DrB Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Okay, here is my two cents worth. There were three major types of shells used in WWI 1. High Explosive: (H.E.) could be fused to explode as an air burst, on impact, or delayed, so as to bury itself before it went boom. It was developed to destroy inanimate things: trenches, dugouts, emplacements, tanks, for counter-battery fire, etc. 2. Shrapnel or Anti-personnel. Exploded above ground to scatter its load forward and downward. Was fused but could be fitted with an impact fuse. Early experiments with it showed it to be unsuccessful at cutting barbed wire. It was designed to be a man-killer and not a crater maker, as was H.E. 3. Cannister. Used for defence as a last resort. Deployed as a direct fire shell. As implied, the three types of shells above were developed for the specific purpose mentioned, but (comma) certainly HE could be used as anti-personnel due to its massive explosion and flying debris. One often reads about a shell exploding and causing a soldier, or soldiers, to simply vanish. This was obviously not from shrapnel. Now someone will write about some other shells such as gas, illum, etc, but this is about the major types. DrB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Poilu Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Aurel, Don't quote me on the 50 yards detonation height, I really am not sure on that one but I am reasonably sure it was significantly higher than 5 metres. There are people on this forum far, far more qualified than me in the subject of ordanance - BTW I don't know if they are all on holiday but this place does seem very quiet lately. Nigel, dear fellow, I really did not realise your thinly veiled 'question' was aimed partly at me, at no point have I entered the discussion on cannister shot or other anti-personel ordanance, flailing balls or otherwise. The reason being I know a little bit about shrapnel and HE shells, a bit more on grenades and rather less on other things. And I can confirm Aurel is not my lover, I am very happily married thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Birch Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Totally unrelated but showing how things have changed I seem to remember hearing in a documentary that during the IIWW to have a 50% chance of hitting an area the size of two football pitches with a particular heavy bomb neccesitated dropping 10,000 bombs ie a thousand bomber raid and some 8 - 10 000 men in the air - now it takes one man and one bomb - not sure about these figures but they were along those lines. Slightly off topic, but when the RAF investigated the accuracy of Bomber Command's raids during the first few years of WW2 and prior to the introduction of Area Bombing, they discovered that it was claimed that the target had been "hit" if the bombs fell within 5 miles of the aiming point! In the early years navigation was so bad that the majority of aircraft never even achieved this "hit rate". Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 The No.80 fuses used in 18 pdr shells were time and percussion so if the time mechanism failed the shell would still detonate on impact, albeit with a different effect of course. My dear Giles (Don't worry, I am happily married too ! This is the fuse of my 18 pounder. I have already noticed myself : N° 80. (See second photo.) So this is a time + percussion fuse ? Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Second photo And should somebody else know what the other markings mean ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Poilu Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Aurel, Yes, t+p. The powder train that controlls the timing mechanism is initiated by the shock of firing. This shock also releases a firing pin that is then free to move on the shell striking the ground and initiating a second primer within the base of the shell to detonate the round. No.80 - the type of fuse (obviously). VII - a mark VII development. 1305 - I think this is seperate from the date (17) and represents a lot number. 17 - the date - 1917 B M C and R M C Co. are the maker's initials. I cannot find a reference for these. 'B' always represented the Birmingham Munitions Co. - whether B M C was also used I do not know. Incidentally, according to Williamson, the No.80 was a Krupps designed fuse made under license by the British. After the War royalties of £260k were demanded by the Germans for manufacture of shells fired at them in 14-18! And a part payment was infact made... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIGEL Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Hello Aurel its me again Nigel , and hello Giles, sorry about last night but i was getting pissed off as i thought i was being ignored in something i am interested in and i have no patience to just sit there and do nothing. I went to bed wondering who else Aurel dosent love and the referal to midnight got me going as i have noticed i do get a bit hairier and my ears go all pointed. Anyway Aurel, you said earlier that the charge is black powder, did you mean actual black powder ( gun powder ). If you did i would have thought that,- that would have been a weak explosive to use when they had better alternatives, so why use it ?--------- Would the shell war head be designed to fragmentate to allow the shot side ways or just down ?----------- Is there a reason for it being brass ? Why use lead for the shot ? when steel would have been lighter thus allowing a longer range heavier load etc.-------- I dont understand why they relied on these rounds to destroy the wire when the H.E. round would do it, or was it because they didnt want craters, ? which come to think of it would have supplied cover for the advancing soldiers. Please excuse my typing which i am very poor at, as i use one finger only and i have to fix my keyboard tonight as one of the keys keep sticking, thats why i didnt keep putting all the question marks etc last night. I do have quite a few more questions on this subject--------i can hear all the groans of dispair now, so dont book your holidays just yet NIGEL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Poilu Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Anyway Aurel, you said earlier that the charge is black powder, did you mean actual black powder ( gun powder ). If you did i would have thought that,- that would have been a weak explosive to use when they had better alternatives, so why use it ?--------- Would the shell war head be designed to fragmentate to allow the shot side ways or just down ?----------- Is there a reason for it being brass ? Why use lead for the shot ? when steel would have been lighter thus allowing a longer range heavier load etc.-------- I dont understand why they relied on these rounds to destroy the wire when the H.E. round would do it, or was it because they didnt want craters, ? which come to think of it would have supplied cover for the advancing soldiers. Nigel, I think I may have mentioned black powder. Have a look at the first post I gave, it explains many of your questions. Also buy a copy of the 'Big Bang - a history of explosives'. by G I Brown. Highly recommended. But, The charge that ejects the balls is indeed black powder ie gunpowder. You need to understand the difference between this and HE. Generally gunpowder burns (albeit quickly) it is a low explosive, HE explodes or detonates. The rate of burning of BP is controlled by the size of the grains similar to the way the size of the strands of cordite in an 18 pdr cartridge are much bigger than those in a .303 bullet. The larger shell needs time for the pressure to build or the gun would explode. The pressures in burning gunpowder are up to 6000 atmospheres in a quickish time, for TNT the figure is a rather more impressive (!) 275 000 atmospheres or more in an incredibly quick time. In a shrapnel shell the black powder is more than adequate and pushes the balls out in a controlled way. The fuse is designed to blow off in one piece. It is a highly precision made article and is machined to very close tolerances, brass is a perfect material for this purpose. Why would you want the shrapnel to go sideways? - the enemy is on the ground! The purpose of shrapnel is to injure the enemy, for this you want to hit them with as much force as possible. Force = mass x velocity. We have a good velocity and for lots of mass lead is a more suitable material than steel (although steel balls were used). It is also soft and deforms on impact imparting more damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 The purpose of shrapnel is to injure the enemy, for this you want to hit them with as much force as possible. Force = mass x velocity. We have a good velocity and for lots of mass lead is a more suitable material than steel (although steel balls were used). It is also soft and deforms on impact imparting more damage. Force = Mass x Acceleration ie. change in velocity which in this case is BIG! Aye Malcolm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Poilu Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Cheers Malcolm, now I know why I failed Physics A level... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Nigel, Impressed by the questions you asked, which I hadn't even thought of. (And by the way, let it be a consolation : there are many people I am not in love with ) Giles, And even more impressed by the answers ! And if you failed Physics A level, I wonder what level I would have got ! Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Cheers Malcolm, now I know why I failed Physics A level... Well, I was in Physics at University for 28 years ....................... now languages ,on the other hand, go in one ear and out the other. Aye Malcolm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIGEL Posted 4 August , 2004 Share Posted 4 August , 2004 Glad you are impressed, but this is something i am interested in, and have dabbled in as well from time to time. Giles i do understand all about the properties of gun powder, but from your answer are you saying that modern day type propellent powders hadnt been invented at that time ? I understand about lead shot as being soft it will expel all of its kinetic energy ( there you are Malcom ) into its victim and as lead shot was made in those days by droping droplets of molten lead 30 foot from a tower into water, was it also cheaper than steel bearings which would with enough velocity penetrate corrigated steel roofing over the trenches covered with sand or soil. Did they ever have delayed action shells which would land in the soil and explode at a later time with H.E. and what you call shrapnel shot ? Being as gas was used, did they ever contaminate the shot enclosed in the shell with some poisoness substance so even the slightest nick by a piece of shot would disable then kill thus tying up streams of men. I have never studied physics as i found it boring but i have always messed with guns and been fasinated on how we find ways to kill others, but please hurry with the answers if you know them as cinderella i am not and that hour is approaching Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIGEL Posted 5 August , 2004 Share Posted 5 August , 2004 Anybody seen Giles and Aurel ?-------------i think i must wash more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 5 August , 2004 Share Posted 5 August , 2004 Anybody seen Giles and Aurel ?-------------i think i must wash more often. Yes, I'm here. Wash more often ? Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIGEL Posted 5 August , 2004 Share Posted 5 August , 2004 I should Wash more often---means have i driven you away----just silly English humour Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnreed Posted 12 August , 2004 Share Posted 12 August , 2004 I am in the process of writing a short precis on Artillery equipment and ammunition from the 13 Pdr to the 60 Pdr if anyone has an interest in it, i will send to those who are interested once I have completed it. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIGEL Posted 12 August , 2004 Share Posted 12 August , 2004 i am interested in the bang side John, i would only be too pleased to have a look Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now