Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
#1
Old 04-08-2004, 11:18 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Netherfield Park
Posts: 3,021
Rocket Propelled Grenades vs. Hand Grenades

Perhaps like you, I saw some very unsettling footage on the news this evening--footage showing an M1A2 Abrahms battle tank just moments after an RPG slammed into it, lightly wounding two of the men inside and killing one, I believe.

My guess is that the explosive charge on an RPG is significantly larger than that of a hand grenade, but how much?

Also: about how fast does the RPG's rocket propel the grenade? Are we talking several hundred MPHs?

And what accounts for an RPG's penetrating ability? I'm guessing it's more than a simple F=M x A, including such factors as the density and shape of the RPG's nose.

Frankly, I'm stunned that an RPG could penetrate the armor of our best battle tank...
#2
Old 04-08-2004, 11:48 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 3,354
I am no expert in the field, but I know a thing or two.

An RPG, as opposed to a hand grenade, is not only much more potent, but also concentrates its whole explosive power on the point of impact.

A hand grenade creates something like a spherical explosion instead.

I haven't seen the footage (a link maybe?) but it is very dificult to seriously damage a M1 tank (which has reactive armour) with an RPG. There is one occasion(some test probably), where a M1 sustained two succesful hits from sovied-designed Israeli tanks and then striked back, incapacitating both enemy tanks.
#3
Old 04-08-2004, 11:53 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 3,354
I d'like to add that the attackers most probably got a lucky shot. Some places (like between the turret and the main body of the tank) are quite vulnerable.
#4
Old 04-08-2004, 11:54 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Encinitas
Posts: 2,410
M1 series tanks don't have reactive armor.
__________________
And the plane never takes off...
#5
Old 04-09-2004, 12:07 AM
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 38,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog80
II haven't seen the footage (a link maybe?) but it is very dificult to seriously damage a M1 tank (which has reactive armour) with an RPG.
As pointed out, the M1 does not carry reactive armor (an armor that explodes outwards when struck.) M1s carry composite armor made of steel and ceramics and God only knows what else.

You're right though in that RPGs are designed to focus their explosive power. To be honest the term "RPG" is deceptive. An RPG is not like a grenade launcher that throws little grenades. It's really closer in design and purpose to a rocket launcher. It's similar in capability to the M72.

The RPG-7 grenade (the RPGs you see used are very likely RPG-7s) is an 85mm projectile that weighs about five pounds, which is much heavier than any hand throwns grenade.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
#6
Old 04-09-2004, 12:24 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 7,544
Do RPG's have a shaped charge that therefore enables penetration of things armour plating?
__________________
"We live on an island surrounded by a sea of ignorance. As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance" - John Archibald Wheeler
#7
Old 04-09-2004, 12:33 AM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the IP address space
Posts: 2,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarlGauss
Do RPG's have a shaped charge that therefore enables penetration of things armour plating?
Yes. The shape of the warhead is very distinctive for that sort of charge.
#8
Old 04-09-2004, 12:47 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Encinitas
Posts: 2,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnac the Magnificent!
Perhaps like you, I saw some very unsettling footage on the news this evening--footage showing an M1A2 Abrahms battle tank just moments after an RPG slammed into it, lightly wounding two of the men inside and killing one, I believe.
Sorry for the short first post: I was going out for beer.

Since three troops were involved it sounds like a turret hit. If the loader and commander were up in their hatches an RPG is going to spoil their day. And the gunner won't especially like having 4 or 5 pounds of explosive going off against the wall of his cubicle. As Dog80 pointed out it may have been a lucky trap shot shot against the turret ring.

Quote:
Also: about how fast does the RPG's rocket propel the grenade? Are we talking several hundred MPHs?
Actually, your guess is right in the ballpark. A couple hundred miles an hour flight speed with maybe 3 or 4 seconds flight time.

Quote:
And what accounts for an RPG's penetrating ability? I'm guessing it's more than a simple F=M x A, including such factors as the density and shape of the RPG's nose.
The shape of the RPG's nose, or any shaped charge weapon, is only an accommodation to aerodynamics. The work is done by the inverted cone shaped explosive charge right behind that thin shield. It's hard to believe, when you see the diagrams, that shaped charges really work. But they do. RPGs can go through 18" - 24" of steel in the right conditions.
__________________
And the plane never takes off...
#9
Old 04-09-2004, 12:51 AM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 308
Here's a link that explains shaped charges in a little more detail. They've been widely used in man-portable anti-tank projectiles since WWII, though the principle, originally known as the "Munro Effect" was first observed in the late 1800s. Here's some more info on the RPG-7, which is pretty much the standard model, though the Russians are now producing and selling more advanced ones (including, I believe, models with multi-stage shaped charges). Note from the first diagram that much of the large, pointy warhead is, in fact, hollow.

I expect that recent damaging hits to M1s by RPG rounds are a function of the unusually close quarters environment in which the tanks have been coming under attack in the original invasion of Iraq and more recently. If an attacker is willing and able to close to point-blank range, he has a better chance of hitting his target in one of its more vulnerable areas (e.g., the turret ring, the lower side hull behind the treads, hatches, etc.). This is in contrast with their designed role, and most of their active employment in the '91 Gulf War. Note that range has no inherent effect on the penetration capability of a shaped charge. It pierces the same thickness of armor whether fired from 1000' feet away or 1 foot.


RickJay - I believe the M1A2 actually has a layer of depleted uranium in its composite armor on some surfaces, along with the other materials you mentioned.
#10
Old 04-09-2004, 02:05 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 16,451
Here is what an RPG-7 looks like.
This is not the first time an RPG has done damage to a tank. Back in Aug of last year a tank was put out of action by an RPG round. Here is a series of excellent pictures of the 8/03 tank
Don't forget that the armor on a tank is not the same thickness all over. some areas are thinner than others.
#11
Old 04-09-2004, 01:13 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Dogpatch/Middle TN.
Posts: 30,551
There have also been rumors of RPGs with hyperbaric warheads being tested in the perpetual border slirmishes between China & Russia.

If true, the RPG has just become one of the most dangerous infantry support weapons on the battlefield, as it could be turned on infantry with great ease, & could destroy Chobham-type armor as well.
__________________
The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over.
~~~~Hunter S. Thompson
#12
Old 04-09-2004, 10:31 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: City of the Red Chicken
Posts: 1,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umbriel
Here's a link that explains shaped charges in a little more detail.
That link may need a little more explanation for some. As stated by others, the front cone of an RPG is hollow. In fact, there is another hollow cone on the inside, but the bottom of this cone is facing forwards. The first hollow cone does 2 things, it provides a more aerodynamic profile and it provides a standoff distance for the start of the explosion.

The second hollow cone (which is bottom forward) is lined on the inside with a thin sheet of metal (used to be copper, not sure if that's all that's used) and the outside of the cone is the explosive.

When the front cone hits the target, it detonates the explosive at the very tip of the back hollow cone. This melts the metal lining, and blows it back down the center of the second hollow cone towards the target. As the explosion propagates down the cone (towards the target), it continues to add molten metal to the jet, and the explosive force continues to accelerate the molten metal. The metal then hitsthe target like a thin molten spear at the speed of sound. It doesn't make a large diameter hole, but it makes it through a lot of armor.

Defenses against the RPG include forcing it to detonate early so the molten jet breaks up before it hits the armor, and turning the RPG so that it is not facing directly into the armor.
#13
Old 04-09-2004, 10:44 PM
2012 SDMB NFL Salary Cap Champ
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 11,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay
As pointed out, the M1 does not carry reactive armor (an armor that explodes outwards when struck.) M1s carry composite armor made of steel and ceramics and God only knows what else.

You're right though in that RPGs are designed to focus their explosive power. To be honest the term "RPG" is deceptive. An RPG is not like a grenade launcher that throws little grenades. It's really closer in design and purpose to a rocket launcher. It's similar in capability to the M72.

The RPG-7 grenade (the RPGs you see used are very likely RPG-7s) is an 85mm projectile that weighs about five pounds, which is much heavier than any hand throwns grenade.
Okay, I think we're all familiar to the concept of a rocket launcher thanks to FPS games going all the way back to Doom. Are there real differences between what those games describe as a rocket launcher, what a real rocket launcher is, and what an RPG is? How about a bazooka?
#14
Old 04-09-2004, 10:52 PM
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 38,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by asterion
Okay, I think we're all familiar to the concept of a rocket launcher thanks to FPS games going all the way back to Doom. Are there real differences between what those games describe as a rocket launcher, what a real rocket launcher is, and what an RPG is? How about a bazooka?
A small launcher like an RPG-7, M72, or Carl Gustav is basically a rocket-assisted shell; it has a rocket-type engine that fires it at the beginning of its flight, but it's flying most of the way unpowered. They're unguided and for obvious reasons, accurate range is limited. A bazooka is such a weapon (the M72 is today's bazooka.)

This is as opposed to a true rocket launcher like a TOW, Stinger, or Dragon, which are actual missiles, with rocket engines propelling them all the way to the target.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
#15
Old 04-10-2004, 01:17 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Encinitas
Posts: 2,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoringDad
When the front cone hits the target, it detonates the explosive at the very tip of the back hollow cone. This melts the metal lining, and blows it back down the center of the second hollow cone towards the target. As the explosion propagates down the cone (towards the target), it continues to add molten metal to the jet, and the explosive force continues to accelerate the molten metal. The metal then hits the target like a thin molten spear at the speed of sound. It doesn't make a large diameter hole, but it makes it through a lot of armor.
Nice post, BoringDad, with a chance for me to clear up a common misconception.

I have often heard of shaped charges "burning" or "melting" their way through metal. Neither term is correct.

The metal isn't burned, or oxidized, by the passage of the shaped charge jet. There's little or no oxygen to be had 'cause an explosion just went off in the immediate neighborhood. This effect can be useful in putting out oil-rig fires.

And it's not melted either. The temperatures associated with the jet's passage are typically well below melt temperatures of the metal, usually steel, being penetrated.

What the jet does do is push its way through. Yield strength of steel is on the order of 40K psi, more or less. Local pressures from shaped charge jets are in the 10+ million psi range. Rather than think of a hot knife through warm butter, as an analogy, think of a screwdriver through styrofoam.

Interestingly, some of the metal from the jet is deposited on the penetrated metal's surface. So what you get is a very loud, expensive copper plating technology.
__________________
And the plane never takes off...
#16
Old 04-10-2004, 03:21 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 12,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnac the Magnificent!

And what accounts for an RPG's penetrating ability? I'm guessing it's more than a simple F=M x A, including such factors as the density and shape of the RPG's nose.

Frankly, I'm stunned that an RPG could penetrate the armor of our best battle tank...
I guess you've gotten the answer now that the RPG penetrating ability comes from a shaped charge.

The term "grenade" applies to any small missile. Grenades can be thrown by hand, propelled by a rifle (rifle grenade), rocket etc. The hand thrown grenades usually thought of are fragmentation. However, there are also concussion grenades, smoke grenades, tear gas grenades and probably some more I haven't thought of.
#17
Old 04-10-2004, 04:58 PM
Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: A Brit in 'Stralia
Posts: 1,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoringDad
This melts the metal lining, and blows it back down the center of the second hollow cone towards the target. As the explosion propagates down the cone (towards the target), it continues to add molten metal to the jet, and the explosive force continues to accelerate the molten metal. The metal then hitsthe target like a thin molten spear at the speed of sound. It doesn't make a large diameter hole, but it makes it through a lot of armor.
If I can be an incredibly nitpicky metallurgist for a second - the cavity liner doesn't melt, and the jet isn't molten. This has been determined by flash x-ray diffraction. The jet is structurally a solid, but it flows under the immense pressures generated by the explosive.

Source - Military Metallurgy, by A. Doig.
#18
Old 04-10-2004, 06:15 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay
A small launcher like an RPG-7, M72, or Carl Gustav is basically a rocket-assisted shell; it has a rocket-type engine that fires it at the beginning of its flight, but it's flying most of the way unpowered. They're unguided and for obvious reasons, accurate range is limited. A bazooka is such a weapon (the M72 is today's bazooka.)...
Sidenote, America no longer uses the M72; Do you guys? We use the M136 now, and the troops are clamouring for the Carl G. (which the SF and Rangers already have).
#19
Old 04-10-2004, 10:34 PM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the IP address space
Posts: 2,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay
A small launcher like an RPG-7, M72, or Carl Gustav is basically a rocket-assisted shell; it has a rocket-type engine that fires it at the beginning of its flight, but it's flying most of the way unpowered. They're unguided and for obvious reasons, accurate range is limited. A bazooka is such a weapon (the M72 is today's bazooka.)

This is as opposed to a true rocket launcher like a TOW, Stinger, or Dragon, which are actual missiles, with rocket engines propelling them all the way to the target.
Just to be be incredibly nitpicky: The Carl Gustav is not technically a rocket launcher, it's a recoilless rifle. The round contains a propellant charge much like a conventional artillery round, except that the bottom blows out to allow gases to escape to the rear of the weapon. But it's not a rocket - the casing stays in the weapon, and it's the launcher that handles the pressure of the propellant charge going off. Only the shell leaves the muzzle, a good part of the propellant gases leave through the vent at the rear of a weapon, and the shell casing has to be removed from the weapon before reloading.

The M72 (and the bazooka) OTOH are both rocket launchers, in that they - ehm - launch a rocket. If you inspect a bazooka round or a M-72 round, they are little solid-fuel rockets in their own right - with a rocket bell, fins and everything. The tubes of the bazooka and M72 are much lighter than those of the Carl Gustav in that they do not handle any pressure - except what's necessary to protect the user from the exhaust gases.

(And so to make the confusion complete: Both the Carl Gustav (and the RPG) can fire rocket-assisted rounds - well after the round has left the launcher, a sustainer rocket engine kicks in to improve range. Range is nice. Computing for windage with a rocket-assisted round - preferably before the target decides to solve the problem by running you over instead - not so nice.)
#20
Old 04-11-2004, 09:04 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brazil - Brasilia
Posts: 3,996
So technical specifications aside... How effective are RPGs ?

I was made to understand that only those cumbersome Marine Amphibious APCs were vunerable to RPGs. That most other armor in the US arsenal was RPG proof. (Though of course having them slam into your tank isn't fun at all of course.)

Is it any good vs infantry ? HUMVEEs must be a favorite with Iraqi Insurgents.

Is it more pshycological seeing those grenades flying all over the place ?
__________________
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster.
And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
- Friedrich Nietzsche

A tyrant is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader.
- Plato (c.428-348 BC), Republic, Book VIII

Ubi Dubium, Ibi Libertas
(Where there is doubt, there is freedom)
#21
Old 04-11-2004, 12:55 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 15,581
The best possible weapon to take on a tank is another tank. No army with any choice in the matter would rely entirely on the infantry's anti-tank weapons. But the various infantry weapons make it possible for infantry to not be completely helpless against tanks, and have the advantage of numbers and cheapness. It's sort of like in the Middle ages when armored knights ruled the battlefield: archers and men with polearms could and did take down knights, but you wouldn't want to field all infantry against a force of armored and mounted knights.
#22
Old 04-11-2004, 01:44 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Je suis Ikea.
Posts: 25,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt
If I can be an incredibly nitpicky metallurgist for a second...
[sidebar]It's posts like this that keep me coming back to the SDMB. Nobody else has the range of participants we have here![/sidebar]
#23
Old 04-11-2004, 07:55 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rashak Mani
So technical specifications aside... How effective are RPGs ?
Individually, not very. But when used often enough, in enough situations, against a variety of targets, the odds catch up.

Quote:
I was made to understand that only those cumbersome Marine Amphibious APCs were vunerable to RPGs. That most other armor in the US arsenal was RPG proof. (Though of course having them slam into your tank isn't fun at all of course.)
The USMC's AAVP7A1 is very vulnerable, especially since it is chock-full of Marines (20-some of them.) However, I don't think that one has yet been lost in action. The Bradley is much better off, with it's armor generally working as advertisted. The M1-series are rather amazing, given the amount of RPG hits these things are absorbing. Still, even the mightey M1-series does have weak point. If you shoot enough RPGs at a M1, odds are you will eventually hit one of those weak points.

A British Challenger 2 tank, during the early days of the war, took dozen of RPG hits. Didn't even knock it out of action. To think, those almost went to Iran (Well, the Challenger 1.)

Quote:
Is it any good vs infantry ? HUMVEEs must be a favorite with Iraqi Insurgents.
The HEAT-warhead projectiles would be pretty bad weapons against infantry, in most situations, since the explosive force is so concentrated 'forward'. There are fragmenting warheads and hyperbaric (fuel-air explosive) warheads, however, that are darned usefull vs. infantry.

Vs. a HUMVEE, they will of course penetrate right through, but that is also a disadvantage: There is generally no ammo to 'cook off' in a HUMVEE (not like in a Bradley or Abrams), and unless the stream hits a person, you are unlikely to cause catastrophic damage (to people; The hummer is unlikely to survive.) Most effective vs. a 'soft' target like a HUMVEE would be traditional high-explosive.

It is interesting to note that the Stryker brigade over their is reporting very positive things about the Stryker, and it's ultra-super-high-tech armor vs. RPGs: Basically, a 'net' of metal (so-called Slat armor), not dissimiliar to a fence, stuck around the Stryker. RPG hits the 'armor', and detonates prematurely. Yet another gift from the British. (I think it was them, years ago, that came up with the concept of 'slat' armor to defeat HEAT warheads.)
#24
Old 04-11-2004, 09:05 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Posts: 594
I was under the impression that there is a reactive armor kit for almost every armored vehicle. Also, many mechanics are very resourceful so what is to stop them from adapting elements of one kit to the features of another armored vehicle?
#25
Old 04-11-2004, 09:06 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Ottawa, Canuckistan
Posts: 2,593
You can find a number of discussions on the incident referred to by the OP and similar incidents at the AFV News Discussion Group at the AFV News site (AFV=Armoured Fighting Vehicle). In this case, the RPG was apparently fired straight down into the top of the turret from a highway overpass, injuring the two crew members who had their heads sticking out of the turret hatches from the surface blast and fragments. The RPG penetrated the thin top armour on the turret, which is NOT designed to be RPG resistant.

The MI tank is very resistant to attacks from the frontal arc, but has thinner armour on what are normally areas not exposed to direct attack by serious weapons, such as the rear and top. It is not invulnerable. Tank design is a process of compromise, where you increase the armour on the front by decreasing the armour elsewhere, while still trying to keep the weight within reasonable limits. The goal for the MI, which was met pretty well based on actual experience, was not to make the tank invulnerable, but to make it very difficult to penetrate from the front (where most of the attacks come from on a normal battlefield) and to maximize crew survivability when it was penetrated.

It is not that hard to knock out an M1 (or any tank) if it is hit in the right place. For example, as the rear of the M1 is basically a huge engine grill, it is not that difficult to penetrate the armour there and kill the engine (this happened to at least one M1 in Iraq, apparently to a stray 25mm round from a US M2 Bradley). However, the crew will normally escape and the tank can be hauled back to the workshops and the damaged engine pulled and replaced in a few hours. Similarly, a hit in the ammo storage racks at the back of the turret will blow off special armour panels before the explosion can penetrate into the rest of the turret, again sparing the crew and resulting in a workshop repair job rather than a destroyed tank.

Most of the destroyed tank pictures coming from Iraq are the result of hits that started fuel fires, which are very difficult to extinguish and will usually cause the tank to be completely burnt out. This is apparently usually due to hits on the fuel cans carried on the outside of the turret for refueling the auxilary power unit (small electrical generator) or on the APU itself on earlier models of the tank. Newer models have the APU in a self contained installation under armour to avoid this problem (part of the original design but dropped due to Congessional cost-cutting, IIRC).

The was an incident a couple of months ago where an RPG hit the side of an M1 right at a "golden BB" location, where it passed through a miniscule gap above the armour skirt hanging outside the track and hit a thin spot in the armour on the inside of the track. it went through, cut a track through the back one crew member's flack jacket and the front of the seat pad he was leaning against, and then hit the fuse panel on the other side of the tank, knocking out the electrical system. Again, no serious injury (the tank commander had a couple of burns from the hot metal spray), and the tank was repaired and put back in action.
#26
Old 04-11-2004, 10:18 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: City of the Red Chicken
Posts: 1,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt
If I can be an incredibly nitpicky metallurgist for a second - the cavity liner doesn't melt, and the jet isn't molten. This has been determined by flash x-ray diffraction. The jet is structurally a solid, but it flows under the immense pressures generated by the explosive.
As northern piper said, pick away. Very neat extra information.
And to allow you to continue to pick... is the heat from the explosion too low to melt the copper, the duration of the explosion too short to allow enough heat to transfer into the copper to melt it, or the pressure high enough to keep it solid?
#27
Old 04-12-2004, 01:01 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Encinitas
Posts: 2,410
Short of matt's return I'll stick my neck out and say that at the pressures present at shaped charge detonation everything inside the shock cone is going to be a solid. The time and energy constraints you mention, BoringDad are way too constrictive to allow a massive transfer of heat. Plus that massive psi overburden tends to be a bit of a bitch.
#28
Old 04-12-2004, 09:36 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnac the Magnificent!
I'm guessing it's more than a simple F=M x A, ...
Side point to the discussion. Without an explosive charge, the appropriate equation is momentium = mass times velocity (p = mv)
#29
Old 04-13-2004, 02:16 AM
Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: A Brit in 'Stralia
Posts: 1,964
MonkeyMensch: spot on about the heat transfer! Detonating explosives are surprisingly bad at starting fires from their own heat of detonation.

The penetrator will be heated by the physical work done on it, but not to the melting point of copper or steel. Solid penetrators can be recovered - reportedly they have a final shape reminiscent of a short fencing sword with a disc hand guard.

Experiments with other possible liner materials have included lead, for that extra bit of density, and glass. Lead, that soft squidgy metal, shatters at the deformation rates involved in lined cavity charges and doesn't form an effective penetrator. Glass on the other hand forms a penetrator nicely. Go figure!

(Since glass is of lower density than copper or steel, it's surprising that anyone bothered to run the experiment. My WAG is that the feasibilbity of using glass liquor bottles with hollow conical bases for field-improvised charges was being studied.)
#30
Old 04-13-2004, 03:19 AM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,269
Basically, Hand Grenades work by exploding at the enemy. RPGs work by distracting them because they're trying to level up their party so they can change character classes before the boss battle, so you can get close enough to throw a grenade at them.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44 PM.

Copyright © 2017
Best Topics: gay little people cheerleader spankies hoppity hop toys common meter big fat nigger spear vs javelin hockey substitution rules bleach spray bottles long fingernail wine cork stuck hboc mckesson artificial speciation usps redelivery slip tonight in german ded bob definity hp100 review adderall cost walmart tontine legal giant newton's cradle craig shergold 2015 recarbonate soda roshambo etymology soma abuse motel live swag urban dictionary waterworld dry land mouse behind stove maori pronunciation uss seaview sword vs bear les schwab brake prices cost to replace outlet killing floor guest pass fat albert character with hat over face bigger than a breadbox counter sue for false claims removing ivy from brick frames for calendar pages how much electricity does it take to kill you printer not printing colors correctly how to pick up a hooker how much is 50 ft how to cook swedish potato sausage human sex with chimp fedex didn't leave door tag term for black hair origin password reset email not sending 2016 funeral gift money amount propane tank wont turn on directions from the shire to mordor on foot puerto rican coffee maker what chinese food should i get white wedding lyrics meaning leaving office early email stabbing self in heart reset button on computer the dark knight returns green arrow how to slit a throat what do blood oranges taste like price to resurface rotors word for a male mistress