Talk:Mortar (weapon)

WikiProject Military history

(Rated Start-Class)

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Additional information... This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please the following to the template call: | B1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> = y/n | B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> = y/n | B3 <!-- Structure --> = y/n | B4 <!-- Grammar and style --> = y/n | B5 <!-- Supporting materials --> = y/n Associated task forces (general topics): Military science and technology task force Weaponry task force

Caliber/Calibre

The spelling of Caliber/bre is inconsistent

"Caliber" is used in the first paragraph and "Calibre" in the second

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.65.82 (talk) 23:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Defaced

Looks like someone has defaced the page.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.146.0.12 (talk) 08:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

mortar definition is unacceptable

The definition is overall not acceptable. Some weapons are clearly being called "mortar" while being breech-loaded. Some mortars (especially mortars in AFV turrets) are capable of direct fires. See AMOS, AMS and earlier French mortars.

The problem isn't just a problem of this article; the designation "mortar" is being used inconsistently for very different weapons:

46-240mm calibre (I've even heard about a "37mm" mortar model and 120mm is the laregst common calibre) . cheap & simple / extremely complex . smoothbore / rifled . muzzle-loaded / breech-loaded . manually loaded / automatic loading . manual laying / automatic laying . indirect fire only (upper elevation range = about 45-85°) / indirect and direct fires . towed / self-propelled . self-propelled without turret / self-propelled in turret . normal barrel / spigot type . The difference between a mounted EFS (automatic 120mm mortar based on 2R2M) and a 105mm self-propelled howitzer is small.

I suggest a different faceted definition that really matches the current use of the term:

1) A definition for pre-WW1 time period, including heaviest mortars till WW2 (like German 21cm Mörser 18 as a late example of that breed) 2) A definition for WW1 to modern times; the classic Stokes-Brandt and similar mortars (mostly fit by the quoted definition except that some models were even around WW2 already rifled). 3) An addition that today, all types of guns that can fire the munitions of definition 2 weapons' munitions are being called "mortar".

I am researching for an article about modern 120mm mortars, and I can tell you; the definition situation is chaotic, "mortar" is in use for a huge variety of extremely different guns. Lastdingo (talk) 22:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC) edited that myself Lastdingo (talk) 22:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

So, Lastdingo, can you edit this article according to the sources you have, and citing these sources? We need someone who can do this and would appreciate this. Many thanks. Dieter Simon (talk) 22:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The usage of the term evolves. I doubt that there's a source already that has an encompassing definition. Most sources that I remember simply avoid to offer a definition or just tell about what mortars used to be before they go on to present the innovations made since the 90's. This article will either stick to an outdated and incomplete definition or the authors dare to create a new definition that reflects the actual use of the term. Lastdingo (talk) 23:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

While we Wiki editors appreciate the difficulties you have finding your editing confirmed independently I am afraid it will still be necessary to work according to the guidelines in Wikipedia:No original research. Like all encyclopaedias, we are under an obligation to cite sources by which readers may be able to verify and find substantiated what we say in Wikipedia. I am sorry if that makes it more difficult for you, we nonetheless appreciate what you are doing to make this article as perfect possible. Thank you again. Dieter Simon (talk) 23:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I recall that encyclopedias create definitions if necessary? Ah, who cares. I will probably publish an article about it and use it as reference next year ;-) Lastdingo (talk) 02:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I checked several of my books and manuals. German, Austrian, British, Canadian and U.S. published books and several army manuals. No definition. I searched online and found a lot of crap definitions (plus the other kind of "mortar" for cement and such).

http://www.google.de/search?q=define:mortar&hl=de&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&oi=definel&defl=all OK, so we cannot give a better definition due to Wikipedia rules - how about at least fixing the old one? "A mortar is an muzzle-loading indirect fire weapon that fires shells at low velocities, short ranges, and high-arcing ballistic trajectories." This change would fix the obvious error. "muzzle-loaded" is wrong - example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/160mm_Mortar_M1943 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastdingo (talk • contribs) 02:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Breech-loading weapons are called gun-mortars, and are not same as mortars. They really need an article of their own. Mortars are muzzle-loading indirect fire weapons--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 11:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

No, "Gun-mortar" is only in use for the Russian 120mm systems "Nona" and "Vena" because of their long barrels. Neither the Russian 160mm mortar nor the French MO120 rifled version of the U.S. 107mm rifled mortar were called "gun-mortar" or designated as such. The 60mm mortar in use in the Merkava and the French turreted mortars as well as AMOS, EMES and AMS are called "mortars" as well.Lastdingo (talk) 09:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I have found a better definition of "mortar". Source: "Brassey's Artillery of the World" (1977): "A mortar is basically a specialised form of howitzer, designed to fire solely at high-angle, i.e. 45-80°, and using graded charges of propellant to vary its trajectory. The piece, generally smooth bore, is supported at the muzzle end by a bipod and rests on a circular steel base plate which takes all the shock of discharge. Typical mortars have no buffer-recuperator mechanism, which enormously simplifies manufacture." This is not perfect yet, but the best definition so far. I would delete "steel" because in the past 30 years some titanium alloy baseplates were introduced. The high angle limit should be set to 85°, not 80° because of some mortar models which have that (actually, one on the page after the definition has 85°). Only hand-held and turret mortars fire at less than 45°, so maybe the whole part about angles should get a "generally". btw, the book also writes "The projectile is a finned bomb." (relevant for the bomb/shell discussion here).Lastdingo (talk) 08:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggested definition (I will copy this into the article if no-one protests:

"A mortar is basically a specialised form of howitzer, generally designed to fire solely at high-angle, i.e. 45-80°, and using graded charges of propellant to vary its trajectory. The piece, generally smooth bore, is supported at the muzzle end by a bipod and rests on a base plate which takes all the shock of discharge. Typical mortars have no buffer-recuperator mechanism, which enormously simplifies manufacture."Lastdingo (talk) 08:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I copied the definition into the article, and retained the last sentence of the old definition. Lastdingo (talk) 17:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Lastdingo, what you have had here is a discussion with yourself largely that resulted in a less precise definition that is largely plagiarised from the Brassey's book. Considering that no howitzer I have ever seen has any remotely similar characteristics to the vast majority of mortars except high angle of fire, how do you justify your new introduction to be "superior"? I'm sorry, but I will have to revert it if only because of the plagiarism issue--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 05:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

How about removing the howitzer comparison and go with the bombard comparison instead. Or simply retaining the chgaracteristics:

"A mortar is an artillery piece, generally designed to fire at high-angle, i.e. 45-85°, and using graded charges of propellant to vary its trajectory. Freestanding mortars typically lack buffer-recuperator mechanism, which enormously simplifies manufacture. Mortars mounted in vehicles sometimes have both buffer-recuperators, and magazines with mechanisms that permit autoloading." The above can be verified via links to Brasseys, and to AMOS in the artillery entry. Works? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.252.230.194 (talk) 17:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I offer the definition of "mortar" from the Joint C3 Information Exchange Data Model JC3IEDM

   Mortar, heavy

A towed or vehicle-mounted, indirect fire weapon with either a rifled or smooth bore.
It usually has a shorter range than a howitzer, employs a higher angle of fire, and its calibre is usually between 108mm and 150mm.
Ref APP-6A OCT 98 ADatP-3 FFIRN/FUD 1650/1 MRTHEV 1000058

   Mortar, light
A man-portable, muzzle-loading, indirect fire weapon with either a rifled or smooth bore.

It usually has a shorter range than a howitzer, employs a higher angle of fire, and its calibre is usually 60mm or smaller.
Ref APP-6A OCT 98 ADatP-3 FFIRN/FUD 1650/1 MRTLGT 1000059

   Mortar, medium

A man-portable, muzzle-loading, indirect fire weapon with either a rifled or smooth bore.
It usually has a shorter range than a howitzer, employs a higher angle of fire, and its calibre is usually between 61mm and 107mm.
APP-6A OCT 98 ADatP-3 FFIRN/FUD 1650/1 MRTMED 1000060

   Mortar, very heavy
An indirect fire weapon, usually with a shorter range than a howitzer, 

employs a higher angle of fire, and its calibre is 151mm or larger.
Ref APP-6A OCT 98 ADatP-3 FFIRN/FUD 1650/1 MRTVHV 1000061
The JC3IEDM has been developed by the Multi-National Interoperability Programme. It serves as an authoritative data source for the several countries who participate in its stanardization work.
From the OP CodyHill (talk) 17:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Cody Hill

• Hi All, I've noticed that even with the lengthy discussion about the "proper" definition, the lead paragraph hasn't changed and still mentions a mortar as a "muzzle-loaded" weapon, which probably covers the majority of mortars but not "all" (as some mortars existed that were breech-loaded). I haven't seen any agreement yet... what's the next step? Cheers, DPdH (talk) 04:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I've found the following definition in Encyclopedia Britannica Online, which seems quite generic:

  Mortar
    weapon 
    Main
    "in military science, short-range artillery piece with a short barrel and low muzzle velocity, firing an explosive 
     projectile in a high-arched trajectory. Large types were used against fortifications and in siege operations from 
     medieval times through World War I. Since 1915, small, portable models have become standard infantry weapons, especially
     for trench or mountain warfare. Medium mortars, with a calibre of 70–90 mm (about 3–4 inches), a range up to 4,000 m 
    (about 2.5 miles), and a bomb weight of up to 5 kg (11 pounds), are now favoured."

I guess this could be adapted to this article, and properly cited. Regards, DPdH (talk) 04:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

And the following definition, in Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, also reasonably generic:

  mortar, in warfare
   "mortar, in warfare, term originally applied to certain types of artillery with high trajectories, but later applied
    to an infantry weapon that consists of a tube supported by a bipod that fires a projectile at a very high trajectory. The
    mortar is not usually classified as artillery. Unlike standard types of artillery, mortars need no complex recoil 
    equipment and are usually smoothbore and muzzle-loaded. Their weight is light in relation to the weight of shell 
    delivered, but at the expense of range and accuracy. First developed by Sir Frederick Stokes during World War I, the 
    mortar was used by infantry in trench warfare and is standard equipment in modern armies."

which is also a good one to use as a basis for that "summary" leading paragraph! Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 05:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Improvised Palestinian mortars?

Is there a source for the paragraph that says the Palestinians use improvised mortars? Given the great number of mortars manufactured all over the world it's probably not that hard to buy a regular mortar. Sjö (talk) 09:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

it might be harder for them to smuggle them into the gaza sgtrip or west bank. in any case the IRA used home made mortars because they were effective and easy to hide ( they are just steel pipes before use ). 86.33.15.108 (talk) 18:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Still unreferenced/poorly cited

Hi, I've noticed that the tags that this article had before the "lead paragraph" were recently removed by an anonymous user. I agree with two of the removals, but disagree with regards to being adequately referenced. Hence, I'll add again the appropriate tag. Regards, DPdH (talk) 03:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Removal of Unbalanced Tag in History

There was an unbalanced tag in history with no explanation. Possibly it was there because of the large insurgency paragraph. In any case the section has enough range that it seems reasonable to me. Of course there are various ways the history could be improved but we can expect this to occur in an evolutionary way. John Chamberlain (talk) 15:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)