Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: 230RN on November 12, 2014, 02:14:47 PM

Title: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: 230RN on November 12, 2014, 02:14:47 PM
This seems strange.  I was reading about the Korean "Axe Murders," where UN personnel were sent out to cut down a tree in the demilitarized zone and were attacked by NK forces:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axe_murder_incident

One item that caught my attention was that afterward, UN forces went out in "overwhelming force" to cut the tree down (bolding mine):

Quote
In addition, a 64-man South Korean special forces company accompanied them, armed with clubs and trained in Tae Kwon Do, supposedly without firearms. However, once they parked their trucks near the Bridge of No Return, they started throwing out the sandbags that lined the truck bottoms, and handing out M-16 rifles and M-79 grenade launchers that had been concealed below.[2] Several of the special forces men also had Claymore mines strapped to their chests with the firing mechanism in their hands, and were shouting at the North Koreans to cross the bridge.[14][15]

Don't know anything about Claymore mines, but it struck me that the recoil and side-blast, if any, would have been dangerous enough that having one go off on one's chest right below one's face would not be a good idea.

Qs:

(1)  Am I mistaken about the recoil?  Seems anything that's going to throw a bunch of projectiles out frontwards, must come back (recoil) with a considerable kick.

(2)  Was this common practice for some kinds of military occasions?

(3)  Is perhaps the wiki article in error?

It just sounded kind of weird to me.

The incident does, however, reinforce the theory of "Peace through superior firepower." :D

Terry, 230RN

Title: Re:
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on November 12, 2014, 02:35:34 PM
Korean kamikaze
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: vaskidmark on November 12, 2014, 02:38:26 PM
This seems strange.  I was reading about the Korean "Axe Murders," where UN personnel were sent out to cut down a tree in the demilitarized zone and were attacked by NK forces:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axe_murder_incident

One item that caught my attention was that afterward, UN forces went out in "overwhelming force" to cut the tree down (bolding mine):

Don't know anything about Claymore mines, but it struck me that the recoil and side-blast, if any, would have been dangerous enough that having one go off on one's chest right below one's face would not be a good idea.

Qs:

(1)  Am I mistaken about the recoil?  Seems anything that's going to throw a bunch of projectiles out frontwards, must come back (recoil) with a considerable kick.

Yes, the blast force hitting against your chest would be pretty severe, although claymores were regularly used set up free-standing.

(2)  Was this common practice for some kinds of military occasions?

Is bat-guano crazy a military occupation?  I met some ROK Marines in Vietnam - they did not do the pull-the-still-beating-heart-out-of-a-water-bullalo thing, but I would like to be several hundred yards away, on open terrain, when they started coming at me.

(3)  Is perhaps the wiki article in error?

What are the odds that Wiki (the most frequentl;y cited source) is correct?  50-50 on a good day?

It just sounded kind of weird to me.

The incident does, however, reinforce the theory of "Peace through superior firepower." :D

Terry, 230RN

My conversations with folks who were stationed on the DMZ says that our side did not attempt to provoke the Norks.  Patrols going to anything other than sling arms pretty much required permission from higher authority.  OTOH, static emplacements were reported as locked, loaded, and actively sighted in on individual targets or groups.

It's likely that any snatch and grab attempt is ging to be met with the judicious use of impact weapons.

stay safe.
Title: Re:
Post by: vaskidmark on November 12, 2014, 02:40:18 PM
Korean kamikaze

The Koreans that I was aware of would not do kamikaze.  Coming back with the heads of their enemy on the ends of poles would be more likely.
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: dogmush on November 12, 2014, 02:43:14 PM
1. No you aren't mistaken.  It's a mine.  It blows up.  only most of the blast goes forward. The min safe distance to the rear and sides of the mine is 16 meters.  Having one on your chest go off would reduce you to red goo.  maybe some boots.

2. No, That is not AFAIK doctrine in any real military.  Troops enjoy survival.

3. Perhaps.  On the other hand the ROC marines I've gotten drunk with were some crazy MoFo's. Like seriously crazy.  So perhaps not.
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: wmenorr67 on November 12, 2014, 03:06:10 PM
1. No you aren't mistaken.  It's a mine.  It blows up.  only most of the blast goes forward. The min safe distance to the rear and sides of the mine is 16 meters.  Having one on your chest go off would reduce you to red goo.  maybe some boots.

2. No, That is not AFAIK doctrine in any real military.  Troops enjoy survival.

3. Perhaps.  On the other hand the ROC marines I've gotten drunk with were some crazy MoFo's. Like seriously crazy.  So perhaps not.

The ROC Marines I met were crazy. 
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: Firethorn on November 12, 2014, 05:38:37 PM
I consider it a form of peacocking.  The SKs wearing the claymores absolutely didn't want to light them off.

HOWEVER, consider the NK's reactions upon realizing what's going on.  A single claymore would kill most of the SK party, but it would kill everybody in front of it(IE the NK's) even further out.

It's saying 'I'm a crazy Mofo, don't mess with me'.  The goal was to intimidate the NK's for long enough to get the tree chopped down as reports on the NK side went up and down the chain.  It worked.
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: 230RN on November 13, 2014, 06:24:49 PM
1. No you aren't mistaken.  It's a mine.  It blows up.  only most of the blast goes forward. The min safe distance to the rear and sides of the mine is 16 meters.  Having one on your chest go off would reduce you to red goo.  maybe some boots.

2. No, That is not AFAIK doctrine in any real military.  Troops enjoy survival.

3. Perhaps.  On the other hand the ROC marines I've gotten drunk with were some crazy MoFo's. Like seriously crazy.  So perhaps not.

OK, thanks, all.  That's about what I figured, but my impression from the article was that it was Americans who strapped claymores to their chests, from the words "several of the special forces men..."

I guess I assumed "special forces" meant U.S. personnel.

Terry
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: Phantom Warrior on November 15, 2014, 10:24:42 PM
Like dogmush said, Claymores are an explosive, plain and simple.  It is a directional mine because there are bunch of steel balls on top of the explosive that are launched across the impact area like a giant shotgun shell.  But it is still 12 ounces of C4.  Touching that off in contact with your body wouldn't leave anything behind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M18_Claymore_mine#Description
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: 230RN on November 16, 2014, 04:47:34 AM
Or, as dogmush said, maybe a pair of boots.  (I laughed at that remark when I read it.)

From Phantom Warrior's link (bolding mine):

Quote
The force of the explosion deforms the relatively soft steel balls into a shape similar to a .22 rimfire projectile.[1] These fragments are moderately effective up to a range of 100 m (110 yd), with a hit probability of around 10% on a prone man-sized 1.3-square-foot (0.12 m2) target

Well holy cow, I thought that was interesting.  And the balls are originally smaller than a .177 pellet's diameter.

Also, this piqued my interest:

Quote
A layer of tinfoil was added between the fragmentation matrix and the explosive. This slightly improves the fragment velocity, and protects the steel fragments from the corrosive explosive. A ferrite choke was added to prevent RF signals and lightning from triggering the mine.

Makes sense.  ("RF" = Radio Frequency.  Keeps nearby radio transmitters from firing the mine.)

Terry
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: Sergeant Bob on November 16, 2014, 03:01:42 PM
Or, as dogmush said, maybe a pair of boots.  (I laughed at that remark when I read it.)

From Phantom Warrior's link (bolding mine):

Well holy cow, I thought that was interesting.  And the balls are originally smaller than a .177 pellet's diameter.

Also, this piqued my interest:

Makes sense.  ("RF" = Radio Frequency.  Keeps nearby radio transmitters from firing the mine.)

Terry

"How bout ya Rubber Duck? You got a copy on BOOM!!!!
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: 230RN on November 16, 2014, 03:47:15 PM
^ LOL

"Hey, Highway Sergeant, turn yer power mike down. Yer overmodulatin', got some real bad crackling in there.  Ya wanna 10-9 that? Come awn back to this here Rubber Duckie, come awn."
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: Sergeant Bob on November 16, 2014, 10:10:13 PM
^ LOL

"Hey, Highway Sergeant, turn yer power mike down. Yer overmodulatin', got some real bad crackling in there.  Ya wanna 10-9 that? Come awn back to this here Rubber Duckie, come awn."

I ear ya goodbuddy! (goodbuddy is not a term of endearment these days!)
Title: Re: Claymore mines strapped to chest? ???
Post by: just Warren on November 16, 2014, 10:13:08 PM
This is something that you train the Very Special Forces to do.