4.5" WP fun for you guys!

[EOD Sterling]

Hey Folks, Found a 4.5" WP (VERIFIED with burster tube by X-Ray) here on Redstone Arsenal, Alabama USA (So it could be from ANYWHERE)

Heres the Dimensions we have available:
LENGTH: Base to Nose-Burster Adapter Junction - 14.6inches (pretty short for a US model)
DIAMETER: Body just forward of Rotating Band - 109mm - We could not take a Bourrelet diameter because some clod smashed the hell out of it several decades ago with an explosive charge!
DIAMETER: Across Base - 3.5"/89mm
Rotating Band Width: only 22mm... most US stuff has either a VERY Wide HV Band or multiple Bands.... this is leading us towards British Manufacture.

Boat-Tail Construction - Which is also odd for most of these.

Any help would be appreciated folks! Have a great and safe day!

 

[US-Subs]

The US had a 4.5 early in WWII. I was told that at the beginning of WWII the 105mm was still a new development, and we did not have enough to train with, or go to war. The UK had an abundance of guns, and some were shipped to the US for training purposes. We made a very small (relative) number of projectiles, the HE was designated the M65. I am at work and not near any of my publications, so I don't know if a WP loaded variant is listed or not, I don't recall any. The only ones I have seen were range recoveries at Ft. Sill, which ties in with the story. Here is a pic for comparison.

 

[EOD Sterling]

Thanks US-Subs.
I double checked and (as shown in your pic) every American 4.5 has either a Single Very Wide Rotating Band (like the one shown), or two individual Wide bands to be fired from High Chamber Pressure guns. This round we have only has a single 22mm wide band suitable only to be fired from a lower pressure gun system. That's got me thinking a lot about the Brit short barrel 4.5"/60 Pounder from the WW-1 era.
It's also 2 inches shorter than any US 4.5 I can find in my pubs! 2 inches short make a big difference.... ask my wife!

Granted, on Redstone, this thing could be a prototype and we'll never find it, but that won't stop us from trying.

I'm wide open y'all!

 

[flak18]

The picture US Subs shows appears to be a 4.5" Gun projectile. Maybe yours is a 4.5" Howitzer projectile or, as you say a 60 Pounder with economy driving band from later in WW1

 

[TimG]

The British WWI era 4.5" projectiles have a diameter of 4.48" (113.8 mm). The early driving band is 1.2" (30.5 mm) high, there was a later driving band that was narrower and from what I can ascertain was about 16 mm high. It appears the only streamlined projectile was the Mk. ID H.E.

What is the diameter of the top of the fuze adapter?

Does the X-ray show the driving band fixing method?

TimG

 

[AMMOTECHXT]

Unfortunately I do not know the dimensions for 25 Pr. Not sure if there was a 25 Pr WP in WW2 (there was not in 1978) but the shell length, driving band width and positioning look about right for 25 Pr. The shape including boat-tail is about right for 25 Pr HE. The WW2 version of 25 Pr HE that I have seen have a base plate inserted into a machined hollow and yours doesn't obviously have a base plate. Perhaps worth checking 25 Pr?

 

[MINENAZ16]

Hello,

I don't want to be undisciplined, and I could missed something but when I see for the first time this shell, without measurment, my first thought is 105mm WP.
and datas could match.
Width of band : 21mm - Length without fuze 399mm (with top adapter).
Now I don't have this 105mm at home but I'm quite sure boat tailed base is near 3.5in.

To compare with 105 WP M60

 

[AMMOTECHXT]

I missed the part in the first post about a bourrelet and Minenaz16's photo shows one, so yes it could be that the shell is a 105 mm.

 

[EOD Sterling]

TimG - We can't take a diameter at the top of the Fuze Adapter that would be accurate, it's a bit smooshed by the disposal attempt.

I don't have the X-Ray available to me, it was run by the CAIRA team... they are selfish and don't share. HEHEEHE. So I can't tell you much about the rotating fixing.


MINENAZ16 - I get where you would suggest it's a 105mm, notice in the original measurements that I took a Diameter Measurement of the body, just forward of the Rotating band at 109mm....now you see why I'm a bit stumped?

 

[bacarnal]

Sterling, at 109mm I come up with 4.29". 105mm is 4.13". Would it be possible that the burster expanded the casing down to the rotating bands? I notice that it's really belled at around the bourelette. I remember 155mm WP rounds expanded far enough that they would unseat the rotating band. We would also find the bands in a perfect ring with no breaks. Also, it looks to have been unfired, hence a possible demo shot with the fuze well stuffed with C-4, just to give it that extra umph. Cheers, Bruce.

 

[US-Subs]

Sterling, at 109mm I come up with 4.29". 105mm is 4.13". Would it be possible that the burster expanded the casing down to the rotating bands? I notice that it's really belled at around the bourelette. I remember 155mm WP rounds expanded far enough that they would unseat the rotating band. We would also find the bands in a perfect ring with no breaks. Also, it looks to have been unfired, hence a possible demo shot with the fuze well stuffed with C-4, just to give it that extra umph. Cheers, Bruce.

I suspect that you and Minen are correct and that the body is slightly deformed. Doesn't look like anything was put in the fuze well, but a side shot could be enough to do it. I've seen the popped rotating bands you describe, but we occasionally found illum bodies without bands and always assumed they were from them. Never seen it on anything but a 155mm though. Here is mine.

 

[richardwb1]

The best way that I have found to identify these unfamiliar rounds is the rotating band (driving band). If you read the publications on identifying enemy ordnance, they specifically say that the band or the band seat is the best way to identify a round. I have measured and measured hundreds and hundreds of bands and they stay consistent through many years and many different types of projectiles, at least for the U.S. If you look at TM 9-1901 dated 1944 or dated 1950, they give band widths. This is enormously helpful information. This is a field recovered M65 4.5 Inch projectile. If the band width is not about the 1.72 inches, then I would very much doubt that it is the U.S. 4.5 inch projectile. The other thing is that the U.S. was not enamored of this round and discarded it as soon as WWII ended so I doubt we put a lot of R&D in this item. OS (Ordnance School) 9-20, artillery ammunition never lists a WP round for this gun either and neither does TM 9-1904, ammunition inspector's guide. I am not trying to be pedantic in this thread but conveying what I have learned by trying to identify items with nearly identical diameters over the years.

 

[richardwb1]

I hope this conveys even more information about the importance of the rotating band. In the 105mm caliber, the U.S. had an anti-aircraft gun, a recoilless rifle, a howitzer, and a tank gun. How about the whole 75/76mm caliber? The U.S. Army had a whole slew of items. For the 105mm, the tank gun projectiles had 2 bands (3 for the flechette projectile), the RR had a single band about .65" wide or .81" with only .65" pre-engraved, the AA gun had a band 1.42 inches wide, and the early howitzers had a band .81 inches wide. The 75mm gun/howitzer band was .49 inches, the 3 inch and 76mm had a band that was 1.02", the 75mm Skysweeper projectile's band was 0.87 inches and the Walker Bulldog 76mm projectiles had a band width of 1.44" typically and oh yeah, a 75mm recoilless rifle projectile had a band width of .35" or .49" with only .35" pre-engraved. There may be an exception here and there but once you understand the importance of this measurement, it helps enormously. Alas, after 1960 or so, no more band widths are listed in the mainstream publications.
When someone asks me to identify a projectile from a picture, I want a picture of the band and the width measured with a calipers, not an approximation, along with the other usual measurements.
Hope this helps. It has helped me enormously over the years.

 

[EOD Sterling]

OK, So here are the dimensions again, they were taken with calipers, so they are accurate, I just don't have pictures of the caliper measurement since it was a rainy, crappy day.

Again, cannot take a measurement at the Bourrelet since it and the majority of the Ogive are smashed nearly flat by a demo charge. We suspect that someone used TNT to attempt to destroy this and a bushel of 75's on the same site.
In response to BACANAL, We have seen several swollen WP bodies, this round exibits none of the stress fractures, or rounded swelling characteristic of that phenomenon.

The burster adapter, and part of the fuze were present in the nose still, no attempt at nose well loading possible.

ROTATING BAND- In response to RICHARDWB1, I agree, Rotating/Driving Bands are key identifiers. Which is why a 22mm band width was so puzzling for me. Very Narrow which discounts it as a US 4.5", and it's not quite right for even an older 105mm. Being only 22mm wide definitely puts it into the "Low Chamber Pressure" family and thus, really limits the amount of guns that would fire it. Either an older 105 or a 60PDR short.

LENGTH- at 14.6" from base to burster junction, it's about an inch and a half short for all the US and Brit 105mm WPs I've checked.

So, my thoughts are, it either goes in a Brit 60PDR Howitzer, of which I have no reference to a WP round being built (but it's Redstone, so anything is possible)..OR... it's a swollen 105mm and I just missed it.
Or is it yet ANOTHER mysterious Prototype produced by Redstone??? (We've had more than a few here!)

Heres the Dimensions we have available:
LENGTH: Base to Nose-Burster Adapter Junction - 14.6inches (pretty short for a US model)
DIAMETER: Body just forward of Rotating Band - 109mm - We could not take a Bourrelet diameter because some clod smashed the hell out of it several decades ago with an explosive charge!
DIAMETER: Across Base - 3.5"/89mm
Rotating Band Width: only 22mm... most US stuff has either a VERY Wide HV Band or multiple Bands.... this is leading us towards British Manufacture.

Boat-Tail Construction - Which is also odd for most of these.​