wingsofwrath
Well-Known Member
I was browsing reddit with my morning tea, as usual and I ran into this thread of someone who found a shell body in a garage and were asking wherever it was a 75mm M48, so I dropped them a message about how it was definitely a 76mm shell judging by the rotating band... but then I saw the boat tail with place for a tracer element and realised it wasn't a run-of-the-mill M42 variant as had been my knee-jerk reaction.
So what was it?
Well, my next thought was "some naval 3-inch" for the 3"/50, but that turned out to be a dead end as well, since all of them also had flat bases.
Next possibility was either 75mm T50E2 as used in the M334 cartridge for the M51 Skysweeper of 76mm M352 for the M41 Walker Buldog, except the first one has a hemispherical base and the other has a different rotating band which is hidden inside the cartridge case except for the top ring.
But then I ran into this report which talks about the development of the 75mm T50E2 (also added the PDF to the post) and mentions the T50E10 which is the same as the T50E2 but with a boat-tail instead of a hemispherical base. Also mentions that it was never adopted:
"At the time 0C0 informed Picatinny of its decision, the design of the T50E10 shell was also well under way. Instead of the hemispherical base of the T50E2, the T50E10 had a truncated conical base.This design, it was expected, would result in increased aerodynamic stability, because tests of the T91E2 90-mm HE shell, having the same type of base, proved it to be more stable than the T91 model which had a hemispherical base. No T50E10 shell will be fabricated however because of the request that development of Skysweeper ammunition be brought to an orderly conclusion. A discussion of the development of this item will be included in the technical report covering the development of the T50 series of shell"
Now, what do you think, am I right in my hunch, or did I overthink it and overlooked something obvious because of my unfamiliarity with US ordnace past 1947?
So what was it?
Well, my next thought was "some naval 3-inch" for the 3"/50, but that turned out to be a dead end as well, since all of them also had flat bases.
Next possibility was either 75mm T50E2 as used in the M334 cartridge for the M51 Skysweeper of 76mm M352 for the M41 Walker Buldog, except the first one has a hemispherical base and the other has a different rotating band which is hidden inside the cartridge case except for the top ring.
But then I ran into this report which talks about the development of the 75mm T50E2 (also added the PDF to the post) and mentions the T50E10 which is the same as the T50E2 but with a boat-tail instead of a hemispherical base. Also mentions that it was never adopted:
"At the time 0C0 informed Picatinny of its decision, the design of the T50E10 shell was also well under way. Instead of the hemispherical base of the T50E2, the T50E10 had a truncated conical base.This design, it was expected, would result in increased aerodynamic stability, because tests of the T91E2 90-mm HE shell, having the same type of base, proved it to be more stable than the T91 model which had a hemispherical base. No T50E10 shell will be fabricated however because of the request that development of Skysweeper ammunition be brought to an orderly conclusion. A discussion of the development of this item will be included in the technical report covering the development of the T50 series of shell"
Now, what do you think, am I right in my hunch, or did I overthink it and overlooked something obvious because of my unfamiliarity with US ordnace past 1947?
