German Fuel Air Explosive at Sevastopol?

Discussions on the fortifications, artillery, & rockets used by the Axis forces.
Post Reply
WSchneck
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: 05 Apr 2005, 18:17
Location: Lake Ridge

German Fuel Air Explosive at Sevastopol?

#1

Post by WSchneck » 02 Nov 2006, 21:53

An article titled "Warheads: An Historical Perspective," by Don Kennedy, (on page 56 in a book titled "Tactical Missile Warheads," edited by Joseph Carleone) states: "There is evidence that the German Army may have employed a form of FAE on the Russian defenders in the WWII siege of Sebastopol. German 28-cm and 32-cm NEBELWERFER barrage rockets were employed in mass arrays, with groups of 32-cm-diameter liquid incendiary rockets fired first so as to disperse their contents of gasoline, kerosene, or naptha as vapors, followed seconds later by the 28-cm high-explosive rockets that possibly detonated the fuel-air mixtures. The Soviets noted widespread personnel casualties "without a mark on them," a typical comment concerning a victim of blast injury." The Germans plainly understood the fundamentals of FAE (as demonstrated in the taifun system for the pioneers). The 32-cm round in question was probably the "32-cm Wfk. M. Fl. 50".

Is this true?

If so, did the Germans do this deliberately?

If so, does anyone have more specific information on this operation?[/u]
Last edited by WSchneck on 03 Nov 2006, 00:36, edited 1 time in total.

ducatim901
Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: 14 Jul 2005, 16:38
Location: netherlands

#2

Post by ducatim901 » 02 Nov 2006, 22:37

What in the lords name is a FAE, I know what an SAE is but a FAE??

http://www.wehrtechnikmuseum.de/Exponat ... lerie.html
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/rocket/index.html

In this list you can see that there were grenades (rockets) Fl and Spr, this means Flamm and Spreng, flamm could be the thing you write about in your post.
Greetings Jack.


WSchneck
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: 05 Apr 2005, 18:17
Location: Lake Ridge

#3

Post by WSchneck » 03 Nov 2006, 00:35

Jack,

Thanks for the links. My apologies for not being clear, FAE=Fuel Air Explosives.

Sincerely,
Bill

ducatim901
Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: 14 Jul 2005, 16:38
Location: netherlands

#4

Post by ducatim901 » 03 Nov 2006, 19:47

AHHH, a early daisy cutter!!!!
JK

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

#5

Post by LWD » 03 Nov 2006, 20:06

The term diasy cutter has also been applied to large conventional esplosive bombs particularly those designed tomaximize their horizontal blasts. The history of fuel air explosives goes back quite a ways but mostly as a result of accidental detonations (grain elevator and coal dust explosions are classics). I have seen no evidence of a German employment but am not an expert especially on the Eastern front so this means little. They can be tricky to detonate with a single device but the usage mentioned above uses seperate fuel dispensing and detonating projectiles. The Germans would certainly have been aware of FAEs and attempting a field expediant such as the above wouldn't seam have any serios technical problems. Might take a bit of luck to get the timeing right but nothing beyond the realm of possibility.

WSchneck
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: 05 Apr 2005, 18:17
Location: Lake Ridge

#6

Post by WSchneck » 03 Nov 2006, 20:21

Jack,
Thanks, but "daisy cutters" and FAE use different mechanisms.

The M121 (see attached photo) and BLU-82 "Daisy Cutter" bombs did not use the Fuel-Air Explosive effective. Both contain a large charge of conventional explosives (an aluminumized slurry if I recall correctly) and were detonated by a fuze at the end of a probe. The resulting blast was intended to clear vegetation for a helicopter landing zone. The successor to the BLU-82, the MOAB, does use FAE (if I recall correctly).

http://inventors.about.com/od/militaryh ... Cutter.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... allboy.htm

A Fuel Air Explosive bomb works by dispensing a fuel into the air and then detonating the resulting cloud of fuel-air mixture. The fuel in a FAE bomb can not be detonated until it is dispersed into the air. Modern FAE bombs use fuels like propylene oxide, the German round in question seems to have been filled with kerosene.

FAE data:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/fae.htm
Attachments
Daisy Cutter with CH-54.jpg
Daisy Cutter with CH-54.jpg (28.74 KiB) Viewed 6260 times

WSchneck
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: 05 Apr 2005, 18:17
Location: Lake Ridge

#7

Post by WSchneck » 03 Nov 2006, 20:32

LWD,

Thanks, the history of fuel air explosives does go back quite a ways (I read in a secondary source that the Byzantines had problems with this in their "Greek Fire" arsenals, working to confirm, no luck yet). The Germans did use FAE in their taifun systems (Kharkov, the Crimea, and Warsaw 1944). This one used carbon monoxide and acetylene if I recall correctly. I was involved in testing an FAE system at Yuma Proving Grounds and am familiar with the idiosyncracies that come with this technology.

Bill

JStein
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Mar 2019, 22:53
Location: Southwest USA

Re: German Fuel Air Explosive at Sevastopol?

#8

Post by JStein » 11 Mar 2019, 23:16

Hi,
An old post but I was just reading a fascinating book, "D Day through German Eyes" Book Two by Holger Eckhertz about an interview of K.L. Bergmann, a specialist weapons officer in 1954 by Holger's grandfather Dieter Eckhertz. Mr. Bergmann describes an early version of the "Taifun" system (apparently coal dust and oxygen) where he saw it used in Sevastopol, and later describes a Taifun B. This apparently was a much improved FAE in place at San Omer in the Pas de Calais by March of 1944.

https://themilitaryreviewer.blogspot.co ... and-2.html

User avatar
jpz4
Member
Posts: 801
Joined: 04 Mar 2006, 22:43
Location: The Netherlands

Re: German Fuel Air Explosive at Sevastopol?

#9

Post by jpz4 » 12 Mar 2019, 13:05

JStein wrote:
11 Mar 2019, 23:16
Hi,
An old post but I was just reading a fascinating book, "D Day through German Eyes" Book Two by Holger Eckhertz about an interview of K.L. Bergmann, a specialist weapons officer in 1954 by Holger's grandfather Dieter Eckhertz. Mr. Bergmann describes an early version of the "Taifun" system (apparently coal dust and oxygen) where he saw it used in Sevastopol, and later describes a Taifun B. This apparently was a much improved FAE in place at San Omer in the Pas de Calais by March of 1944.

https://themilitaryreviewer.blogspot.co ... and-2.html
JStein,first of all :welcome:

I'll let others comment on the Taifun, but your post go my attention for another reason. What you call a 'fascinating book' is in fact a highly questionable product. I'd recommend reading the negative reviews on Amazon. Having studied one of the chapters of the first volume I could only conclude it was entirely fake and a complete waste of time. If I had had a paper copy I would have thrown it away.
I've found nothing even remotely genuine. It has been written in a clever way to mislead the readers but ultimately it is a collection of trivia (which are fairly easy to pick up by any WW2 enthousiast) mixed with a combat story that does not add up. It is fabricated. The existence of neither the 'veterans', nor the author nor his grandfather can be proven and the publisher (who seems impossible to trace as well) has produced other stuff that is clearly fake.
The supposed veterans have no real context, rarely mention units, names or locations, and where they do they are dead ends.
It is also written with a clear revisionist agenda including the old 'the heroic Germans were outgunned and outnumbered but never outfought in their pan-European struggle against communism', with an added 'the allies committed crimes too so those of the Germans are not so bad'. In postwar Germany this view has resulted in countless publications from questionable media outlets (such as Der Landser) which today are not taken seriously by anyone with a serious interest in history. Now this agenda is rearing its ugly head in the English language people seem to be caught unaware and are lapping it up. It is fiction with a dangerous agenda.

If you read it again I'd recommend looking for the countless red flags. To name just three: 1) the amount of gore. People don't dwell on painful memories and don't typically go into the nasty details. 2) The 'knowledge' of the veterans about things they would/could not have known in detail (such as enemy equipment) as well as their observation skills in battle. People's knowledge about their own army was very limited, let alone that of the enemy. On the other hand the 'veterans' tell little about stuff they could have known.... 3) The terminology is often clearly postwar. This includes words like 'Hanomag' for the Sd.Kfz.251, but even the Panzer-Tracts experts have never found any evidence that term was used for such vehicles during the war. In fact it is probably a mistake from the 1960s-70s which is being repeated to this day.
I'm not even talking about the writing style, which reads as a bad acting performance (which it is) with questions that are clearly designed for the answers. The answers are full of trivia which are apparently intended to improve credibility but in fact do the exact opposite. On the other hand, small details that would lend credibility and could be checked by experts seems to be lacking entirely.

The books take advantage of a massive shortage of German accounts. It draws people in by providing stories that are exciting and in their enthusiasm of finding a 'new perspective' people appear to loose their ability to realize what is going on. Even worse, some authors have already fallen into the same trap and use the books as a source!

PS: I encourage anyone who's has or will read these books to share any problem they find in them. Publications like these damage our combined effort of studying WW2. The least we can do is warn people about publications like these and combine our efforts to show what is and isn't genuine.

JStein
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Mar 2019, 22:53
Location: Southwest USA

Re: German Fuel Air Explosive at Sevastopol?

#10

Post by JStein » 12 Mar 2019, 19:15

Thanks jpz4. Obviously I got taken in by this. I was wondering about these "interviews" and these terms , and of course, the first mention I had read of a FAE device supposedly operational and deployed.

User avatar
Grzesio
Member
Posts: 981
Joined: 11 Jul 2005, 15:55
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: German Fuel Air Explosive at Sevastopol?

#11

Post by Grzesio » 12 Mar 2019, 21:37

The Taifun FAE was actually used during the Warsaw uprising in August-September 1944 for demolishing buildings and sewer system.

User avatar
jpz4
Member
Posts: 801
Joined: 04 Mar 2006, 22:43
Location: The Netherlands

Re: German Fuel Air Explosive at Sevastopol?

#12

Post by jpz4 » 13 May 2019, 01:07

FWIW, the Sunday Times has published an article addressing this abomination of a book. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/expe ... -tpd9mj0vc

(It is a shame the article only mentions the non-existing people involved in it and doesn't cover the mistakes in the content.)

Post Reply

Return to “Fortifications, Artillery, & Rockets”