Gork@lemm.ee to NonCredibleDefense@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 1 month agoQuite an explosive finishfiles.catbox.moeimagemessage-square115fedilinkarrow-up1573arrow-down14
arrow-up1569arrow-down1imageQuite an explosive finishfiles.catbox.moeGork@lemm.ee to NonCredibleDefense@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square115fedilink
minus-squareAtomic@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up17·1 month agoThat’s a reason for then not now. Better question is then why didn’t Germany stick with the old design instead of switching to more “modern” looking grenades? And the answer is NOT “baseball”. The answer is that they’re too heavy and cumbersome. And the cons outweighs the pros.
minus-squareDragonTypeWyvern@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·edit-21 month agoThe answer is it simplified NATO logistics Pray we don’t simplify it further
minus-squareMadison420@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·1 month agoIt’s actually that they’re more expensive when you add the frag jacket to them. There cheaper to produce but logistically more expensive being larger and multi part.
That’s a reason for then not now.
Better question is then why didn’t Germany stick with the old design instead of switching to more “modern” looking grenades?
And the answer is NOT “baseball”. The answer is that they’re too heavy and cumbersome. And the cons outweighs the pros.
The answer is it simplified NATO logistics
Pray we don’t simplify it further
It’s actually that they’re more expensive when you add the frag jacket to them. There cheaper to produce but logistically more expensive being larger and multi part.