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!

History of M110 Projectile.

DJig2013

Member
Ordnance approved
Premium Member
I've been researching the M110 155mm smoke projectile, and have found references to it being manufactured (or rather, being filled) as early as 1944 at Redstone Arsenal. What I haven't been able to find is information on when and where the shell was designed and first manufactured in the US. The M110 is also listed in the second edition, volume three, of Catalogue of Standard Ordnance Items published by the Office of the Chief of Ordnance Tech Division. That's also a 1944 pub. But there is nothing there on the projectile's origins. Does anyone know a reference for the design history? Thank you for anyone who can help.
 
I'm not saying this is an official history. I'm sure U.S.-Subs will have a more accurate story. As countries do, the U.S. wanted to update its inventory of 155mm weapons. During WWII they had the old design M1917/18 Howitzers and the 155mm Gun M1917/18, which were first released at the end of WWI. The projectiles used by the Howitzer had one rotating band 0.6 inches wide. The Gun fired a projectile with either two rotating bands of 0.6 inches wide each or the newer single band that was 2 inches wide. Each of these weapons had it's own ammunition, so there were Chem projos for the howitzer, the newer M105 and the older Mk. IIA1 which were fired up to about 1,500 ft. per second velocity. The 155mm Gun had its own Chem projos, the newer M104 and older Mk VIIA1 which were fired at around 2,800 ft. per second, thus the need for more rotating band.

In 1944, these weapons were being phased out to be replaced by the M1 155mm Howitzer which had different chamber dimensions that either of the earlier weapons. A new weapon with a new chamber required new ammunition with a 1.00 inch wide rotating band. The ammunition for all of these weapons was not interchangeable, although the M118 Illum projo was marked 155mm GH to be fired in guns and howitzers, to be used in the leftover guns still in inventory. So the M110 is the Chem projo with a rotating band to work in the M1 howitzers.

Info on the ammunition and weapons can be found in TM 9-1901 Artillery Ammunition dated 1944. I would expect there would be more info in the Ammunition Inspector's Guide, but I don't have mine handy at present.

The conclusion to be drawn here, is that there were 4 predecessors to the M110, and it would have characteristics of those projectiles incorporated into it's design. So, it wasn't designed from scratch, it was mainly a rotating band change to be used in a newer chamber.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for this, HAZORD. I've been trying to cobble together a rough history, and then trace some of the distribution of the M110-style projectiles to other countries and the distribution of the licenses and tech specs to foreign manufacturers. It's a fairly old projectile, with a long history, so fleshing it all out isn't easy. I'm grateful for your help.
-Chris
 
The guys that formerly worked for and currently work for the OPCW that are BOCN members could probably shed some light on the distribution and foreign production. The creation of NATO might have been a factor.

One interesting characteristic of the M110 is that the burster charge is too small. It doesn't have enough explosive to reliably crack open the body of the projectile. I've seen examples of projectiles that just bulged like an inflated balloon and blew the burster out through the fuzewell, turning it into a smoke pot or gas pot as it were.

If you take a look at the Nerve Gas projos that followed the M110, they have a much larger burster charge.
 
Last edited:
I have a pretty strong sense of where the US sold the M110, and which countries took up local manufacture (for their own militaries' use or for export). Though I'd welcome any new info. At this point I'm mostly chasing that original design question.
 
Top