Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

When were exploding shells first used?

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Eliza6Beth (U2637732) on Friday, 20th January 2006

  Hi - can anyone tell me (of COURSE you can!!!) when guns first fired ammo that exploded, rather than just thumped into things.
  
  Words like mortars and howitzers come to mind, but other than that I haven't a clue.
  
  Thank you - Eliza

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Friday, 20th January 2006

  Eliza,
  
  I believe 1784, adopted by the British Army in 1803, first used in combat in 1808 at Vimeiro. Major Henry Shrapnel RA (1761-1852) was the inventor.
  
  I really need a icon.
  
  Cheers AA, hope it helps.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Eliza6Beth (U2637732) on Friday, 20th January 2006

  Brilliant - thank you.
  
  Er, why did they call him after the bits you get left inside you?
  
  More seriously, what were the advantages/disadvantages? Were the shells stable/unstable, expensive/cheaper, shorter/longer range.
  
  Is all non-hand gun ammo exploding these days, and if so, when did the non-exploding cannon-ball type finally die out (if it has)
  
  THank you agian - Eliza.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Friday, 20th January 2006

  Eliza,
  
  I think the explanation is that they called the "bits" after him. His name was as a result of his fathers name.
  
  As to the rest, well, speaking off the top of my head and referring to the "shells" of the Napoleonic era, they would have been more expensive. The shell was packed with "grape" i.e. musket balls. The shell was then fired (as a round or canon ball) from the gun together with a pre lit fuse connected to the powder inside the shell. The shell would then explode due to the powder inside the shell and scatter the "grape" in an air burst above the enemy. (Well, if you got everything right it would!). It was designed as a long range alternative to "cannister" shot, which is basically using a canon or gun as a shotgun. (The cannister shell was packed with musket balls and desinned for the shell (outer casing) to break apart at the muzzle spreading the shot over a wide area compared with the area taken by the gun.)
  
  The shells were stable until you lit the fuse, then, look out!!! As a rule of thumb I'd use that a 5 second fuse would last 3 seconds. (I like to keep my hands). As an aside a great use of shrapnel, I believe was by a Royal Horse Artillery Battery at Waterloo in the defence of Hougemont.
  
  The advances in explosives meant that by the 20thC it was more "effective" to place a high explosive charge that would detonate on impact within the shell and use the shell casing as "shrapnel".
  
  Cheers, phew, AA.
  
  

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Friday, 20th January 2006

  The Shrapnel Shell, or Spherical Case Shot, was a specific type of exploding shell. Exploding shells first appeared, to be fired from mortars, in the 16th century (where they were called Granadoes or Bombs), along with incendiary shells (Carcasses), gas shells (Stink Bombs) and a variety of other nasty variations.
  
  In fact they were just a development of hand grenades, which first appeared during the Crusades. Firepots, clay pots filled with naft (a highly inflammable crude oil derivative), had long been used as incendiaries, but when some Muslim engineers fiddled about with the recipe, adding ingrediates later used in gunpowder, they created a crude (no pun intended!) explosive. This was at the same time as inventing personal flamethrowers. What jolly fun

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Friday, 20th January 2006

  Anglo-Norman,
  
  ,
  
  Yes, you are correct. I refer to the accepted history, you quite rightly point out my errors.
  
  I will stand by my posts as too their accuracy and most effective use though.
  
  Cheers AA.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by Eliza6Beth (U2637732) on Friday, 20th January 2006

  Re Mr Shrapnel - No, I meant it as a joke .... (along the lines of: Why did the Duke of Wellington take his title from a boot? etc) (probaly doesn't translate)(unless you're German, in which case no joke translates...) (sorry, I'm being cheeky, but it's Friday night and I'm a glass of wine down while the rest of the family watch the new Smallville....)
  
  So, cannister was musket balls packed inside a 'shell' which simply broke apart on impact, scattering high velocity musket balls all over the place, whereas the 'true' explosive shell was musket balls packed in with gunpowder, and a lit fuse, so that it actually exploded in mid air, rather than broke apart just on impact.
  
  Was Napoleon's whiff of grapeshot basically cannister then?
  
  What was chain shot? Wasn't it when the cannisters/cannon balls were chained together and so came out as one long, well, chain is the only word I can think of (that wine is strong), and was used by battleships for bringing down sail and masts? Was it used by land armies?
  
  When did armies stop using cannon balls/canon? (ie, the non exploding ones)
  
  One thing I do know, becuase I saw it on the TV, was that it wasn't until the Great War era that they cracked the problem of big gun recoil, by suspending the barrel so that only it recoiled, not the whole cannon 'frame'. It seems to be one of those 'durh' moments, thinking why didn't they think of it earlier? Maybe it just wasn't too much of a problem until the shells/barrels got bigger?
  
  Many thanks again, Eliza.
  
  PS So, what were mortars?
  

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Eliza6Beth (U2637732) on Friday, 20th January 2006

  Firepots, clay pots filled with naft (a highly inflammable crude oil derivative), had long been used as incendiaries, but when some Muslim engineers fiddled about with the recipe, adding ingrediates later used in gunpowder, they created a crude (no pun intended!) explosive. This was at the same time as inventing personal flamethrowers.
  
  
  I hesitate to ask this, but is this along the lines of Greek fire? Is this still supposed to have been napalm-like, or has analysis moved on from there?
  
  Thanks - Eliza.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by DaveMBA (U1360771) on Saturday, 21st January 2006

  You are getting a bit confused here.
  
  A canister was a tube of musketballs, which opened on emerging from the barrel to spray balls out in a cone shape. It was a close range weapon. The projectile you are talking about is basically a shell, (originally a granate - Sp. pomegranate), which was a hollowed out cannonball ith power inside it and a fuse. Although unreliable, the fuses were designed to go off at an ideal point, from where the shell would break into about 6 bits. Hence you get point accuracy with ahsell and longer range. The shrapnel combined the two in that it exploded showering musket balls at a distant point.
  
  There is a lot of mythhology surrounding gun and ammunition development, mostly put about by ill-read North Americans. Contrary to their claims, the shell and shrapnel were not air burst weapons for the reasons that fuzes were inaccurate and the forard momentum of the carrying projectile would lead to hte bits being sprayed forward and thus into the rear ranks of infantry formations. Ideally, a shell would burst immediately after it first bounced off the ground right in front of an infantry unit. Shrpanel, because of its shower effect was better burst about 30 feet in front of infantry as it headed twoards earth for max spray effect.
  
  These rounds were fired from howitzers because of the need for elevation. canbister was fired from both guns and howitzers. A mortar is really a large siege version of a howitzer, but it was immobile and was simply set up in position and fired. It would fire a variety of rounds, including large stones, heated rounds, shells holding all kind sof unpleasant things.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by Eliza6Beth (U2637732) on Saturday, 21st January 2006

  many thanks - lovely and clear.
  
  er, what were howitzers (NO, I'm going to look it up on the web. No excuse for laziness in the morning!)
  
  Thanks again - Eliza.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message10

• Message 11

  , in reply to message 10.

  Posted by DaveMBA (U1360771) on Saturday, 21st January 2006

  Basically, they are mobile mortars - they had shorter barrels, but greater elevations than ordinary cannon, precisley to fire these rounds.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message11

• Message 12

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Sunday, 22nd January 2006

  
  
  
  I hesitate to ask this, but is this along the lines of Greek fire? Is this still supposed to have been napalm-like, or has analysis moved on from there?
  
  Thanks - Eliza.Β 
  
  Greek Fire was a development of the Byzantine Greeks (i.e. Eastern Roman Empire), c. AD673. It was a ship-born, anti-ship weapon, pumped a stream of burning fluid (the makeup of which is still not known for certain, but probably included petroleum) through a siphon. The Muslims mamanged to obtain the recipe, or a version of it. The probablem with Greek Fire Engines was that the fuel was not terribly volatile, so that it needed to be pre-heated in a large metal tank. This meant that the engines were large, cumbersome and not easily portable. Greek Fire was not explosive.
  
  Muslims scientists produced a more flamable version which simply needed to have a smouldering cord at the nozzle of the siphon to ignite it. This meant they could build projectors that could be manned by two people and which were easily portable. Later they improved it even further to create (probably accidentaly) the aforementioned explosive.
  
  Greek Fire could also be contained in firepots and shot from ballistas, giant crossbows, small catapults or thrown by hand.
  
  Napalm is jellied petroleum. Although it probably bears some resemblance to Greek Fire, it uses modern chemicals that were not available to the ancient world. The principle is the same though.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message12

• Message 13

  , in reply to message 12.

  Posted by Eliza6Beth (U2637732) on Monday, 23rd January 2006

  Thank you all very much for this - much appreciated.
  
  Eliza.

  Link to this forum: When were exploding shells first used?

  Report message13

Back to top