A few questions to any explosives specialists or people that otherwise have any experience with hand grenades.

  1. we have had a few incidents where low level gang members have been paid to throw hand grenades into people’s homes, supposedly through closed glass windows. How hard or easy is this? Is a hand grenade heavy enough - or has an appropriately sharp shape or the likes - to break the glass?
  2. if one was hit by one of these attacks and one miraculously notices the grenade landing on one’s floor, is there anything that could be done to minimize physical damage to one’s body? Would, say, a piece of furniture shield one from the shards?
  3. are the shards or the blast wave/pressure the more dangerous, or both?
  • Nouvellalia@lemmy.world
    83·
    21 hours ago

    Your suggestions aren’t just bad, they’re literally the worst things you can do. Surely you thought about this and found the worst ideas possible, then posted them as a troll. Putting a pot on the grenade puts you in so much more danger. And a weighted blanket?!?!!

    “Cover the grenade in more shrapnel” is all you keep saying.

    • BenLeMan@lemmy.world
      25·
      16 hours ago

      With sufficient reading comprehension you (and the five people upvoting your posting) would have noticed that nobody is claiming a grenade in a pot would be harmless. The claim was about removing the explosive from the grenade and detonating that inside the pot.

      While I have no evidence to support that claim I have seen someone putting live ammunition in a pot and making it cook off. That experiment clearly showed that cartridges are only really dangerous when used in a firearm. I expect the physics to be very much the same here.

      • rain_enjoyer@sopuli.xyz
        2·
        11 hours ago

        so your solution to defeating a grenade is to dig explosive out of it?

        While I have no evidence to support that claim I have seen someone putting live ammunition in a pot and making it cook off. That experiment clearly showed that cartridges are only really dangerous when used in a firearm. I expect the physics to be very much the same here.

        then your expectations aren’t worth shit, because one is high explosive that does not require confinement to detonate, because reaction zone propagates through supersonic mechanical shock, and the other one is low explosive that has burn rate dependent on pressure, because it burns on surface, which forms foam, which slows down heat transfer, then foam collapses with pressure increase which makes heat transfer faster, but it’s all subsonic. some of the smallest fragments might be stopped by a pot wall, if grenade is in the center, but if it’s close to one wall, then the wall itself would just generate more fragments

        but you probably won’t have pot on hand, or realize what is going on in time, and you don’t know how much time is left because of manufacturing tolerances, and you probably don’t have grenade sumps in your living room, so better way would be preventing this situation in the first place, for example using laminated windows or not being a probable mafia target in sweden, if it’s practical. not by trying to cover grenade with a pot, because you just spend more time closer to grenade this way

        • BenLeMan@lemmy.world
          12·
          10 hours ago

          No, my solution would be to vacate the area post haste. I was just referring to meco03211’s posting in which he wrote

          If you took the explosive out of a grenade, put it in a metal pot with the lid welded on, and detonated, you’d just have a mangled pot.

          Given your theory that the type of explosive used makes all the difference, I would definitely watch a Mythbusters episode about that (if there was one). 😉