What's new
British Ordnance Collectors Network

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

3" shell i.d.

V

vinnyw

Well-Known Member
Hello Guys I need some help with a little info . I have had this a little over a year , and just getting around to it.
My main question is why would or what was the thinking around the odd inside shape . I guess it was not successful
Thank you in advance Vinny
 

Attachments

  • DSC00007.jpg
    DSC00007.jpg
    299.1 KB · Views: 104
  • DSC00006.jpg
    DSC00006.jpg
    296.5 KB · Views: 98
  • DSC00009.jpg
    DSC00009.jpg
    278.5 KB · Views: 97
  • DSC00008.jpg
    DSC00008.jpg
    304.6 KB · Views: 91
Might be an attempt to modify the coverage of fragments. Instead of a 360 degree field of fragments you would get sectors of perpendicular lines of fragments based on faces of hexagon interior. As fragments leave in a perpendicular line from the face of the container. I can't see how this would have ant real advantage, but I am not too good at 3 D thinking at my age, so might be an advantage.
 
vinnyw said:
Hello Guys I need some help with a little info . I have had this a little over a year , and just getting around to it.
My main question is why would or what was the thinking around the odd inside shape . I guess it was not successful
Thank you in advance Vinny
Click to expand...

Vinny,
I've got the same round, picked it up during a clearance on Ft. Sill in the early 90s. Jim Obrien, (now deceased) and who will always have my admiration as an absolute fountain of knowledge on Pre-1946 projectiles, explained to me at the time that it was simply a very early shrapnel design. He said that they were looking for an efficient way of constructing the projectile to overcome what was perceived as potential problems (possible movement of the shrapnel balls?).
 
Vinny

It certainly looks like the body was not meant to be fragmented, but the fuze and the contents were meant to be ejected from the body. The very fine interior thread and the holes for retaining screws is what leads me to that conclusion.

Does the hexagonal go all the way to the bottom and is it tapered or the same dimension all the way down? There would have to be some sort of diaphragm with an expelling charge beneath it.

US-Subs

In most Shrapnel projectiles the balls are held in place by rosin or a similar substance. So, they can't shift. But, maybe the rosin was the answer rather than a hexagonal interior?

Ray
 
If the cavity is hexagonal to the base, it could act as reverse choke and add a spin to the projected column of balls increasing the dispersion??
 
Shrapnel is dispersed by the centrifical force of the spinning projectile. More dispersal is hardly needed.

JMHO

Ray
 
Some background information (after you open photo click on it again to enlarge to "+" size otherwise you will go crazy trying to see the text and drawings):
 

Attachments

  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; b.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; b.jpg
    296 KB · Views: 41
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; c.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; c.jpg
    287.2 KB · Views: 35
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; d.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; d.jpg
    211.9 KB · Views: 44
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; d1.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; d1.jpg
    175 KB · Views: 39
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; e.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; e.jpg
    175.7 KB · Views: 43
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; f.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; f.jpg
    192.1 KB · Views: 44
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; g.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; g.jpg
    174.3 KB · Views: 47
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; h.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; h.jpg
    182.5 KB · Views: 51
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; i.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; i.jpg
    176.9 KB · Views: 54
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; j.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; j.jpg
    185.5 KB · Views: 61
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; k.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; k.jpg
    171.7 KB · Views: 38
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; l.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; l.jpg
    207 KB · Views: 32
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; m.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; m.jpg
    205.6 KB · Views: 35
  • Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; a.jpg
    Experimental Shrapnel for 3-inch Gun, Chief of Ordnance Report 1902, Appendix 5; a.jpg
    162.8 KB · Views: 51
Last edited:
As discussed in the Chief of Ordnance report shown above, eight of the steel jacketed lead filled shrapnel balls surrounding a "standard" lead shrapnel ball. Notice the steel jacketed shrapnel have a flat top and bottom surface.
And in the second photo are two of the steel jacketed lead filled shrapnel balls stuck to a magnet.
 

Attachments

  • Steel jacketed shrapnel with lead shrpanel.JPG
    Steel jacketed shrapnel with lead shrpanel.JPG
    133.9 KB · Views: 19
  • Steel jacketed shrapnel, lead filled, stuck to magnet.JPG
    Steel jacketed shrapnel, lead filled, stuck to magnet.JPG
    134.5 KB · Views: 17
Last edited:
This seems to answer the question. All this work, new steels and heat treatment made the production of shrapnel projectiles unnecessary. Nice to see that experimentation and research were carried on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top