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!

Projectile identification and info req

A

ABBOT1989

Member
Premium Member
Hi fellow members

can anyone help me in identifying this 105mm FD projectile ive looked all over and cant find any records of the stamp I would like to know what stencilling would of been on the shell and what colours the shell would have been painted .heres some pics of the shell in question
thanks in advance
shaunDSCF5203.jpgDSCF5204.jpgDSCF5205.jpg
 
P8 A/3348/E is the drawing number for the projectile. P8 was a drawing series originating at Fort Halstead. The drawing title is 'Shell, 105 MM FD, HE, body with Cu DB' and was drawn by Huggins 13th September 1961. The reference to a driving band in the title may suggest that it was destined for experiments.

PAT is likely ROF Patricroft (empty manufacture).
 
Thanks Bonnex I couldn't find any info anywhere
do you have the drawings bud . also when I got it looked like it was filled with concrete and used as a doorstop the concrete only went in a couple of inches and the rest of the body was filled with a red wax would this of been original to the shell . that made me think it was for the early trials or something . what colour would the body of been and would it of had a fuze and would it of had any stencilling .
thanks shaun
 
ABBOT1989 said:
Thanks Bonnex I couldn't find any info anywhere
do you have the drawings bud . also when I got it looked like it was filled with concrete and used as a doorstop the concrete only went in a couple of inches and the rest of the body was filled with a red wax would this of been original to the shell . that made me think it was for the early trials or something . what colour would the body of been and would it of had a fuze and would it of had any stencilling .
thanks shaun
Click to expand...

Sorry Shaun, I don't have a drawing but I will ask around. The 1960 marking scheme would apply but there are options depending on what the shell was used for. Assuming it is for trials AE501 could probably help with likely markings and fuzing/PRF.
 
Bonnex said:
P8 A/3348/E is the drawing number for the projectile. P8 was a drawing series originating at Fort Halstead. The drawing title is 'Shell, 105 MM FD, HE, body with Cu DB' and was drawn by Huggins 13th September 1961. The reference to a driving band in the title may suggest that it was destined for experiments.

PAT is likely ROF Patricroft (empty manufacture).
Click to expand...

Little question : what's the signification of FD ?


Yoda
 
Thanks bonnex
sorry for the late reply just got in from work ive messaged him hopefully he will shed some light on the colours
thanks shaun
 
This is a standard Shell 105mm FD HE L31A1 shell, as indicated by 'N' , with the empty shell design drawing number P8(A)3348/E.
This is for use with 105mm Mk 2 system equipments, Gun SP FD L13 Abbott and Guns Field L19 and L20. This could be scarce because it was the first HE shell in the Mk 2 system and was soon replaced by later designs.
As it appears never to have been painted and has the waxy red filling it may never have got outside the RO system into service use, although it has all the stampings.
I have messaged you and see I have left the 'A' out of the empty shell drawing design number.
 
Thanks AE501
That's smashing it was painted a light blue but wasn't original to the shell so I removed it you could see brush strokes in it also . ive sent you a pm mate
thanks shaun
 
Thanks 2pounder
I cant tell if it had been painted or not there was no sign of the old paint when I removed the new paint .
thanks shaun
 
thinking about it all the HEsub ones I've seen have been mid blue sorry cant find any pictures at the moment.
 
Hi 2pounder
one thing I regretted was removing the HEsub did I do right in removing the HEsub to prove the projectile is empty and safe (FFE). or would it of been ok to leave the HEsub in it .

thanks shaun
 
I've always thought empty is exactly that, would an everyday officer know what HEsub is? get a visit with something to prove and it could be full of nothing and get removed.
 
No Practice shell was introduced into Land service at that time and there still was not one by 1972, not even for the HESH round.
Perhaps there was an ROF trial using the L31 shell body to develop one, but it was not needed so it was dropped.
There is a more obvious reason for a SH Practice due to the HESH direct fire anti tank role. There was a SH Practice for the 105mm Pack Howitzer, in the Mark 1 System.
You could have left it in had you known what it was.
.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top