What's new
British Ordnance Collectors Network

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

M15 WP grenade

D

Dragontooth

Guest
Who has pics and info?

This was the predecessor to the M34 WP right?


Wiki is too short.
 
It preceded the M34, but was not replaced by it, at least not initially. It was also converted into a BLU for submunition use.
 
US-Subs said:
It preceded the M34, but was not replaced by it, at least not initially. It was also converted into a BLU for submunition use.
Click to expand...

Aha. Can you please tell me which years of 'active duty' we are looking at here for the M15 and M34 respectively?
Thank you.

PS I have tried the search function but could not find anything the first time.
 
Not real sure on dates. The M15 was around in WWII, the M34 came to be sometime during Viet Nam. The M34 is still seen on occasion, I'm not sure when the M15 faded away.
 
The M15 was also use in the early WWII napalm bombs, which were essentially drop tanks. Fill the tank with napalm mixture, screw in an M15 with an adapter into the filler hole, put an all ways acting fuze on the grenade and you now have a crispy critter maker. Cheers, Bruce.
 
Here is some basic info cut and pasted from a 1961 report that seems to correct some data given on the other M35/15 thread. In addition, I'm not sure if the bodies used for the firebomb igniters were the same as the M15 or not, I'll try and measure mine in a day or two to see. Keep in mind that there were at least two types of fire bomb igniters, one filled with WP, one filled with sodium for targets on the water. Both were filled in the same body.

DPGTP 467 6 January 1961

A. Development. The development of the P04 (E16) grenade wasinitiated as a result of a requirement of the Army Field Forces for a​
grenade similar to the M15​
​
​
​
WP grenade, which would be lighter in weightwith improved dispersion characteristics. This new item was to haveantipersonnel effects by producing metal fragments. It was to f i t the​
MIA2​
​
​
​
​
adapter for r i f l e launching and be equally useful as a hand grenade.​
B.​
​
​
​
Previous Testing​
1.​
​
​
​
Final Engineering Tests of the El6 grenade conducted atArmy Chemical Center in 1953 concluded that the grenade satisfactorily​
met​
​
​
​
tHe military characteristics, except f o r d i f f i c u l t y in f i t t i n g thegrenade to the MlA2 adapter. Later CONARC user t e s t s indicated that thefuze handle was unsafe so it was redesigned,. Tests conducted in ​
January 1959 indicated t h a t the redesigned handle was satisfactory andthat no other defects were apparent. The grenade was therefore recommended​
for type classification and has since been standardized to M34.

2. The revisions to the original El6 model were madewhile the grenade was​
​
​
​
still in the developmental stages to correctthose defects as discovered in functional tests, but the revisionnumbers were never officially added to the original nomenclature ofGrenade, Hand or Rifle, Smoke, WP, E16, with one exception. Thisexception was the printing of Equipment Publication 74 and TechnicalInstruction 300-5, which erroneously l i s t e d the grenade as E16R2.The grenades to be environmentally tested w i l l have a l l of the revisionsincorporated and are designated Grenade, Hand and Rifle, Smoke, WP,M34. The o f f i c i a l nomenclature of the grenade prior to standardization​
was Grenade, Hand or Rifle, Smoke, WP, E16
 
According to the government, we are not using the M34 today or have in the past 20 years. This violates the Chemical Treaty.

Now, use might be by SpecOp's people as they are still using M7A3's in Afghanistan & Iraq. This violates the Chemical Treaty too. NOTE: I do not know the exact name of the treaty we were a sighner to.

Would like to see some pictures of the M34's use today though, that is if there are any?
 
bacarnal said:
The M15 was also use in the early WWII napalm bombs, which were essentially drop tanks. Fill the tank with napalm mixture, screw in an M15 with an adapter into the filler hole, put an all ways acting fuze on the grenade and you now have a crispy critter maker. Cheers, Bruce.
Click to expand...

I've been trying to check on this, with slightly conflicting and confusing results. At this point however it looks like I will have to concede.

Navy OP 1664 states that there are two igniters (there are earlier ones, but we will limit this for clarity), the M15 and M16. It states that "The igniters consist of either a sodium or WP hand grenade M15". I've never heard of or seen references for a sodium (Na) M15. It further states that the M15 and M16 may be filled with either fill, but that the difference is that the M15 has a bracket for outside attachment (external), the M16 is screwed in to the fill cap (internal). Army TM 3-400, Chemical Bombs and Clusters, makes no mention of M15 grenades. It states that "the igniter body is an 18 gage steel cylinder, 2 3/8 inches in diameter and 4 1/2 inches long". The TM further states that the M15 is WP filled only, the M16 may be WP or Na.

I've attached a picture of my M15 and M16, M16 on the left, M15 on the right. Again a little confusing in that my M15 has the filler cap adapter, not a clamp. Unsure why, this is the way I received it.

It should further be noted that the use of the M34, M15 or any other WP filled munition is not in any way a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention. The only way it could be a violation is if you used it specifically for it's toxic effect. It is true that WP can have a toxic effect, but it takes 10-12 years to show up - not a viable reaction time for a chemical weapon. Typically WP is used as a screening smoke or for incendiary effect.
Within the convention the use of RCA (tear gas) and other chemicals (lethal or non-lethal) is limited to law enforcement. In accordance with the Convention it cannot be used as a method of warfare. The question of use then in part becomes whether the using party has been requested to assist in law enforcement activities by the host country, and in what context they do so.


View attachment 56377 DSC_0757.jpg
 

Attachments

  • DSC_0756.jpg
    DSC_0756.jpg
    91 KB · Views: 26
Subs, This is the pub I got my info from: TM 9-1325-200 /NAVWEPS OP3530/TO 11-1-28, Pages 5-22-5-24 and page 4-27 shows the M15 igniter assembly, which looks like the M23 igniter body with a clamp to hold the grenade. What you have shown is the M16 igniter. The pub also states the the M15 grenade is used. Unfortunately, I don't have a date for the pub, but it has both GP and LDGP bombs in it and the M904 fuze in addition to the older M100 series tail and the M103 nose. Kinda hard to pin down but I'd say in the mid '50's. Cheers, Bruce.
 
Late note that I couldn't use edit for. The pub is dated April 1966 and is here on BOCN as a download. Bombs and Bomb Components, TM 9-1325-200. All that chasing my tail and it was here to begin with. Cheers, Bruce.
 
High concentrations to WP Smoke are toxic and can have immediate serious side effects to the Human Body. And...no, it does not take nearly two decades to do damage as has been stated. You should need to read up on the toxicity of Chemicals, including WP smoke to the body and the immediate effects on the human body. Bone diseases are only one side effect that can show up as early as 8 years o sooner depending upon the person(s) exposed. Also, it does effect everybody differently. To say that WP only has a side effect of Osteo problems to the human body in around 18 years simply shows me that it is nothing more than hyperbole. What other facts do you have on the Physiology of the human body in relation to exposure? To simply say "That if used for it's toxic effect" is really an inaccurate opinion and definately not condusive to each/all soldier(s) on the battlefield. It is only, again your opinion and a misleading one at that. Generalizing, if that is what you were trying to do here, cannot do anybody any good and will not do it for some poor old soul who ends up having come into contact with the WP itself or its smoke. To end this subject of an inaccuracy on your part all I will say is before you make a medical "mistake" such as this one, Please, do more research on the Physiology of the human body and how it reacts to disease. Please, do not state your opinion on Medical issues to me here.

By the way, thanks! Fragman!

It is up to the SpecOps Community as to whether they will use any of the imflammatory agents such as CN, CS, and CR, etc., etc. These and the other chemicals are very much "Tools" that the Special Operations Community have in their possesstion.
From a SEAL book that I am reading now (entitled "Special Warfare Special Weapons" By Kevin Dockery on pages 176 - 177) tells the reader that the M15 was considered "Obsolete" by the Navy (SEALS) in 1996 and that it came about around 1943. Centered in the top of the M15 is the same fuse used on the Mk3A2 grenade. That being the M206A2.

Supposedly right after WWII, it says, the M34 was designed also as a bursting-type grenade. Stay tuned till tommorrow folks to this Bat station and the same Bat time.
 
Last edited:
bacarnal said:
Subs, This is the pub I got my info from: TM 9-1325-200 /NAVWEPS OP3530/TO 11-1-28, Pages 5-22-5-24 and page 4-27 shows the M15 igniter assembly, which looks like the M23 igniter body with a clamp to hold the grenade. What you have shown is the M16 igniter. The pub also states the the M15 grenade is used. Unfortunately, I don't have a date for the pub, but it has both GP and LDGP bombs in it and the M904 fuze in addition to the older M100 series tail and the M103 nose. Kinda hard to pin down but I'd say in the mid '50's. Cheers, Bruce.
Click to expand...

Bacarnal, so that puts it as late as 66 and still used for an igniter. But have you ever heard of a "sodium grenade", or a sodium filled M15? I don't suppose it would be a big deal to do at Pine Bluff or elsewhere, but you would think it would be referenced more than a passing line in a pub or two. On the M15 vs M16 I am strictly going by the painted nomenclature on the bodies. I agree that at least two of the pubs would call it an M16, but I received this igniter as it is. Could have been reassembled, but its not that common of a part.??

The OP also mentions an earlier M13 and M14, with the same external appearances.
 
WP and PWP are still used by the united States military as screening smoke. Look up the M60 for the 105mm and the M110 and M825 for the 155mm WP is a chemical but it is used as a screening agent. And most screening smokes are toxic (HC smoke) And the M34 is still in the US inventory. It is just not a high issue item.
 
Thanks BA1980,

I wouldn't of known that until you brought up the fact of the artilliary rounds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top