Cartidges to send shell away

[marc coene]

Hello,

In the History book of 154 Siege Battery I read they used 3 types of cartridges to sent shells away with their guns.

They talk about:

Cordite

N.C.T

R.D.B.T.

What were these products? Was there a reason (with a kind of purpose) they used diffferent type? Or were there 3 types just used without technical preference?

In the book this is not explained, perhaps shell could with one or another type sent further away? Any explanation appreciated. Thanks. .

Regards, Marc,

[Pete1052]

I believe those are various types of propellant, what generically is called "gunpowder."

[grantowi]

Cordite looks like uncooked spagetti, when ignited it burns very fast releasing a vast amount of gas

NCT was I believe a mixture of nitro cellulose and something else.

Don't know what diffrence they made to the distance the shell went

Grant

[johnreed]

N.C.T is a propellant Nitrocellulose Tubular

R.D.B.T. again is a propellant and the initials stand for Research Department "B" formla Tubular

John

[nigelfe]

Gunpowder and propellant are nothing like one another. The age of black powder was long past in 1914, gunpowder probably wouldn't even get the shell beyond the muzzle!

Cordite was the original formulation adopted by UK, NCT IIRC was adopted before WW1. All three were 'double-base' propellants meaning they were primarily a mixture of nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine. They were all relatively hot burning (meaning more barrel wear) and produced quite a lot of muzzleflash.

More details are, of course, on my ammunition page http://nigelef.tripod.com/ammo.htm

[marc coene]

Gunpowder and propellant are nothing like one another. The age of black powder was long past in 1914, gunpowder probably wouldn't even get the shell beyond the muzzle!

Cordite was the original formulation adopted by UK, NCT IIRC was adopted before WW1. All three were 'double-base' propellants meaning they were primarily a mixture of nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine. They were all relatively hot burning (meaning more barrel wear) and produced quite a lot of muzzleflash.

More details are, of course, on my ammunition page http://nigelef.tripod.com/ammo.htm

Nigelfe, thanks for the clear info. regards,Marc

[centurion]

Gunpowder and propellant are nothing like one another. The age of black powder was long past in 1914, gunpowder probably wouldn't even get the shell beyond the muzzle!

Cordite was the original formulation adopted by UK, NCT IIRC was adopted before WW1. All three were 'double-base' propellants meaning they were primarily a mixture of nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine. They were all relatively hot burning (meaning more barrel wear) and produced quite a lot of muzzleflash.

I'd agree in general but I think you may exaggerate a little for effect. Black powder is a propellant and was still around for some weapons and the later black powders would certainly have had enough ummph to launch a shell (although at a lower velocity). All propellants (including black powder) were mixtures that effectively burned rather than detonated but the newer ones did so without producing masses of smoke (which could revealed one's firing position and fogged the battlefield) and barrel fouling. The new propellants were also less prone to problems with damp etc.

[nigelfe]

Blackpowder served its purpose for several centuries, but the arrival of cordite (and ballisite) made it obsolete almost overnight. No doubt if you used enough blackpowder you would get the shell beyond the muzzle, weight for weight (shell and propellant) I'm not so sure. The early rifled guns used blackpowder but their shells were usually relativley light for their calibre and I don't think shot start (ie cutting the grooves in driving band by being forced into the rifling) was an issue.

[centurion]

Blackpowder served its purpose for several centuries, but the arrival of cordite (and ballisite) made it obsolete almost overnight. No doubt if you used enough blackpowder you would get the shell beyond the muzzle, weight for weight (shell and propellant) I'm not so sure. The early rifled guns used blackpowder but their shells were usually relativley light for their calibre and I don't think shot start (ie cutting the grooves in driving band by being forced into the rifling) was an issue.

Somewhat simplistic. The initial problem was that corned gunpowder was too powerful for the early breechloaders and a less violent, slower burning propellant was needed. All sorts of experiments were tried to produce a solution still using gunpowder, this included variations in the granularity of the glazed grains and changes in the charcoal (so black powder became brown powder or slow burning cocoa as one variety was called). By about 1885 the British artillery were faced with no less than 12 types of powder a different mix being used for different types of gun and/or climate. This was over complex and gunpowder wqas still subject to damp, created vast amounts of smoke and fouled barrels. Gun Cotton was initially too dangerous to manufacture. A gunpowder replacement initially came in the form of the German Schultz powder (Nitro Lignite) which was damp proof and nearly smokeless but still too violent for use in breechloaders. The French then introduced Poudre B which was still a form of gun powder but gelatinised. This protected against damp and reduced the burn rate. Britain introduced Cordite in 1892 however this was not suitable for ignition by the friction tubes then in use and guns using these continued to use gun powder until they were replaced (similarly Germany having introduced very expensive Krupp 370mm coastal guns with huge breeches continued to use these with black powder until they were replaced). The 10-pr jointed gun using black powder as a propellant was used briefly in France in 1914/15 and continued in some lesser theatres until after the war.

[MikB]

Somewhat simplistic. The initial problem was that corned gunpowder was too powerful for the early breechloaders and a less violent, slower burning propellant was needed.

Yes, but you're going back to the late 15th/early 16th centuries there. Those breechloaders were weak, but it was the barrel construction as well as the breech 'jug' and its retention that made them so. Breechloading effectively disappeared for about 300 years - the advantages of corned powder, in power and above all storage stability, were great enough to outweigh the loss.

Early 303 rifle rounds used black powder propellant, a tubular pressed pellet of about 70 grains IIRC. The weight of the superseding cordite was only about half that - though its volume not so much different - and the ballistics maybe 20% better.

Regards,

MikB

[centurion]

Yes, but you're going back to the late 15th/early 16th centuries there. Those breechloaders were weak, but it was the barrel construction as well as the breech

Read my post properly please - I'm talking about the 19th Century - thats why I used the date 1885!

The introduction of cast cannon with an integral breech (as opposed to built up guns which perforce had to have a separate breech part) first allowed the use of corned powder. This was refined down the years so that when the breechloaders were introduced in the 19th Century it was too violent and powerful.

[johnreed]

Once again we have gone away from the original subject.

John

[MikB]

Read my post properly please - I'm talking about the 19th Century - thats why I used the date 1885!

The introduction of cast cannon with an integral breech (as opposed to built up guns which perforce had to have a separate breech part) first allowed the use of corned powder. This was refined down the years so that when the breechloaders were introduced in the 19th Century it was too violent and powerful.

I don't agree. But, as John says, we've left the topic a long way behind.

Regards,

MikB

[centurion]

I don't agree. But, as John says, we've left the topic a long way behind.

Regards,

MikB

Read Hogg in various works on the introduction of cordite. For an easy read start with A History of Artillery (page 80 from memory).

[nigelfe]

Not sure what is mean by a 'cast barrel with integral breach', sounds like nonsence to me, but perhaps I'm logically de-constructing,. Barrels, a least the A tube, were forged and mnachined. Breaches were produced seperately. As I said 'modern' propellant made black powder obsolete overnight. It's very simple.

[MikB]

Read Hogg in various works on the introduction of cordite. For an easy read start with A History of Artillery (page 80 from memory).

As well as many other writers, I've read quite a deal of Hogg, thank you. I think firearms history shows pretty clearly that it's propellant and ignition development that governs the engineering, not vice-versa. It was the rod-and-hoop breechloaders of Tudor times that were effectively kyboshed by corned powder - by 1885, however many kinds of black powder there were, all of 'em were corned - as powder had been for 300 years or more.

Regards,

MikB

[nigelfe]

But have you been reading the right Hogg? IV or OFG?