Red Biddy and Red Planet anti-tank weapons.

[biscuitsAB]

While searching for something else I came across this report on the Red Planet AT rocket launcher; -

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD0146318&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

In view of Red Planets superior performance to the 3.5 in weapon eventually adopted by the British army I'd like to know if anyone on the forum knows why it wasn't proceeded with? Also any source of photo's of both weapons. Googling Red Biddy provides the info. that this is a mixture of red wine and whiskey, which is a waste of two perfectly good drinks to my mind

 

[JFC Fuller]

The clue seems to be at the bottom of page 2 (page 9 of the PDF doc) in the document you linked to. It looks as if the British developments were seen as offering capability above what was required at a size and weight above what was practical thus they were pursued solely as a technology demonstration activity. This fits with wider efforts at the time to both trim the cost of defence projects and standardise equipment across NATO. The 3.5" was readily available and did not require new development.

Excellent find by the way.

 

[biscuitsAB]

Seen. I must learn to deal with the veggies as well as the meat. Thanks.

 

[Maury Markowitz]

Does anyone have an updated URL for this document?

 

[Maury Markowitz]

And then 5 seconds later I found it:

https://www.bulletpicker.com/pdf/Development%20of%20Anti%20Tank%20Rocket%20Red%20Planet.pdf

 

[Apophenia]

A crude attempt at stitching together some of the Red Planet drawings from that report ...