napalm and flame-throwers, are "chemical weapons". Fuel- air bombs can kill without ignition due to fumes, so a dud bomb like this could well be considered a chemical weapon.
A Vacuum-bomb did not or does not exist, however I would like to use one on my living room right about now.
A Vacuum-bomb did not or does not exist, however I would like to use one on my living room right about now.
Well it took place not far from Cholm. The Latvian men were at their definate place on the front, when suddenly the German captain N. (in the book his name was mentioned) ran through their camp smiling and laudly speaking what he saw. So, he told somethink like: "The Russian troops were killed, they stayed in the poses how they met the bombs. Some with a cups in their hands, some near their weapons e.t.c. Their bodies were not smashed, but only the blood had been seen in their ears." He ran away sured that the victory is near.
It was the end of 1941.
It was the end of 1941.
-
- Member
- Posts: 7051
- Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 01:58
- Location: Mississippi
-
- Member
- Posts: 7051
- Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 01:58
- Location: Mississippi
Guntis is quite right - there WAS some German missiles used, from what I later deduced to have been Nebelwerfers - that DID cause Moscow to threaten 'gas warfare'. I thought they were some sort of High-Pressure compressed-air projectiles and now I read in the forum about vacuum-bombs? Nothing I've read so far on the thread - seems to pinpoint what it actually was that they used - so please, MORE INFORMATION.
From http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/doctr ... 9/1ch4.htm
The above text tells us about the effects of a nuclear detonation blast wave, but i think it would apply to conventional explosives also if the explosion is rapid and powerful enough. Though in that case, i'd expect to find normal explosion damage in the target. Whatever we're after here doesn't really sound very cost-effective.b. When the blast wave acts directly upon a resilient target such as the human body, rapid compression and decompression result in transmission of pressure waves through the tissues. These waves can be quite severe and will result in damage primarily at junctions between tissues of different densities (bone and muscle) or at the interface between tissue and air spaces. Lung tissue and the gastrointestinal system, both of which contain air, are particularly susceptible to injury. The resulting tissue disruptions can lead to severe hemorrhage or to air embolism, either of which can be rapidly fatal. Perforation of the ear drums would be a common but a minor blast injury.
c. The range of overpressures associated with lethality can be quite variable. It has been estimated that overpressures as low as 193 kPa (1.9 atm) can be lethal, but that survival is possible with overpressures as high as 262 kPa (2.5 atm). Atypical range of probability of lethality with variation in overpressure is summarized in Table 4-I. These are rough estimates based on selected experimental data, and there will be some differences between these figures and tabulations based upon other experimental work. In addition these numbers apply only to unreinforced, unreflected blast waves. When blast waves are complicated by reinforcement and reflection, estimation or measurement of the overpressures associated with specific injuries becomes quite complex. The significant thing shown by the data in Table 4-I is that the human body is remarkably resistant to static overpressure, particularly when compared with rigid structures such as buildings. Shattering of an unreinforced cinder block panel, for example, will occur at 10.1-20.2 kPa (0.1-0.2 atm).
Re: Germ. vacuum bombs vs. Soviet chemical weapons
In the Courland part of Latvia there is a private museum in the village Zante. The proprietor speaks very Little English but I remember him showing was relics he had dug up ant talking about the Worlds first "vacuum bomb". I´ve alsu encounted the term Dauerwerfén in connection to such a weapon while Otto Skorzeny refer to "a wapon they stopped using due to Soviet pressure" as Stuka zu fuzz, which I Believe is an incorrect reference.
Re: Germ. vacuum bombs vs. Soviet chemical weapons
There is a report from late 1943 about a projectile containing phosphorous and other chemicals that absorb oxygen. The effective radius on impact is given as a few hundreds meters. There is also a report of a larger version. B.I.O.S. Report No. 142 refers to an "Oxygen Bomb" Factory located at Nordhausen. The effect of the bomb is killing all life in a circle of several kilometers. The length of the bomb is given as 17 meters.
Chemical weapons were found loaded into artillery shells. I have seen photographs. British soldiers had discovered the shells with green and yellow rings. The contents turned out to be Tabun.
Chemical weapons were found loaded into artillery shells. I have seen photographs. British soldiers had discovered the shells with green and yellow rings. The contents turned out to be Tabun.
- Helmut0815
- Member
- Posts: 919
- Joined: 19 Sep 2010, 14:13
- Location: Lower Saxony, Germany
Re: Germ. vacuum bombs vs. Soviet chemical weapons
There was no such thing as a "vacuum bomb" in WW2 and as stated before, thermobaric bombs were first used in vietnam war in the sixties. However, in WW2 there were rumors on the eastern front, claiming the germans were using so called "Pressluftgranaten" (compressed air grenades) causing severe lung injuries. In fact, the "Pressluftgranaten" were a myth too. The effect came from normal 15, 28 oder 30 cm Nebelwerfer grenades detonating rapidly in limited space causing high barometric pressure differences. That's the story behind vacuum bombs and compressed air grenades.Grellber wrote:In the Courland part of Latvia there is a private museum in the village Zante. The proprietor speaks very Little English but I remember him showing was relics he had dug up ant talking about the Worlds first "vacuum bomb".
Skorzeny was right, the so called "Stuka zu Fuss" oder "Heulende Kuh" (howling cow) is a Wurfrahmen 40 mounted on a Sd.Kfz. 251.Grellber wrote:I´ve alsu encounted the term Dauerwerfén in connection to such a weapon while Otto Skorzeny refer to "a wapon they stopped using due to Soviet pressure" as Stuka zu fuzz, which I Believe is an incorrect reference.
Source: upload.wikimedia.org
regards
Helmut