OK does anybody here know who makes a good copy of a Russian or Chinese 4.5" mortar from the fifties and sixties era? And of course ammo? Maybe an 82mm as well to complete the ensamble
gary
Russian or ChiCom 4.5"? Never heard of it… If you find a kit, let me know! There are a couple of 120mm (4.7in) kits in 1/35th scale around… M1938 and the Granatwerfer 42 (M1938 copy). Italeri/Zvesda and DML.
Soviet 82mm M1937… only in 1/72nd scale by Revell Germany (as far as I know) in soft plastic and that’ll take some work.
HTH
story of my life! I’ve got the pits started, and have nothing to put in them unless I go the U.S. built route (not what I wanted). I see all this going back in the cigar box till I find something suitable.
The Russians used a 4.5" mortar for eons, and it’s a better tube than out 4.2" one. The 82mm was also better back in the day, but all the newer stuff is built like the old Russian units. S.F. teams liked to use them just for their ease of use alone, and there always was a seeming endless supply of captured ammo.
gary
Rumor was the russkies developed the 82mm so they could use our 81mm ammo if captured but we couldn’t use theirs.
Crazy Ivan
Ps, I could use theirs as a booby tray as easy as ours though [;)]
Gary,
I am not an expert and will never claim to be one and I certainly do not have it all but… If you have a pointer to some actual reference on the (fairly modern) 4.5" (114mm) mortar, please do enlighten me!
With all the reference and discussions that I’ve accumulated over the years, most from several experts in the subject, I have never heard of or seen anything about a 4.5" mortar. My google search turns up nothing (for fairly modern times) as well. Something that large would be impossible for SF type teams to move around… One (US/NATO) 4.2" HE round weighs in at greater than 27 lbs and a 4.5" round would be even heavier and the US/NATO 4.2" M30 mortar assembled weighed in at 625+ lbs, took an hour + to set up and was quite manpower extensive. The Russian/Chicom M1938 mortar weighed in at 617+ lbs! Also, If you are talking about using captured 4.2" ammo well, the US (and NATO) 4.2" tubes were rifled bores as opposed to the much more common smooth-bore (fin-stabilized) tubes found in most mortars either smaller or larger. (French MO-120 series were/are rifle-bores). The 114mm (4.5") seems odd to me as well. 120mm (4.7") has been the international ‘standard’ since pre-WWII (The US being relatively ‘new’ to this) and the Chicoms used 120mm quite effectively in Korea and beyond. I doubt that even they would mix it up… logistics etc.
50 and 60mm would be the max that you would see any ‘team’ humping and those with enough of an ammo load to be ‘economical’ would probably not be practical… hence the advent of the 30 and 40mm grenade launchers. I highly doubt that SF ‘teams’ would look to engage targets some 5-7,000 yards out.
I heard the same story when I was in the Army. Truth or fiction I don’t know.
gary
An A-Team is not issued a 4.2 or a 4.5 mortar. They grab whatever they can lay their hands on. These tubes will stay in their base camps till they abandon the site. I’ve never seen any SF team take a tube into the bush, but have seen Regular Army and Marines to this.(60mm)
With the above said; we used two Russian built tubes. An 82mm and what was always termed as a 4.5" (I’m talking Summer of 1968). It was not American or for that matter anything from NATO. I well remember the snap on discs verses those little bags of propellent. Was it a 4.5"? I don’t know as I never measured the tube. But it was bigger than a 4.2" mortar for sure. The bore was smooth just like all the 4.2’s I’ve ever seen or shot.
I have seen 4.2’s in the field, but these were always slung in under a chopper (usually in twos or threes). Once in awhile you’d see them do the samething with an 81mm mortar as well. Base camps are a different story, and are heavilly defended from the center out (usually the high point in the layout). The mortars are usually set in a fairly deep pit to hide the flash after dark, but not always.
So was it a 4.5"? I don’t know now, and at the time didn’t even know how to accurately measure the bore. I just go by what it was termed as, and untill somebody proves it different; it’s still a 4.5. But for a non-existant piece they must have fired 3,000 rounds during the nine months I was based outta there. Maybe they didn’t know how to measure it as well I don’t know. But it was clearly a better tube than an American 4.2.
gary
Interesting. Assuming here that you were 11C in US Army service, both the M2 and it’s successor the M30 (starting in 1951) were both rifled tubes. I don’t know where you got your tube from. Left-over British 4.2" from WWII? That’s the only smooth-bore in that caliber that I’m aware of that ever existed. Never heard of any turning up and being used in SEA… not even by the French. (Prove me wrong!) Was it something that someone hammered out on their own in their hootch?
So haven’t I.
I’m asking you for proof that it did exist. You brought it up and you’re the one looking for a kit.
Would have to be a mighty deep hole… seen the night-time muzzle flash pics on my site?
How so?? Range, RoF? Accuracy? Was it made out of stainless steel? Please do elaborate! Inquiring mind(s) want to know! I’m trying to create and maintain a history of mortars! Your speculation has my interest but really, I do have my doubts.
why was it a better tube? simply ease of use. Was it any more accurate or had any more range than anything else; doubt it. But in the end when you are just two people in the parapit, and trading iron the easiest way is by far the best way. We never shot more than 1500 yards as it was, and then it was all by visual. I might add here that the only rounds these guys ever used were HE, and if we’d had that four duce we’d love to have been able to put a little light over head from time to time without firing it from a 155 howitzer
you made mention of the depth of the pit. It was about five feet with a berm of earth maybe three feet high on the west wall (were they would normally fire towards). There was no flash to be seen. I’m going to try to find a couple pics as I think I know where some might well be.
what with your constant interrigation on this so called weapon sir; all I asked was who made a kit. Nothing more, nothing less. I know very little about mortars, and really think of them as somekind of wanta be. When the parties to be call it a 4.5" I naturally take them to heart (they were better men than I’ll ever be), but if it’s not then what is it? It’s bigger than a 4.2", and used Russian ammo (had a large bunker full of it). But on the otherhand in the late summer of 1968 I never would have dreamed that I would be interrigated over an issue like this. Otherwise I would have shot a hundred pics of it instead of several hundred pics of 155’s and anything else I fancied.
I got better things to do
gary
And my brother in law was always bitchin’ cuz someone stole his bong!
No interrogation… just trying to find out if my library is missing something or maybe I could offer some ‘assistance’ to you but…
Going back a few notes… No bore measurements required. Most ammo will be stenciled with caliber etc and I’d be willing to bet that at least one round in the bunker would’ve been clearly marked as to what it was.
I would be willing to bet again that it was the M1938 et al or Chicom copy in 120mm (4.7" but it/they were never known as that and the ammo/tube for it would not have been marked as such).
I rest my case.
Attempted to inject a little humor here among us 50 somethings. Mini, I have followed Gary’s thread because I like to learn as much as I can from my generation’s war (me, not there), and Gary is a very well spoken reporter.
Without getting technical, I’d say his original proposition stands. What’s the reality? The model.
Gary, if you’ve got snaps, build it yourself. I’ve said before to you that as a model railroad modeler, I’d like to help you, and the mortar pit.
I would think that the big job would be the figures, of course. I went to DC to see my friend Larry Larson’s name on the wall, and made a rubbing. He was at a forward fire base last time I heard, what that means I don’t know.
A mortar is an easy thing to model Gary. A much harder thing will be a diorama that is a true depiction of your situation.
you may well be right, as I don’t know. As I said all I had t go by is what they said it was. The rounds had writing on them as always, but it’s only been 40 years ago this month. With my memory banks having been dumped a zillion times since then I can’t say. I did go to another site last night, and they also have no such animal listed (which I also suspected). But after looking at some photographs I did see one that looked very similar to what I remember (it was Russian but number escapes me at the moment), but the base plate looked different as well as it being taller (looks can be decieving).
So in the end I may just do it with a four duce and an 81mm instead; even though it’s not what I wanted to do.
gary
the only picture I have is microscopic (taken from the air at about 1000ft), but I think I may know somebody that’s got pictures of “The Alamo”. This pair of tubes were placed right in front of it. Dug in very deep for a mortar pit, and manned by whoever they could snatch for help. They also had a 57mm recoiless and a fifty mounted just above it and to the right. I just thought it would make a neat looking dio, but didn’t want to start a war.
gary
you can do a search on Larry Larson’s name from the wall, and they will give you some details to work with (normally his unit and company; plus his KIA date). From there you often can do a unit search and find out what happened to him. But be forwarned; sometimes it’s not what you wanted to read.
glt
Thanks Gary. I did find all the info you listed, and will follow the links when I’m sitting down at home. There isn’t actually a whole lot more I need to know, but a picture would be nice.
normally there is a company or better yet a battalion website someplace. In it you can make a post asking for anybody that knew him. A good place to start is Military.Com. Also by chance if he was up north; then goto the ADVA website, and then to the locator. Make a post there. The post will stay on there for several years, and you’d be surprised as to what might turn up. That’s how I got hooked up with one of my buddies I used to party with all the time
gary
He was a Pfc, USMC 1/4 Company C, 2nd Pltn. KIA 3/26/67 in Quang Tri Province, west of Khe Sahn.
may have been one of the guys on 865 or 881. Anyway he predates the Americal Division, but I do think he’s part of Task Force Oregon. Just about everybody in I-Corps was part of Task Force Oregon, and then it was later expanded and renamed The Americal Division. Make a post on the ADVA Locator website, and then check it every week or so. I’d also suggest that you hunt up a copy of the book “Valley Of Decision” by Ray Stubbe & John Prados. Stubbe was the Marine chaplin on Khe Sanh. One nice thing about Marines is that they do keep excellent records as well as do a lot of photographry.
If I was still working, I had a Marine source for locating just about anybody in the 1st and 3rd Marines. You also might want to check with the 1st Marines website out of Toledo Ohio. That group are supposed to be about as uptp date as it can get.
gary