Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
16. You can tell, for each batch has been known to be different
Mon Aug 26, 2013, 09:36 AM
Aug 2013

We like to say we have top notch quality control, but it is known that each BATCH of ammunition made can have different firing characteristics. Thus if you have to go from one batch to another batch, new firing tables come with the new batch. If re-painted that hides the lot number for the batch and thus, unless, disparate, artillerymen will not fire the repainted shells.

You also seem to miss the second reason I gave, such shells have to be handle differently then High Explosive shells. Chemical Shells, like White Phosphorus shells, must be stored and transported standing up, not on their side like High Explosive Shells. That difference in handling is the main reason such shells are marked as they are. Remember if these shells are mishandled, i,e, Chemical Shells handled like it was an High Explosive shell, the shell will no longer be balanced, instead would be heavy to one side. That difference is weight would make it impossible to fire such shells AND KNOW WHERE THEY WILL LAND. Some will be short, i.e. land on your own troops.

Sorry, one of the reason such shells are MARKED, is because any shell with Liquid inside (even if a semi solid liquid in White Phosphorus or chemical Shells) require special handling. Due to the need for such handling for the shell to be useful, you paint the whole shell an different color to make sure Fatigued soldiers quickly see that it is a different shell then what they had been firing.

P.S. Shells are color coded in addition to what they are marked. Thus you would have to repaint the whole shell AND then re label the round to make a Chemical round look like a High Explosive Round. That is just plan dangerous given shells are used in indirect fire missions most of the time (i.e. a fire mission is called in, and fire is given to the area where it is requested for). It is rare to have a direct fire opportunity in today's combat environment.

The Soviet Army seems to have a greater emphasis on direct fire opportunities then we in the west (this is probably due to that Russia is a huge FLAT terrain and thus such direct fire opportunity occurs more often then in the rolling hills and mountains of Central and Western Europe) but even is such situations, most artillerymen will want to use only one type of ammunition if at all possible. Mixing between batches will shift the impact area, let alone differences between type of shells being used.

Hague is hoping someone will notice him. dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #1
No surprise there... FarPoint Aug 2013 #2
Riiiighht. Arctic Dave Aug 2013 #3
Sad thing is, this may be right. n/t AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #4
Not likely. Chemical shells have a different design from normal high explosive. leveymg Aug 2013 #5
Damn scientists. GeorgeGist Aug 2013 #8
One, problem, you also need the same SHELL design in a Chemical Shell happyslug Aug 2013 #9
No. The wall thickness in HE shells is much greater, as shown. The difference is readily apparent leveymg Aug 2013 #10
However, from the outside, the shells look virtually identical. That tells me something leveymg Aug 2013 #11
No trained Artillery would fire such a round happyslug Aug 2013 #13
If someone repainted a chem round to appear to be an HE, would the handler be able to tell? leveymg Aug 2013 #15
You can tell, for each batch has been known to be different happyslug Aug 2013 #16
If someone intentionally wanted to have an artillery unit fire chemical shells by repainting them to leveymg Aug 2013 #17
About one shell, when it does NOT land where it is suppose to. happyslug Aug 2013 #18
What would the effect be on the ability of forward observers to spot random misses at night in the leveymg Aug 2013 #23
Mass Barrage. what are you thinking, WWI?? happyslug Aug 2013 #25
Thanks. This is very useful first-hand info about artillery. It largely confirms what I suspected. leveymg Aug 2013 #27
As to rockets, these would have to a mass firing of rockets happyslug Aug 2013 #26
The rockets that we've seen appear homemade and contain only 1-2 liters of agent leveymg Aug 2013 #28
Sarin is toxic in small amount IF IT GETS INTO THE LUNGS happyslug Aug 2013 #29
No the shell thickness would be less in chemical shells happyslug Aug 2013 #12
That's exactly my point - investigators would be able to see from the larger fragments that chemical leveymg Aug 2013 #14
We know who did it daleo Aug 2013 #6
+1 nt Javaman Aug 2013 #19
Evidence is coming in. Check my post here for links that have details: freshwest Aug 2013 #24
"The absence of evidence..." er, how does that go again? Comrade Grumpy Aug 2013 #7
anyone who suffocated to death from that 'gas' still has a lung full. test the dead. Sunlei Aug 2013 #20
give the shell pieces to those who lifted dna/finger prints off the boston bombers mess. Sunlei Aug 2013 #21
that's what the rebels are doing. they sent out samples for testing. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #22
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Syria chemical attack evi...»Reply #16