Report No.

3/49

mm ,py' No. l3
C^WT

mowTv OP
Rf.GRAPED

..BY
DATtD

ARMAMENTS DESIGN ESTABLISHMENT

MINISTRY OF SUPPLY

BY
DATED m&&

20081208290
•>B1B

FIN STABILISED DISCARDING SABOT SHELL

PROGRESS OF DESIGN

R.G. HOLTON

NOTICE

OFFICIAL SECRETS ACTS

Any unauthorised person finding this document
should read the instructions on the back cover.

fecHNic
StCTlQH

May, 1949
 :"-»r y

The initial distribution of numbered copies was as follows:-

1 D.N.O.
' 2 D.G. of Ac
3-4 Sec O.B.
5 S.A.B.
6 A.R.E,
7 A.G.E.
8 D.G.D. (Admiralty)
9-11 T.P.A.3A.I.B. (Records and loan)
12-W2C ToP.A.3A-I«B. (Overseas distribution)
T.S./B.J.S.M. 3
M
I
t
I
I
U.S.M.A. (Ord.) 5
U.S. R. and D. Board 2
U.S. Naval Attache • S.
1

A.D.E.

34 C.E.A.D.
35 D.C.E.A.D.(C)
36 D.C.E.A,D.(M)
37 S.N.R.
38 S.A.F.R.
39 Dol
40 D.2
4i D« 2 (Mr. Holton)
42 0.3
43 Do 10
44 C.T.2.
45 Central Pile
46 Library

47-70 C.T.I. Registry

 ARMAMENTS DESIGN ESTABLISHMENT

TECHNICAL REPORT

No. 3/49

FIN STABILISED DISCARDING SABOT SHELL

PROGRESS CP DESIGN

R. G. Holton A.M.I.Meoh.E.

Abstract

This report details the progress - to date - in firing a

fin stabilised sub-calibre shell at high velocity from a smooth bore
gun. A previous Report (A.D.E. Tech. Report 5/48) discusses the
method of calculating the stresses in the shell body due to firing,
and since all firings carried out have not revealed any abnormal
functioning of the shall body as such, no major changes have been made
in this part of the design. This report, therefore, is concerned
only with the development of the discarding sabot and the tail unit.

Armaments Design Establishment,

Ministry of Supply,
Port Halstead, Kent.
Phone: Sevenoaks 2301.

May, 1949.
 CONTENTS

Page

Introduction 1

Appendix A 12

Appendix B 13

Appendix C 15

Appendix D 17

Appendix E 18

Appendix P 19

Appendix G 21
.
Appendix H 23

Appendix J 25

Appendices K and L 27
Introduction

A Fin-stabilised, Discarding Sabot Shell is a sub calibre projectile

which can be fired from a smooth bore gun. Stability in flight is obtained
by a suitable design of tail unit having four fins0 Pressure (in the gun) is
applied to the sub-calibre shell through the medium of a centrally disposed
sabot consisting of four sectors which are discarded at the muzzle. High
reduction ratios (Parent calibre/Sub calibre) are possible and hence high
velocity.

The shell has high length/sub calibre ratio. Its high cross sec-
tional density and low air resistance result in reduced times of flight to a
given target.

Design A
cm
German Peenemunde Pfeil Geschosse 10.5/4-5 "

This type of projectile was discovered among German experimental

work after the 1939-45 war. A German design is shown in Pig. 1.

Firing Results

A trial was carried out by the Ordnance Board with captured German
shell. The trial is reported in O.B. Proceeding Q.4697- The results show
that the shell was unsatisfactory, several breaking up or missing the target.
Accuracy was assessed on two series of three rounds each. This accuracy
should be compared with that of British designs reported herein.

Design B

British 5«4/2.2 inch - D2(L)2150/GF/557

It was decided to commence work on this type of shell in C.E.A.D. in

1945 and a convenient equipment was selected, i.e. the Service Q.F»5»25 inch
Mk. II gun, which could be smooth bored to 5*4 inch by removing the rifling,
giving about 40 calibres shot travel.

The design shown in Fig. 2 was prepared. A very high velocity was
desired, and the shell and sabot were lightened as much as possible to this
end.

The British 2.2 inch sub-projectile was supported in the gun bore
similarly to the German design, i.e., by the central sabot and the tail fins,
both these features being of bore diameter. The projectile was separately
loaded into the gun chamber up to ramming stops provided at the rear edge of
the tail fins.

The sabot on this design consisted of four equal sectors secured

around the sub-projectile by a plastic ring screwed on to the central boss.
The plastic ring was intended to fracture under gas pressure in the gun,
leaving the four sectors free to discard at the muzzle.

The steel sabot carried no rubber sealing ring at this stage, but
the thin rear skirt shown in Fig. 2 was known from recoveries to expand under
gas pressure to form some measure of seal, but fired shell nevertheless
showed considerable gas wash on the duralumin tail unit, indicating lack of
sealing.
 -2-

Provision was not made on this design to produce rotation of the

shell in flight - the leading edge of the tail fins being faired off symmet-
rically on each flanko

Firing Results

A trial report is given in Appendix Ao

A second firing with the same design of projectile is reported in

Appendix B and photographic records of the shell in flight at about 140 feet
frcm the muzzle are given in Pigs. 3, 4 and 5«

Design C

British 5.4/2.2 inch - D2(L)3074/E/557 = Sealing Ring

D2(L)5L98/V557 = Sabot
D2(L)2150/G^/557 = Shell
Firings with a non-discarding sabot proof shot, fitted with a simple
form of rubber seal, resulted in the gas wash on the tail unit being elimina-
ted. The shell shown in Pig. 2 were therefore fitted with a modified sabot
and a rubber sealing ring - see Pig. 6.

It can be seen that the thin rear skirt of the sabot in Pig. 2 was
removed and the plastic securing ring omitted, the'sabot sectors being held in
position by the rubber sealing ring.

Firing results

A trial with this combination is given in Appendix C. This was a

firing for functioning only, while the following Appendix D gives results of
the same projectile fired for accuracy determination. The tail fins in the
trial Appendix D were faired off on one side only at the leading edge. The
relatively slow rotation (estimated 1000 r.p.m.) which this would impart to
the shell was considered to even out any mechanical eccentricities.

The supposition in Appendix C that the accuraoy in the trial

Appendix D precludes damage to tail fins by discarding sectors is not supported
by later firings - see conclusions to Design G, (repeat).

Design D

British 5.4/1*9 - D2(L)2657/GE/635

The satisfactory functioning and accuracy of the above designs B and

C decided C.P.A.D. to produce a shell of better ballistic shape and performanceo
The design is shown in Fig. 7<> The sub-projectile in this design was sup-
ported in the gun bore similarly to designs B and C*

Initial firings were carried out with the design as shown, i.e. with
sabot sectors secured by plastic ring and without sealing ring. Projectiles
of this type were already being manufactured whilst the effectiveness of a
sealing ring was being proved on design Co

Firing results

See under design E.

 -3-

Design E

British 5°A/1.9 - D2(L)2657/GE/635 = Shell & Sabot

D2(L)3&tVE/635 = Sealing Ring
The plastic securing ring in Fig. 7 was soon replaced by a rubber
sealing ring attached to the sabot by adhesive. The design is shown in Figo 15
attached to the sabot from design D.

Firing Results - Designs D and E

A firing carried out at night, and using "Arditron" flash photography,

is reported in Appendix E. Photographs of the shell in flight are also given
in Figs. 8-14, being taken at about 140 feet from gun.

Conclusions

The functioning of both types (D and E) was unsatisfactory; the

photographs show that the tail units were either damaged locally or the com-
plete tail unit was missing, and the projectiles had yaw of varying degree.

It is important to note here that the gun in use showed no bore wear
and the performance of the shell could not be associated therefore with a worn
gun.

By comparing Designs D and E with B and C, it was considered that

malfunctioning could be attributed to the tail unit attachment to shell body,
which was much weaker in designs D and E. Damage or fracture would then
occur due to bore acceleration and/or side slap, or again to muzzle blast.

Design F

British 5-4/1.9 (Proof Shot) - D2(L)3844/V635 = Sealing Ring

D2(L)275Vv651 = Shot
D2(L) 2844/^651 = Sabot
To confirm the above conclusions, a trial was fired with proof shot
having a steel body with steel tail fins welded thereto. The design is shown
in Fig. 17. The sabot and sealing ring shown were the same as those fitted
to design E (Fig. 15).

Firing Results

The trial is reported in Appendix G. Photographs of hessian screen

as struck by projectile and sabot sectors are given in Figs. 18, 19 & 20.

Conclusions

The photographs again show that the projectile did not function
correctly. The pattern on the screen is irregular, the projectile iB
unstable and recoveries had severely buckled tail fins. It was evident that
failure was not due to tail weakness.

An examination of the gun bore revealed considerable scoring at this

stage, the diameter being irregularly oversize up to .027 inches. It was
considered that incorrect functioning would continue in this gun, since the
sabot sectors would expand into the oversize parts of the bore, and the conse-
quently reduced engagement between the buttress threads on the projectile
would result in failure at this point. A new gun was therefore introduced.
 -4-

Design E (repeat)

British 5.4/1.9 Design Nos. as for E (previous)

It was decided to fire projectiles of this design in the new gun, hut
at lower pressures than had been used previously, although the higher pres-
sures were still within the design limits of the shell. The object was to
find a pressure at which the shell would function so that trials could continue.)

Firing Results

The trial is reported in Appendix P.

Conclusions

The results record continued incorrect functioning and break up of

projectile.

Comparison was again made between design D/E and B/C. Attention was
drawn to the difference in shape of the sabot sectors, particularly at the
outer diameter. After much consideration and examination of gun and shell
recoveries the following conclusions were derived:-

It would appear that during the build up of pressure in the chamber,

the rear face of the tail unit received an impulse from the pressure wave
before this reaches the sabot, which is some 16 inches forward. This impulse
moves the sub-projectile forward, causing the sabot sectors to expand into the
bore via the medium of the buttress thread, and the four sectors then rotate
about the rear point X (see Pig. 16(a)) until the front edge Y makes contact
with the gun bore<> Thereafter, the projectile behaves at random in the gun,
the discards and/or sub-projectile scoring the bore and breaking off the tail
unit. Damage to three recovered sabot sectors from this trial are consistent
with this view, while further support is given by damage in the gun bore
around shot start position, and which could be associated with the edge Y
(above)o The buttress threads on these three sectors were severely flattened;
those on Round 3 were undamaged. The correct behaviour of Round 3 is attri-
buted to the very low pressure recorded - 8.9 tcns/sq. inch.

Previous correct functioning of designs B and C (5«A/2<>2) can be

associated with the much longer rear skirt on the sabot (see Fig. 36(b)) where
overturning of the sectors about point X (a) is not possible.

It is considered here, subject to later confirmation, that the

presence of sabot-sectors ahead of the sub-projectile in flight, as shown in
Figs. 8 - 14, is associated with the sectors becoming disengaged, or partly
so, from the sub-projectile in the gun. They may then be freely accelerated
either in the gun, or at the muzzle by blast, and so move at a higher velocity
than the sub- projectile and in advance of it for a short distance. Photo-
graphs of the correctly functioning 5°4/2*2 Design B and C do not show this
phenomenon.

Design G

British 5° 4/1° 9 - D2(L)2657/GE/635 = Shell

D2(L)3910/E/635 = Sabot

It was now agreed to fit a new sabot to the sub-projectile shown in

Fig. 7» The design of the sabot, with a rubber sealing ring fitted, is shown
in Fig. 21. The four sectors of the sabot were secured around the sub-
projectile by a plastic ring, the sealing ring being secured with adhesive.
The plastic ring was broken manually after loading in the gun, in order to
ensure free separation of the sectors at the muzzle; the rubber sealing ring
was also cut radially in four places for the same reason, and these cuts were
arranged out of line with the joints between the four sabot sectors to prevent
gas leak.
 -5-

It can be seen that the sabot design is very similar to that in.
Pigo 2, and the overturning of the sectors in the gun as discussed in conclu-
sions to Design E (repeat) is avoided.

Firing Results

See Appendix H with photograph of pattern on hessian screen in

Fig. 22. Note that the sealing ring shown on the design was omitted in this
firing, but was included in the repeat trial for range and accuracy.

Conclusions

The photograph of the hessian screen (Fig. 22) shows sub-projectile

signatures (with coloured square surround) and sabot sector signatures (with
circular surround of same colour respectively). The sub-projectiles showed
very little yaw, and sectors were spread at about 5 feet radius from sub-
projectile at the screen distance.

The correct functioning of the longer bore fitting sabot was thus
proved.

The firing results show that one round broke up. (The additional
correct signature on the screen photograph is of a 5°4/2.2 round which was
fired for comparison). It was thought that the cause of break up of this
round was due to assymetrical loading of the propellant around the tail unit,
resulting in unbalanced pressures around the tail in the gun. A different
view arose from later firings - see conclusions to Design J (Tail units).

Design G (repeat) Design Nos. es for G (above)

A firing for range accuracy was carried out with this design.

Firing Results

See Appendix J. Note that sealing rings were used in this firing.

Conclusions

During this firing it was observed from the yaw cards that several
rounds had one tail fin missing.

This was found tc be so on the recovered projectiles, which in

several cases showed damage to the leading edge of other fins and which was
not considered due to landing on sand. It was assumed that the damage was
caused by impact with the sabot sectors which had not spread wide enough to
pass the tail fins on discarding. It is hoped to gain more information on
this by the use of radio flash photography at positions close to the gun
muzzle* Projectiles with tail fins damaged or missing ranged equally well
with those having complete tails. It is concluded from this that the tail
area is excessive, and the projectile is over-stabilized, i.e. a shell with
three fins in still stable provided it rotates to even out the unbalanced
tail, while its reduced dr&g is offset by the probable persistent yaw, such
that its ranging properties are consistent with a shell having four fins
with less yaw.

If the design can be arranged so that the tail fins remain .n

undamaged the tail area may be reduced and the projectile will be upset
less by the muzzle blast.

In spite of the damaged tail units it can be seen that the line
accuracy is very satisfactory. A range accuracy at graze is shown in the
results but the target accuracy at some point on the upward trajectory, con-
sistent with A.A. fire, would be less than this. Later firings with Radar
tracking are considered desirable to check this.
 -6-

The ballistic coefficient 1.8 was assumed for purposes of calcula-

ting M.V. from O.V. in the results. The figure calculated fran range results
is 1.719.

Design H (5»4/l°9) and Design J (5.4/2.48) Design H = D2(L)2657/GE/635 = Shell

D2(L)3769A/651 P Sabot
Design J = D2(L) 3663/GS/759 = Shell
D2(L)3822/3C/759 = Sabot

The previous firings were carried out in a new gun, in which the
sabot fitted very closely. . It was now considered essential that the sabot
design should accommodate itself to worn gun conditions, where the present
design would result in reduced engagement of the buttress threads between
sabot and sub-projectile.

The design of sabot shown in Pig. 23 was fitted to the sub-projec-

tile in Design D, as shown. The same type of sabot was fitted concurrently
to the larger shell design (5.4/2.48) shown in Pig. 24, where a V.T. fuze can
be accommodated in the nose. This double cavity shell was designed on the
basis of A.D.E. Tech. Report 5/48.

The steel sabot sectors on these two designs were secured to the
sub-projectile by a plastic (rubber ebonite) ring. This ring, is very simi-
lar to a design which has been used successfully on spin stabilized shell.
A rubber sealing ring is held in the dovetailed recess in the plastic ring
and gas pressure applied in the gun forces the slightly deformable plastic
into the wedge-shaped annulus, between the sabot and the gun bore, thus
taking up any normal gun wear and ensuring at the same time a close engage-
ment of the buttress thread.

The plastic ring and rubber sealing ring, being partly cut through
in manufacture, are stripped off by the muzzle blast, leaving the sabot sec-
tors free to separate from the sub-projectile.

A preliminary firing of this type of sabot, fitted to a 5->4/l°9

proof shot, had shown promise of success. The low pressure of about
10 tons/sq. inch was used, however, as this was the level at which the 1.9
sub-projectiles were found to function. It was thought that the excessive
muzzle blast, caused by the low expansion ratio of the heavier charges used
•in the 5.25 gun (S.B. to 5.4), was affecting the initial flight of the
projectile.

A new gun was now available (7«5 inch, Mk. VT lined down to 5<>4
S.B. - shot travel 65 calibres, proofed with P.S. non-D.S. Proof Shot at
23o8 tons/sq. inch/6200 ft./sec.) and this was used in a trial of both
Designs H and J. Two types of tail unit were fitted to Design Hj that
shown in Pig. 23 was connected to the shell body by the extended duralumin
stem, and this was thought to be a source of weakness.

An alternative to the swept back tail unit shown was therefore

included in this trial; this was a square form of tail unit being secured
to the body similarly to design M Pig. 24.

Firing Results

These are shown in Appendices K and L.

Conclusions

Reference Appendix K (Design H) , 5"4/lo9»

 -7-

The results show that the shell, with either type of tail unit,
continues to behave erratically and yaws considerably or breaks up.
("Break up" means invariably that the oomplete tail unit is missing on
the yaw card). The gun bore was examined carefully during this firing,
and no damage could be observed such as had been found on previous guns
when sabot failures had occurred, From this it was considered that the
design of discard was functioning satisfactorily, even at the higher
pressures recorded.

Reference Appendix L (Design J) 5.A/2-48

The four rounds here ranged fairly satisfactorily with little

yaw, but the separation of the sabot sectors is not always regular as
judged by the holes in the screen. This is also a feature of the
pattern given on the screen by Design H, and it may be that the plastic
ring, although weakened in four places, is not breaking readily at the
muzzle and the steel sectors do in fact separate unevenly. On the
other hand the pattern may be influenced by the yaw of the projectile
and this must be eliminated as far as possible.

Attention is now centred on the tail unit design. It is found

on all recoveries that the diameter across pairs of fins is reduced by
amounts up to .25" below the unfired size, and the reduction is greater
at the rear of the tail than at the forward edge. It is evident that thia
is due to rapid side-slap and wear in the gun, and if the shell is swinging
across the bore at the instant the sabot leaves the muzzle, then it will
continue to yaw in that direction until the tail unit is clear of the bore
and can begin its function of stabilizing the shell; by this time the
projectile is in a position to be yawed further by muzzle blast, which may
even remove the tail unit completely.

Both the amount of reduction (in tail diameter) and the degree
of yaw on the cards were noticeably greater than when the shorter gun was
used; the wear would te less,due to shorter bore travel, and this would
be reflected in the degree of yaw. The Design J behaved better in flight
than Design H; the longer distance between sabot and tail provides better
bore control and hence less tendency to yaw at exit from the gun, while its
heavier mass would resist the effect of muzzle blast to increase the yaw.
See under Designs P, etc.

The following designs have been prepared but have not been fired
yet. A further report will be issued showing the results of trials with
them.

Discarding SabotB

Design K Sabot = D2(L)4322/X/651

The design of composite discard, referred to in Designs H and J,

had plastic bands of bore diameter. It has been found, however, that the
plastic band, when used on spin stabilized shell, can be fired quite satis-
factorily through a gun having a lead at the forward end of the chamber
and it should be possible to adopt this in a smooth bore gun, allowing the
lead to wear forward in the normal manner. In a further Design K (not
shown) the plastic band will therefore be about'.20 inches larger than the
gun bore, and the shell will be fired from a modified gun having a suitable
chamber and lead.
 -8-

Design L Sabot = D2(L)3939A/635

It has become evident that the sabot is becoming an expensive manu-

facturing item in quantity production, in addition to being a weight which,
for internal ballistic reasons,should be a minimum. The Design L (see
Fig. 25) has been arranged in an effort to reduce,these objections. The
principle of the deformable plastic has been retained, the shape simplified
and lightened as much as is considered possible. The complicated form of the
four sectors makes the stressing of it by calculation extremely difficult,
and the design is being proved by practical trials.

Design M Sabot = D2(L)i*06yE/635

The use of the plastic bands in Designs H, K and L in a Service role

has yet to be found satisfactory. The plastic may react unfavourably to a
gun heated to some temperature, yet to be determined by high rates of fire.

The supply of a suitable plastic (rubber ebonite) may also be

difficult in an emergency.

A design of sabot (see Pig. 26) has been prepared in an effort to

avoid these objections. It consists of the usual four sectors, secured to
the sub-projectile by a small ebonite ring, which fractures in the gun under
gas pressure. The four sectors are provided with deformable flanges at
front and rear of the outer diameter; these flanges will be swaged down by
the gun lead, while the rear flange will continue to make contact with the
(worn) gun bore due to expansion under gas pressure. The previous all steel
sabots - Designs B, C, D, E and G - had a common objection, in that the hard-
ness of the heat treated steel used in their particular designs would wear
severely a gun having a chamber lead. This Design M, therefore, has the
four sectors coated on the outer diameter with electro deposited nickel
in order to provide a soft surface for bore contact.

Tail Units •

In the conclusions to Fig. 24 the design and wear of tail units is

discussed. It is obvious that the wear on the tail fins must be prevented,
or some other form of bore support adopted, in order to project the shell
satisfactorily from the gun. Various types of pad have been added to the
tail fins to achieve this.

Design K D2( L) 3830/E/635

As a first thought the design of tail unit shown in Fig. 27 was

arranged. The projections on the tail fins, normally used as ramming stops,
were supported as shown by plugs of hard rubber and also plastic rubber
ebonite. Reduction of the projections will occur in the gun lead, while the
plugs are intended to exert outward pressure to keep the projections in con-
tact with the bore. In view of the degree of wear on the tail fins now apparent
in longer guns, it is not anticipated that this design will succeed.

Design P D2(L)3992/E/635

The design shown ia Fig. 28 is a further thought on this problem.

Here a plastic (rubber ebonitd) shoe is fitted over the edge of each fin and
is secured by a pin. The plastic, being resilient, will be reduced in the
gun lead; it has been found already that this type of plastic wears very
little in passing through the gun.

At the muzzle the gas pressure will act on the rear underside of
the shoes to strip them off the fins. It is considered that this design
would be suitable for run up in a cartridge case similarly to the next design.
 -9-

Design Q D2(L)4053/X/635

The design shown in Pig. 29 has also been prepared. This design was
prompted by the foregoing wear problem, and by the problem of run up-in a
tapered cartridge case. (See Cartridge case designs - Fixed Ammunition).
The larger plastic (rubber ebonite) shoes are fitted over the fins, and
hinged therein on the large rear plastic pin; the forward end of the shoe
carries a smaller crosspin of plastic which rests on the edge of the fin.
The shoe is held to the fin by a small pin. During run-up in a tapered
cartridge case the small forward pin is reduced, imposing a comparatively
small pressure and drag on the cartridge case. The shoe as a whole can
then pass through the gun lead to maintain a bearing surface in the gun
similarly to Design P. At the muzzle the gas pressure on the rear face
of the shoe hinges it upward around the large rear pin and Btrips off the
whole shoe forward.

Further designs to be considered are a more robust bore support

attached to the rear of the tail. This is to be rejected at the muzzle by
gas pressure retained in the tail unit boss. The fins will not be used as
bore supports here.

The soft iron insert or "combs" shown on the German tail unit
(Fig. l) will also be tried, although it is expected that wear will still
occur but in reduced degree.

Alternatively, a long central sabot is to be designed, having

about Ig- parent calibre length with bore diameters at its front and rear
ends. No tail support would be necessary in the gun in this design.

Both this design and the previous one have the objection of
increased discarding weight with its reflections on ballistics and equip-
ment weight. The long central sabot can be made of light alloy to reduce
its weight; this means, however, that the buttress thread must be consid-
erably longer sinoe the strength of the light alloy is less than that of
steel. The necessarily longer thread on the shell body means a reduced
cavity, particularly in double cavity shell, and therefore the explosive
capacity is reduced.

Fixed Ammunition. Design R. 3.0/1.2 D2(L)4056/SK/808

It has been pointed out that the previous designs and trials were
of separately loaded ammunition. The calibres used are typical Service
sizes, but it is evident that for fixed ammunition the cartridge case must
extend forward to the central sabot, and there is no suitable equipment
available for providing case attached F.S.D.S. shell of this oalibre.

It was therefore agreed in 194-7 that small scale trials with case
attached shell would be carried out. The design of round shown in Fig. 30
has been prepared and is being manufactured.

The sub-projectile is intended only as a carrier for various

types of sabot and tail unit to determine the most efficient design. The
shoes on the tail unit are extended to make contact with the walls of the
cartridge case, which is extended forward and turned over the front of the
sabot, being secured thereto by the narrow plastic ring shown. (This ring
also fractures as the steel sabot sectors separates at the muzzle). The
complete projectile is assembled to the case by insertion through the rear
end. Filling of the propellant charge is also made through this aperture,
which is afterwards closed by the screwed base plug shcwn^>
 -10-

Fixed Ammunition - Railed Case - Design S D2(L)4315/GF/841

It can be seen that the Design R of cartridge case, provides a

slowly tapered run-up for the tail fins with their fitted "shoes", passing
without any violent changes into the gun lead. The particular propellant
volume required is obtained by extending the tapered case rearward, but
the larger the volume required the longer does the case become, and the
longer is the complete round. This length factor can,be objectionable
from a loading and ramming point of view. Again, if the volume required
is relatively small, the (shorter) rearward extended taper produces a base
diameter, on the case, which is so small that it will be weak if a screwed
hole is formed in it large enough to pass the projectile through on assembly.

The above objections have been overcome by the design shown in

Fig. 31. Here the required volume of cartridge case may be obtained in
shorter lengths of larger diameter, and the large oase mouth diameter con-
tains a sleeve to house the sabot on the shell. Four grooved rails
extend rearward from this sleeve, and the tail fins and shoes run forward
in these rails. (A preliminary firing of several rounds, using separate
ammunition, has shown that rails, attached to the case by two screws or
rivets, remain in position).

The method of assembly then is:-

(a) Assemble rails to case.

(b) Insert complete shell, tail first, in mouth of case, with fins
between adjacent rails.

(c) Support shell on suitable central plunger in tail unit, and push
it inside case until "shoes" are in rear of rails.

(d) Rotate shell until fins are in line with grooves in rails, and
bring up shell until shoes contact groove surface.

(e) Force sleeve into case mouth and over sabot, until sleeve is in
contact with fron,t end of rails.

(f) Cone the mouth of case over the sleeve (and sabot where possible)
and secure with screwed ring on sabot.

(g) Fill propellant (granular) through rear of case,

(h) Assemble screwed base plug and primer.

Firings with above complete rounds have not been carried out to date.

Guns

Two items particular to the gun have yet to be investigated.

(a) Vented Muzzle

The Germans claimed that adequate muzzle venting improved the shell
accuracy, by removing the initial disturbance' due to muzzle blast.
This complication is not a desirable one and although it will be
tried experimentally, it will be avoided if possible.
 -11-

(b) Tapered Bore

It is thought that the wear (occurring at present on the tail fins)

could be accommodated in a tapered bore, thereby eliminating the
increasing side slap of the shell in the gun. This also will be
tried but it will require the use of a sabot similar to Designs H,
K and L. If the sabot of design such as M is used in a tapered
bore, the vibration of the overhung forward end of the shell will
cause the deformable skirt bands on the sabot to collapse, thereby-
losing control of the sub-projectile at this point. If the skirt
is made stiff enough to resist this tendency, it is felt that the
finely tapered bore will wear unduly.
 -12-

APFENDIXA

5.4/2.2 F.S.D.S. Shell

Range and Accuracy Trial

Fired at Shoeburyness on 30th and 31st December, 1946.

Attended by Col. Speechly, Cdr. Ascherson
and Mr. Dear.

Object;- To obtain data to allow the ballistic coefficient of these rounds

to be calculated. Also to see whether these unspun rounds
would have an unacceptably large dispersion.

Equipment :- Gun - 5.4 Smooth Bore No. L.2832

Mounting - B.L. 5.5" C.P. Mk. 2 No. 17.

Ammunition;- 5.4/2.2 F.S.D.S. Shell filled inert and weighted to 12.25 lb.
The shell had tail fins .4" thick with equal 10° chamfer on each
edge of fin. Design D2(L)2150/GE/557 no sealing ring fitted
Cartridge
Cases and
Primers;— 5.25 in. Service. No cartridge lids.

Charge: - N.S. 193-054 30 lb.

Conditions!- Q.B. 10 fired over sand. Gusty wind blowing from right flank
approximately 90° to line of fire (velocity 20-60 ft/seo).

Remarks;

The trial was begun on the morning of the 30th and the first round (A)
was fired successfully although due to the visibility then prevailing, no fall
of shot was observed. On attempting to load the second round (B) the projectile
jammed in the shot seating and was only removed after extreme difficulty which
probably resulted in damage to the ballistic cap.

After this mishap with round (B) the other 4 rounds were more criti-
cally examined and it was found that the plastic discs which keep the sabot-
segments in place did not pull up tight as designed. The rounds were then
reassembled and the sabot segments were secured in place by means of silk cord
and all rounds were then loaded and unloaded.

The trial was continued on the following morning, but round (B), which
may have been damaged, was held back until the last. The table below gives the
results obtained.

Round Press, corrected 0.7. Range Line

t.s.i. ft/sec. yd. yd.
A - 4422 - -
£ ±5*6/5.2. 4502 12935 236.2fi
C 14.0 4454 13517 87.5L
D 14.5 4472 13343 34.5L
F 14.7 4578 13797 75.5R
B 14.4 4499 13667 83.5L
Mean 14.5 4501 13452 21.3R
M.D. 0.3 31 2502 107.74
The results shown here should be compared with S.A.B. *s estimates of a
range of 13000 yd. at a velocity of 4600 ft/sec, with a ballistic coefficient(new
law) of 1.2. From the results it would appear that the actual ballistic
coefficient is slightly better than S.A.B. 's provisional, estimate.
This trial does seem to confirm, however, the low pressures and
correspondingly low velocities which are obtained with the present round.
 -13-

APPENDIX B

5.4/2.2 F.S.D.S. Shell

Photographic Trial in conjunction with C.S.A.R.

Fired at Shoeburyness on 7th and 8th January. 1947.

Object:- To obtain photographs of the projectile in flight with a view,

at a later date, to repeating the trial with rounds fired at
increasingly high pressures until the actual break-up of the
projectile occurs,, Also to obtain, if possible, photographs
of the discarding sabots.
Equipment: - Gun - 5.4 Smooth Bore No. L.2832.
Mounting - 5.25 C.P.
Ammunition!- 5.4/2.2. F.S.D.S. Shell filled inert, and also one round of
F.S.N.D.S. proof shot. The shell had tail fins .4" thick with
equal 10° chamfer on each edge of fin.

Cartridge Case
and Primers:- 5.25 in. Service. No cartridge lids.

Charge:- N.S.198-054 30 lb.

Conditions:- Q.E. 1° fired over sand.

Camera Equipment:- Was disposed by C.S.A..P. at a mean distance of about 140 ft.
from the muzzle of the gun.

Velocities:- Were measured by Duddell, and a single yaw card was obtained
from each round.

Remarks.

The proof shot was fired on 7.1.A7 so as to fix the line for photo-
graphic reasons and the pressure obtained with this round was 12.7 tons/sq.in.
It was then decided to load the 4 rounds so as to ensure that they would load
when required. ,

Round I was loaded successfully, but the second round to be tried, H,

jammed in the shot seating and on extraction the plastic locking ring broke.
It was decided not to load any further rounds.

The aotual photographic trial could not take place that evening, due
to climatic conditions (snow).

On the following morning a new plastic locking ring was made for
round H by S. of E., Shoeburyness. This was somewhat thicker than the original
ring - .25 x 4.8 in diameter. No serious difficulty'was experienced in loading
these 4 round when required, although i,t had been expected that round H, which
had jammed before, would give trouble.

Corrected
Round. pressure O.V. Remarks.
tons/sq.in. Ft/sec.
I 14.6 4555 ha
L 15.1 4610 -
K 14.3 4535 Short skirted sabot
H v 13.9 4430 Thicker locking ring
 \

-14-

An examination of the yaw cards showed that all the rounds were excep-
tionally good for yaw. There was a suspicion that round K was slightly worse
than the other 3. The spread of the sabot segments at the camera position was
rather more than expected and in any future trial it would probably be necessary
to put the cameras slightly further away frcm the line of fire of the gun.

One of the segments struck the railway wagon carrying the camera j
another of the fragments damaged the microphone stand. Good photographs appear
to have been obtained of all roundB.
 -15-

APPENDIX C

D.2.A. Trial No. 114

5.4/2.2 F.S.D.S. Shell

Trial to Investigate Functioning of Discards with Moulded Rubber Ring

Fired at Shoeburyness on Monday, 11th August 1947 and attended by

Mr. Aitchison and Mr. Dear.

Object;- To investigate whether a moulded rubber sealing ring would affect

functioning of the discards.

Equipment: Q.F. 5»4" Smooth Bore No. L.2832. Mounting, B.L. 5.5" C.P.
Mk. II, No.17. Projectiles: 5.4/2»2 F.S.D.S. Shell to Design
D2(L)2150/GE/557, fitted with discards to D2(L)3198/E/557 and
sealing rings to D2(L)3074/S/557.

Cartridge Service 5«25"« No cartridge case lids used.

Cases and
Primers; -

Charge;- N/S 198-054.

Conditions;- Q.E. 1 and 30 minutes as given below<> Fired over sand.

15' x 15* Hessian Screen, erected 125' from gun muzzle. Yaw
Card 140' from gun.

Remarks:

Some of the original 5.24/2.2 Fin Stabilised Shell had their discards
modified to Design D2(L)3198, SO as to accommodate a moulded rubber sealing
ring (Design D2(L)3074) made from rubber to Specification IRGP Mix. No. 4038C.
It was not at all certain that this ring would break up sufficiently quickly
on leaving the barrel to allow the discards to get clear of the tailo It was
hoped, however, that by the use of a Hessian Screen and Yaw Card, together
with a subsequent examination of the recovered rounds, it would be possible to
decide whether the tail fins had in fact been struck by the discards. The
following results were obtained:-

Q.E. Round Weight Charge Copper Ramm- Spread of Muzzle Remarks

No. Weight Pressure ing Discards Velocity
1° 80 17 lb. 4^ oz. 30 lb. 16.5 43.9 45" x 38"

30' 82 17 " 5*" 30 • 16.6 44.0 46" x 30" 4690

»
n 84 17 " 30 " 16.6 4736
*" 43.95 30" x 35"
n 88 17 " If 32 " 20.8 43.95 50" x 39" 5121 Slightly
unsteady-
n B 32 •
89 17 5*" 20.5 43.95 32" x 32" 5069 No Duddell
used
n 90 17 " 5i" 32 • 20.3 43.95 Complete break up
of shell

It will be observed that for the first time with this round pressures of over
20 tons per square inch were obtained with a 32 lb. charge of N/S. This should
be compared with previous firings in which a similar charge only gave pressures
of 16 tons per square inch, the difference presumably being due to efficient
sealing.
 -16-

Unfortunately it was not possible to have the sand recovery party in

the correct position to observe fall of shot and as a result of this only two
rounds were recovered,, Both of these shell exhibit markings along the body
originating at the Sabot Buttress Thread and extending backwards towards the
fins. Furthermore, two of the fins in each 6ase have suffered damage,
although it is not possible to separate out damage caused by the Duddell Wire
Screens, the impact on the sand and possible collision with the discardso
Without any other evidence it would appear that the discards are, in fact, not
getting completely clear of the tail fins- and are liable to cause damage<>
Trial No. 115» nowever, whicn was a Range and Accuracy Trial, rather tends to
contradict this conclusion as accuracy was good and therefore there can have
been little or no damage to the fins before impact with the sand«
 -17-

APPENDIX D

D.2.A. Trial No. 115

Range and Accuracy Trial -with Shell F.S.D.S.

5.4/2.2 Fitted with Rubber Sealing Rings

Fired at Shoeburyness on Tuesday, 12th August, and attended by Mr.

Aitchison and Mr. Dear.

Object:- To investigate the effect on aoouracy of using shell fitted

•with a tail to give slow rotation, and with moulded rubber
sealing rings.

Equipmentt- Q.F. 5.4" Smooth Bore No„L„2242* Mounting B.L. 5.5" C.P.
Mk.II No.17.
Projectiles:5.A/2.2 F.S.D.S. shell to Design D2(L) 2150/®:/557
fitted with discards to D2(L)3198/V557 and rubber sealing
rings to D2(L) 307VV557.

Conditions:- Q.E. 10° fired over sand.

Charge:- N/S 198-054 and 30 lbs.

Fired 12. 8. 47.
Round Proj. Weight Press MoV. Range Line Time of Flight
No. No. lbs. oas. ( corrected) ft/sec Yds. Yds. sees.
T.S.I.
2 B 53 17 4 16.9 4732 13123 5.6R N.R.
3 B 54 17 17.5 4804 13831 34.3L 31.50
4
5
6
B
B
B
55
56
60
17
17
17
i
4
4
17.8
17.5
N.R.
4806
4793
4747
13191
13211
12916
6.2R
34.1H
69.4R
29.62
28.29
28.38
B 64 0.6R 29.40
7
8 B 65
17
17 3 f 17.2
17.1
4841
4785
13761
13651 42.1L 28.45
9 B 66 17 4 17.1 - - — N.R.
Mean 17.3 4787 13383 3.9R 29.27
M.D. m 0.26 26 312.1 27.86 0.90

Fixed 15. 8. 47.

Round Proj. Press. M.V0 Range Line Time of Flight

No. No. (corrected) ft/sec. Yds. Yds. sec.
T.S.I.

11 B 67 17.7 M _ _ N.R.
12 B 68 17.5 4804 13779 7.1L 28.70
13 B 72 17.8 4819 13364 49,5L 28.42
14 B 76 18.2 4850 14380 27.3L N.R.
15 B 77 17.5 4815 - 13741 51.7L 28.88
16 B 78 17.8 4842 14368 16.9L 29.34
17 B 79 17.9 4855 13985 58.9L 28.5
18 B 82 16.8 4855 14306 76.9L N.R.
Mean 17.6 4834 13989 41.2L 28.77
M.D. 0.3 19 310.6 21.0 0.27

It is considered that the accuracy with this projectile is very

acceptable,
 -18-

APPENDIX B

IMENTAL ESTABLISHMffW, RHmgprmiNBSS

Report No. 55/45/Q.5.

Object:- To investigate "by flash photography the "behaviour of the dis-

cards of the P.S.D.S. shell.

Authority:- C.E.A.P. THV/9/1/3.A. Trial No. 122. Heqn. C.E.A.D.

Carried out on 30th October, 1947.

C.E.A.D. * C.S.A.P. were represented.

GUN:- . Q.P. 5.4 inch S.B. No. 1/2242. (31 E.F.C.)

MTG:- B.I.. 5.5 inch C.P. Mk. 2 No. 17.

Charge:- Cartridge Q.P. 5.25 inch gun^filled N/S.198-054
Lot D.9545.R. (Stock). (8)
(For weights see report).
Charge and Air Temp. 58°F.

Projectile:- Shell Q.P. P.S.D.S. 5.4/1-9 inoh^weighted H.E.S. (8)

Conditions:- Fired "by night for M.V. , Pressure and observation of functioning
by flash photography.

Velocities:- By Duddell.

Velocities
Rd. Q.E. Proj. Ram. Charge Pressure T.I.S.D. = 99.22 ft. Time
weight Observed|Corrected Velocities at 199.2-ft.
No. 0 , No. ins. lbs. tons per sq.inD O.V. M.V. B.S.T.
f. 8.

1 1 30 18 44.8 30 15.3 15.6 -4551 4572 1900

2 It n 16.0 3582 3601 2020
19 44.75 15.7
3 It 20 n 32 18.9 19.3 N.O. N.Oo 2040 X
4 It 22 it n 18.5 18.9 4022 4042 2110
II it it
5 24 18.7 19.1 4134 4154 2140
6 n 44.8 30 15.6 3766 2210
25 15.9 3746

X Hit near frame. Co = 1.8 N.L.

NoBo Bound 6 was too indistinct to be read on the vernier and has only
been glassed.
Photography by C.S.A.R. (Cambridge).

SH0EBURINESS.
7/13/47
(Sgd.) G. Cooke Lt.Col.
for Superintendent of Experiments
 -19-

APPENDIX P

Shell F.S.D.S. 5.4/1-9

C.E.A.D. Trial No- 134 - Fired ShoeburyneBs 25.6.48

Object:- To observe the functioning of this design of projectile as

fired through hessian screen and recovered over water.

Equipment:- GuiK Q.F. 5.25 inch S.B. to 5*405 inch. No. 2242 - New

Mounting: 5.5 inch C.P. Mk„ II

Pro.jectile: Design D2(L)2657/G.E./635 - 5.4/1*9 inch with

rubber sealing ring to D2(L)3844/V635 attached
to sabot with Bostik cement.

Cartridges: 5.25 Service Cases. Lids removed before loading.

Primers: No. 17 Mk. 2n.

Charges; N.S. 198/054- Weight as detailed.

Conditions;- Q.E. 4
Hessian Screen at 125 ft.

Observations:- Pressure.
Patterns on Hessian Screen.
Condition of Recoveries.
 -20-

3o
H
O
•i P
-Mo d
o • a
H
•H
8 ^ P ©
6a)
g H
• ITi
•H O
O
•
«u o
V ID
H >r3
"3
na
o
-*
IS
H a
03 aj P O o •H a
a P
g
P
o
O
• • •ri
3ft g *
CM
45
ga
S5H O ^3 *H H H Q a in
g.i •
a a)
a rH
•
CQ
O
a
. 0) P
•H
a
•P
a a
an
a p
. a o
0,
P
P
O
•
H
O
-H
-P
m
3-§> Xi
rH -H
OP
ri £
. 0 *o
05 CO X! o •K H P J5 o CO ^3 p
W 0) o •"
. 'u • t-i
m <Du -o
O H * h. P • U "O
Sao
• Si U . J3 o • >>Xi U . ^5 P
•OP rH 1-S P p. •«-sp fc
O O o o po o o o o
jSJ lA O & mp (i. rH m O & ir\'S

*i •
a M
« P •
09
3 a • • r K .
EH
w G
0) o <M o• KN.
•
U O • ON
pL( '—-• CM o
H
• VO
H
H CO

*~^
H

a P
•a
a
(1)
M
•
a a
<0
a a
. <D • a
a a a.81
g
5
SS SS So
6 ^o a
CM -H aa as K\CM -4"
^-*

%i%i
o o

&a
V <D
u u
o
• •

i
istan
ock -
nit -

a a •
q a
•rl. •3
&
Add m IT* ir\
..^° ITl in
•
ir\ vo
i i i
aiming

Tail
eech

« m P

•
o
a K
p ^^x ^^^ ^•^ ^^^
rH nd -aj o
*—»
a H
^/
M V-r'
3 5
^•^

H CM KN -4-
« «
 -21-

APPENDIX G

EXPERIMENTAL ESTABLISHMENT, SHOEBORINESS

Report No. 55/H.5/Q.6.

Object:- To determine the Pattern made by the shot and discards on

a hessian screen placed 150 ft fran muzzle.

Authority:- C.B.A.D. THV/9/2/l(24) dt. 12/1/48.

D.2.A. Trial 124-

Carried out on 4th February 1948.

Gum- Q.F. 5.A inch S.B. No. 2832 (l/l874).

Carriage ;- B.L. 5.5 inch C.P. II No. 17.

Charge:- Cartridge Q.P. 5.4-inch gun filled:-

N/S 198-054 lot D.9545.F. 2/42. = 30 lbs.(Stock).

Charge and Air Temp. 45°F«

Primers Elect. No. 17 Mk. 2.N. (Stock).

Projectile;- Shot Proof P.S.D.S. 5«4/1»9 • 6 in number.

To D2(L)2751/X/651 fitted discards to D2(L)2844/^/651
and S. Rings D2(L)3844/V635.

NOB. X. 5 X.6 X.7*

21 22 23

Conditiona;- Pire rounds through 15' x 15' Hessian screen at 150 ft

from muzzle for pattern of discards, recovery of shot
and discards and photographs of pattern.
 -22-

&
03

§
•H
ra
w
a)

a
Si
o a
M 03
O
•nO
& § p O U\
fn ON
4H ft
4>
<t-i
s
W
o
vo
o
O
IS 4-4

oa
CO

•p
PCi
%
•
. <0 -p
s U od O eO

i
CM
p
I >
O
O
a> cd
CO rH
ft
OJ

-P
H
SP-*
g
154

<3
CO a)
•H
I 1
1
•H

Ci>
e
<J OJ
o
CM •3
a •3oj
* 03
P o

H n 84)
V ss
OJ
h 5
03
t, 4) 0)
&01
03 03
i
OJ

03
O
03
-o

<0 m
+» S a §§ 9 §
•H
H •n n •H -H •H 03
oa DQ w to a ca
oa a) ca ca 01 oj
0) a) a>
£W H oj W
W n
CM fl -rl
•H •H >H
oa oa
0] A) a in a a>
0) rH OJ <D oj rH
i-l o H rH rH O
O X! O O O X!
X! X! X! X!
o
P 00 rH l^-VO rH

«
oa
«) +>
U M 00
(0 -H XI O O * ON o
£3 O H rAK\ CM -p
O fe o

ra
p
•O
•«• •
O iswo r>i W pq
• •
S • • • H
*f « « CM
CM
CM
ITS
CM

B
H
• °°
O 03
-P
ss O
B a -P
|| 1 ^
•H •>

o
&S
O O
9\
S5 rH CM K*\ -4" ^ VO
ss CM rH
 -23-

APPENDU H

1
Shell F.S.D.S. 5.4/1.9

C.E.A.P. Trial No. 134 (Continuation)

1
Fired Shoeburyness 14.7.48

Object:- To observe the functioning of this design of projectile as fired

through hessian screen.

The lessonB learned in the previous firing on 25.6.48 were

applied.

Equipment:- As in previous trial, except projectiles, as follows:-

Shell F.S.D.S. 5.4/1.9 to D.2(L)2657/GE/635 but fitted with

discards to DO2(L)3910/E/635.

No sealing ring fitted - discards secured with plastic ring

around centre boss {5)

Conditions;- Q.E. as detailed.

Hessian screen at 125 ft.

QbservationB': - Pressure.

Q.E.

Pattern on screen.

Note;

At the commencement of this trial two rounds from a previous trial

(Design E with narrow discards) were loaded in error. They were rammed by
repeated blows on the tail unit, a practice which has been used at all trials.
The first round broke up on firing. When rammed, the second round was
observed to have two discard segments detached from the projectile, the
other two segments being tilted backwards. This condition demonstrated the
conclusion given in the conclusions to Design E (repeat), that the impact of
gas pressure wave on rear face of tail unit unseats the discards at shot
start if their bearing surface is narrow and located too far rearward.
 -24-

•
-p
<M 0
ID
IT» • 0
CM
rH
n
•H
U
O
\ "% t5
•
B g
g0 .5
g
•P aJ
a
0
CO itsq rH
O
Xi
§ «J 0
•H Is-
PI a •»
M Tj 0 •
0) • • •
« 3 -rl $ H rH
O -P

1
01 O
8
|
•H 0

o
0

1
u
12 lu
0 £ A
H
-p
-p
0) *8 1 a
•H a
£ g£ 5 •
1
• m»

•
m b
CM 3 3 CM
-4-
» O O o o O
rH rH H rH o

a
o
§ •
-p
• •
•H

to
3 1A
c c c r

1 m m
IT\
m vo MD

«
. i i •
i i
•

^—x
**
V
-p
o
0 e
ft M
u O

o CO c r r
1
0 •
—' EH
•
• rH CO ON o0 r-
03 • •
o 4 Cf\ to
£ H rH rH

0 • • • • •
p* £ fit fit ,0 ,a
H H rH H H
a
^3 -* ON -4- -d" CT\
O CM CM CM CM CM

>d

3o
01
•H
« w O ->1 «
P

•
O
R

s
& CM
m
vr> rH
K
-4-
N>
m
vo

•
o
K

rH CM rn -d- m
o
M
 -25-

AFPENDIX J

SHELL F. S. D. S. 5.4/1.9

Range and Accuracy Trial - C. E. A. D. No. 15L.

Fired lt/lO/ifi (over Band)

Eguipment:- Gun 5-25 inch Mark II S. B. to 5.405 No. 1875-

Mounting: Q.F. 5-5 inch C.P. Mark II No. 17.

Projectiles: Shell F.S.D.S. 5.4/1-9 to D2(L)2657/CE./635.

Fitted Sabots to D2(L) 3983A/635 and Sealing
rings to D2(L)3982/x/635.

Cartridge Cases: Service 5«25 inch - without lids.

Propellant: N.S. 198/054 lot D9548 - 24 It.

(no tail charges)

Primers: Electric No. 17 Mark II.

Conditions;- Q.E. 5°.

Plastic locking ring broken before loading charge.

Results overleaf.

METEOROLOGICAL REPORT

C.E.A.D. Trail No. 134 - Range and Accuracy

Carried out: 12/10/1+8.

Rds. Time Assumed Follow- Cross Ballistic Barometer Tenuity Elastic-

ht. to ing Wind Temp. (M.S.L.) Factor ity Temp.
Vertex Wind (R-L) Degs.F. ins.Hg. Degs.F.
BST ft. ft.sec. ft. sec.

2-20 1130 1200 21 4 63.1 29.96 0.996 63.2

1215 1200 23 8 64.4 29.97 0.994 64.7
1250 1200 25 6 64=4 29.96 0.993 64.6
1430 1200 21 12 67.3 29.93 0.987 67.9
I52O 1200 41 14 64.5 29.90 0.991 64.8
1610 1200 30 10 64.7 29.91 0.991 64.9

NOTE:- Ballistic Temperatures refer to standard of 6l.7°F„

Elasticity Temperatures refer to standard of 6l.4°F0

Meteorological Office,
SH0EEORYNESS,
22nd October, 1948.
 -26-

Pell Short
a

3 Warmer
Pt./sec.

3971
3939

OOr^QOQl^-UMryOC^I^CM lf\ ITyVO r-H lf\ K\ Ox CO -*

C\-4"-3-VO O Qr^-C^COK^rHCM en Q H CT\h-F- 00 •
M.V.

CT»C/\CT\Cr\QQCrNCf\Cr\QQQCr\QQpNC?\0\ C*\rH
rACM
Tons sq. in.
Corrected
Pressure

1a
12.2
12.3

fAICMNCM KM^rACMNHrArAN CMIOr-lKM^ CM O

CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM CM
HrHr-tHrHrHrHHHHrHHHHHHr-iH H
o>
u
E
n
Right (Tards)

§•
Deviation

7.22
o•
27.8
OOrHHOOHHOOOOr-iOOOr-iH
..................
-4-VO -4-CM CM r-VO KNVO ^OOQHrlrANCQOO
CM NNCMHNIANlfMAiJl^KMA^rllA
3
xt s
+jooifMv-r-icovo-+o>ir\Oi^ocM-4-oinvj>r v
-
Tards

268.7
Range

11637
11938

, ,
8(QN(OCMAQN44 r -HfMHOtOONH -p
OViOOHHVOCO-d-QCOCMaNONir^CrNOVD-^CM o
Not

QrlrtHHririHHriNHHriHNHHH a>
JrlHHriHriHriHHHHHHHriHH
&
Time of
flight

18.07

17.21
0.22

OHrHO^HH * OCO CM • C • IT\ CM ON CA

N.O.

.......o*..o*o....
co Is-1*- h- r*- Is- Is- . r^vo r^- . S> •h-r^vovo
HriHriHriri(5HriH^H»HHriH
Projectile Weight
in gun in flight
lb. oz. lb. oz.

0)
HHfHiHHiHHHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrH (4
Pi
Mean
M.D.

HHHHrHrHrHHrHrHrHHr-lHHr-lrHrH
HriHHHHHHHriHrtHHHHHH

ca
oncJ? NOOOOtKOHOHHOOOO\0\OH a>
H r-H HrHHHH HHrHrHrHHrHrH r-{ i-i

ca
rH rH rHrHrHr-Hr-Hi-Hr-HrHr-HrHrHrHrHr-Hr-Hr-HrHrH

•
w
En

iHiv-ciM-HiOvPQ^-icv'f<^-^"'s~cf\oir»r^-CM-J/
g
o H K^H^J--+-3-irSir\UMr\i?\irMnvj5\ovo r^r*-
u
PH

o
w S5

i-l CM K\_H/ir\vo r~coCT\OHCMK>-i-irs\Dr^-co cr« O

r-ir-HrHrHrHr-Hi-HHrHi-HCM
o
 -27-

APPENDICES K AND L

Shell F.S.D.S. - O.E.A.D. TVJAI Nn,l9»

Fired At Shoebuirness 2C/1 2/48

Object:- (a) To compare functioning of Shell F.S.D.S.5.4/1.9 design H

fitted with plastic banded sabots, and with (1) swept baok tail
fins attached, to shell with duraltmin stem, (2) tail units
attached to shell with steel adaptor and with fins (front edge)
square with axis*

(b) To observe functioning of the first delivery of Shell F.S.D.S,

5.4/2.48 design J fitted with plastio banded sabots.

Equipment:- Gun: B.L. 7.5 inohes lines down to 5.4 (S.E.) N0.172.

Carriage: No. 15 Sleigh.

Charge: N.S. .198/.054 Projectiles A and B ) weights as

N.P.S. .263/.066 Projectile C ) detailed.

Projectiles: A:- Shell F.S.D.S. 5.4/1.9 to D2(L)2657/&.E./635

fitted with sabots to D2(L)3769A/651 and
tail units (swept back) to D2(L) 2662/E/635.

B:- As for A, but with tail units (square

fronted) to D2(L) 3714/5/635.

C:- Shell F.S.D.S. 5.4/2.48 to D2(L)3663/G.F./

759 with sabots to D2(L)3882/v759.

Conditions:- Q.E. 3°
Hessian Screen at 147 feet.
Taw Card at 130 feet.
(M.V. not measured).

'
 -28-

S3g• 6
6 d * B
5 od A T» CM
o d)
•i
T30
CO
^
O
1 13
§ CO
To p £ a
1 S£ £ • •j
c c
tOH • o O
£ I * fi t 1
e
•#
a CO
9
*
4J
o o
43 43 43
§ 10 M CO CO 3 O 0) cd <
c H
H o p d co p
c
ra c\
'Sri
3 3 ne'
9 £
A 9 ,•
& ,o 2 pq
B .4 ~? ,o
E CO *- CO VO
BU
T*
"3*
3-s
llfliij
4J
J
EH EH tt « En p* « £j IJ
g
•H ra o • •
12 "P « « « i4« «
•5 i T-
• sss.tss
^
^.4
\0 -$i-
» •' o
to LT\ CO
0) CO CM (0 CO ^— T- CO ON
« -* f UN
ra M ra an
+> +s 43 43 +»
Q o o o jr o o "*- UN-^tTN
II
a a
« >»
eg jz; S5 Jz;
I?
f-
ONJZ; K
"N
*•
1
V
O lf\CM
VO ITNO
CM CM KN
** T- ^~

%4
O -P .
• • •
ON
• ON • e • UNO r-
<D t& D O O O O ,.J O O O
la s • • • • Ul • •
R M £; fc •*• jzj a 53
KN KSKN
1- *• T"

ft
B o o co ra o to w 0_ o o o
H KNCM • [Q K"\ 03 to i-|M KNCM CM
T-

plf^
POO4 UN
n co a CM KNP-KN m^-co 1^-

II] wEn
o o • • • • o
-4"-H/1^-r- ON (J\ ON
•
v'
^riri
*» *- <p*

& .
Is
O
00 CO CM <M -+ J- _*
SS to -4- -+ -* 3- -3- 3 r^-i^r-
-*^--+

m a
Q

1 S o
1-9 IS
o
T- KNVp CM O
VO -4-CM <r- •«- >r- CM
oj pq <d pq •* pq ^
r^
o O OO
o

M
i1 o
m
CO
n
o ** CM **\-4- I^VO r- *• CMKN-t
o
A M
 FIG. I
GERMAN IO-5/4-5CM(SMOOTH BORE) FIN STABILISED
UNROTATED H.E. SHELL.
(IO-5CM PFEIL GESCHOSS) (EMPTY)

WEIGHT EMPTY I3LB. -40Z. IODR.

H82S/9

bxe 14-5 I 77

2IFLI26J

O
I
I-
(0
w
u
Of

»-

10

5_1 ADHESIVE PAPER

MACHE BINDING.

CG

1-77

<§^)

(Pa
I-
I
-I

<V^ WELDED SOFT

*T IRON INSETS

~ — " — *• —
 FIG. 2
SHELL Q.F, HE. F.S.D.S. 5-4/2-2 INCH
02 (L) 2I5O/GE/S57

1 (

%3S5

•0
0)

I
&

22

JL.
 FIG. 6

SHELL F.S.D.S. 5-4/2-2

SABOT FOR SHELL DESIGN *B
SABOT = 0.2. (L) 3I98/E/557
SEALING RING = D.2CL) 3074/E./557

b
<
 FIG. 7
SHELL O.F. HE. F.S.D.S.5-4/1 9 INCH
0.2 (L) Z657/GE/635

s
ISDIA.

H539501A
 SHELL F. S. D. S. 5-4 / 1-9 ROUND I.
FIRED 30. IO. 47.
*

\
FK3. 3

1
 FIG.IO

Q
z-
3
o
tt
*
— C:
xr
^^^^

Tg
in o
ED 3
D. S.

V*
. a
CL
IH^VJIP
IL
_l
_l
UJ
I
</>

•
 FIGi. 12

1 1
9 ROUND

•
47.

• •
FIRED
D. S.

tfl

^^^^^^^H^^^^^^^l i

LLl
 FIG. 15

SEALING RING FOR SABOT FROM

DESIGN D"
SEALING RING = D.2.(L) 3844/E/635

71

SLOTS IN SEALING RING

'•2.
d
<
 FIG. 16

(a) DISCARD FOR 5-4/1-9 F.S.D.S.

DIRECTION OF MOTION

(b) DISCARD FOR 5-4/2-2 F.S.D.S.

0)

W
a
<

C.E.A.D. TRIAL No. 134.

in

co
Q
co

UJ
I
CO
_ _ ">
in 10 <°

CO
z ~> •* <*
in «» <
r- <0 co
y- cvj *o **)•
z
LU
«i «i ig
to add
LU
OH
CL I- H O
LU 0 O 2
1 <D =
m «t **
<9
z
LL Zi
<
O uJ
to
O
cr
a.

O
I
CO

6-fr/e '3'ay
 FIG. 18.

SHOT PROOF REP* SHELL F.S.D.S. 5-4/I-9

ROUND I .

ROUND 2 .
 FIG. 19

SHOT PROOF REPS SHELL F.S.D.S. 5-4/1-9

ROUND 3

ROUND 4.
 FIG. 20.

SHOT PROOF REP* SHELL F.S.D.S. 5-4/1-9

/•

ROUND 5.

^ ^ a!
fcj lr^ 1^
V

fe§' ip J If

•*»»

ROUND 6.
 FIG. 21
SABOT DESIGN G.
FOR
SHELL. F. S.D.S. 5-4 / 1-9 DESIGN D.
SABOT '- D I (L) 39I0/E/635

STEEL SABOT
4- SECTORS
RUBBER SCALING RING
CUT IN FOUR PLACES
AND SECURED TO SABOT
WITH ADHESIVE.

PLASTIC RING
PRESSED ON.

d
 FIG. 22

PATTERN ON HESSIAN SCREEN OF SHELL FS.D.S.54 /l-9

«*^«i
DESIGN J WITH SABOT TO DESIGN D
 Fir* p*3
SHELL, O.F, H.E., F.S.D.S. 5/4/1-9 INCH.
SHELL = D.2(L) 2657/6E/635
5ABOT= D.2(L) 3769/x/65l

*£2h.
•0)

ui

<
 FIG. 24
SHELL FS.D.S. 5-4/2-48
SHELL = D.2. (L) 3663/GF/759
SABOT = D.2(L) 3822/X/759

2 48

H5 4- 003

o
CO
>
Q
O
CD

R
CO
Q
or
<
u
if)

O «

CD

UJ
CO
CO
<
I
CD
3
CD

Gt/r 3 0V
 ill £

oc5.p3<

-3

1-ui
M W
u. a
u
a
- - - -
o
Z

t- z
z Ul
u 2
z O
K
o
a
l-l
Id a
Z * 1-
2
o O 3 z
co 0 P
O z
a ii
o
<
z
19
Z <i" o
cr t-
o «n
5
z
DC
<9
Z z
< <n to
u a
2
it a
a
O
co
J
s>- z (9
Z
19
z
o
o
o
o < u5
CD J ui o_l
o
X
Z
u —I «J •0 *
t-
O
—
Tt
<e
>- o
LJ •*

CO "j"

2
LU o
CO
CO
<
1
co
CO

6WC 30V
3

(VJ _^
Q

<

~~\

er/e 3
3D

>—
u.

in
ro
>o
UJ

CM
O
O
CO

CM
Q

z
3

e-b-Zc "3 0 V
 TAIL UNIT TO D.2.(L) 4053/X/635 FIG.29
t

RUBBER EBONITE PINS

I
b II

Ul
SSH SSH

et/t
 D^

z
i (O o •+ K

3 8 aS o 01 rs

CM
01
i -+ IN

£
uj m
>°
X r
UJ CN

u in
UJ ul

°<
<*: o - fc
t* a o
o a. a i-

Q
uj uj
_i m
£5
ui

° ID UJ
-I Ul <
z < < fj

6»/e 3ov
•

THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF H.S.M. GOVERNMENT

AND ATTENTION IS CALLED TO THE PENALTIES ATTACHING
TO ANY INFRINGEMENT OF THE OFFICIAL SECRETS ACTS

It u iatoaded for ike us< of the redpieal ealy. aad for coanunkatioa to tack orfcm milt aim u suy
raqau* u> be acquaiated with iu coataaU ia the eourM of Ikdr duties. TB* oaken cierchlof lak power of
coamuakaUoa an rerpontible thai tuck iaforroalioa it iapened with due caetioa aad rcaarva. Aay penoa
otker thaa Ik* authorited holder. upoa obtalaiaf, poueuio* of Ikb docniaeat, by tediaf or otkarwiae, iboald
forward it lottrkar witk kla aaaw aad addreu ia a clewd eavelope a»
THE SECRETARY. MINISTRY OF SUPPLY, ADELPHI. LONDON, W.C.I.
«•§• wtl be nfwaad. AH pmoti are aereby waraed tkal
f damaillua) of tkle imaini haa akkam nalaat tk* Oajplal Small Aoo.
U, K. Restricted

XL S. Restrict*!