View single post by Hellcat
 Posted: Thu Jul 21st, 2011 02:50 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
Hellcat
Root Beer Lover


Joined: Tue Nov 15th, 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 901
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I've recently been looking at artillery shells and some of them have raise a question for me. Were any shells designed for spin stabilization. I'm looking at shells and seeing what I'd say looks like it was mean to cause further stabilizing spin once the shell left the gun. But then I try to find out for certain if it's the shell and all I can find really is talk about the sabot and stabilization. So am I looking at pictures of the shells themselves or of the shells with the sabots in place.

The shells in question that have lead to this are the following:

http://www.civilwarartillery.com/projectiles/rifled/FAOIIIa126.htm 

http://www.civilwarartillery.com/projectiles/rifled/IIIA75.htm

http://www.civilwarartillery.com/projectiles/rifled/IIIA76.htm

http://www.civilwarartillery.com/projectiles/rifled/images/FAOiiia100.jpg

http://www.civilwarartillery.com/projectiles/rifled/FAOIIIa99.htm

Now on the James shells I've been assuming the deal with missing in parentheses(?) means the sabot is missing, though for all I know it means the sleave for the sabot is missing

 Close Window