|
Post by oozlefinch on Sept 27, 2012 13:15:41 GMT 8
A couple of thoughts: (1) The clip of projectiles in the case looks like 40mm rounds; (2) The marked projectile looks to be something in the range of 75mm, 3" or maybe 90mm; (3) The projectiles in the tunnel appear to be 155mm MkIII HE according to the curator of the US Army Ordnance Museum due to the shipping plugs/rings. He also sez they have protective covers on the rotating bands, but the length is still problematic for me. I have another inquiry into him, but how's this for a SWAG, the projectiles are stacked butt-to-butt, creating the curvature at both ends and an apparent length of 48-50"? Waddayathink? By the bye, he sez that the 155mm rounds being held by the soldiers are howitzer rounds, old type design.
|
|
|
Post by okla on Sept 28, 2012 2:35:03 GMT 8
Hey Oozle....Reasonable questions for sure. I have one of my own. If the rounds are stored butt to butt what is that "gizmo", located about 2/3 inches from the tunnel wall, seemingly on all the projectiles? . I don't find it in the same position on the rounds nearest the aisle. This butt to butt idea is creative, though. I am not seeing where the butts meet, but this ain't the clearest photo ever taken. This theory is provocative, none the less. I say again to all you "Geeks". Ain't this fun. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by fots2 on Oct 6, 2012 16:45:27 GMT 8
Question from oozlefinch: “Since I didn't get a response to my note, I'll ask again: Did anyone notice the picture in the video of the 6" shells stacked butt-to-butt? This was my theory of the 155mm shells stacked in the Malinta Hill lateral. Any thoughts?”Fort Drum would have had 14-inch, 6-inch and 3-inch shells. I agree that these are most likely 6-inch shells. The screen capture view is incomplete but it does look like the left-hand side stack of shells are placed back-to-back. For comparison, here are the Drum and Malinta photos posted together. Fort Drum Malinta Tunnel The Malinta shells are one continuous shell. i.e. there is no dip in the profile at the middle which you would see if two 6-inch shells were placed that way. Six-inch shells are narrowed at the rear w.r.t. the center. The protruding rotating ring near the rear end of the shells (if that is what it is) cannot be seen at the middle of the Malinta photo either. Regarding diameter, the Fort Drum shells are large and pointed where the Malinta shells are more stubby and narrower. Six rows of Malinta shells are at waist level on the soldier. Let assume the average height of a 1941 US soldier was slightly less than 6 feet tall. Eight rows of Malinta shells would be about shoulder or chin level on him. If the Fort Drum camera was at eye level (another assumption), then the eight rows of shells seen here are approximately six feet tall (or more). The Malinta shells still do not look like 155m (6.1-inch) shells to me so we will disagree on that. In my opinion, no match between the two photos.
|
|
|
Post by pdh54 on Oct 6, 2012 22:25:08 GMT 8
Thanks Fots Patty
|
|
|
Post by oozlefinch on Oct 9, 2012 0:40:37 GMT 8
No, I never suggested that the 6" shells on drum were the same as a 155mm, but since I had brought up the theory that the shells in the Malinta photo might have been stacked butt-to-butt to create the objects that appear to be 4 plus feet long, I thought it was interesting. I still don't know for sure what those objects are due to their length. While those objects on the bottom rows appear to have lifting rings, they are most probably 155 shells, as they are the only shells to have the rings (or so I have been told), those on the top don't have the rings. I don't think we'll ever know for sure what they are.
|
|
|
Post by pdh54 on Oct 9, 2012 1:57:50 GMT 8
Oozlefinch, Ohhhh, ok, as the kids say 'my bad', or my mistake. For some reason I was not interpreting things correctly. When were those lifting rings used on shells? Was it when they weighed over a certain amount? You know, until you brought it up I didn't see that the shells from the film picture were most likely butt-to-butt. I think I just assumed the colored circles there were just part of the way they identified the shells. There is sooooo much to learn! Thanks for being patient. Patty
|
|
|
Post by oozlefinch on Oct 13, 2012 8:01:50 GMT 8
Patty - I'm no expert (no laughing guys), but I'm told they actually were used for lifting shells; however, I have my doubts as there would have been no good reason that I can think of to lift shells for the breech of a 155 GPF in WW-I. As lifting rings were also used in WW-II for 8" shells, I wonder whether it would have been a helpful way to unscrew the cap (a bar or wrench through the hole in the cap) in order to insert the fuse. I'm just guessing until I can find a better explanation.
|
|
|
Post by pdh54 on Oct 14, 2012 10:50:57 GMT 8
Thanks oozlefinch, But don't you think it would have been too complicated to use those rings to remove or put on the pointed end of the shell? Change subject......... I was wondering if, and this is really a wild SWAG, those shells in Malinta tunnel could have been something that the Navy brought over from Cavite? Or the Army from Bataan? No one seems to recognize them as ammo for any kind of artillery that was on Corregidor initially. Unless I have grossly missed something along the way, which is VERY possible lately. Patty
|
|
|
Post by oozlefinch on Oct 15, 2012 10:14:42 GMT 8
Patty - The rings were attached to a screw-in plug. The plug would have been un-screwed and the detonator-fuse would have been screwed in. There were different types of fuses. Again, I'm no expert on munitions, so I could be a little off. As to something that was brought over from Bataan, I still can't think of anything that was about 4' long and that slender that was used by the army. The lower rows are most probably 155mm rounds due to the lifting ring/plugs, but the top row, or two, are unknown, at least to me.
|
|
|
Post by cbuehler on Oct 31, 2012 1:21:51 GMT 8
As mentioned, the Ft. Drum picture show 6 inch projectiles stored base to base. They are armor piercing as indicated by the long pointed cap. The remaining 14 inch projos (except 1) that we photographed last February when Fireball and I were there are also armor piercing. In the Malinta photo, those may be 75 MM projectiles also stored base to base. The round nose with stubby fuses or plugs are not armor piercing and it makes sense that these would be stored with 155 as these and the 75s were used for Island defense and not against ships. I too cannot think of any projectile that was that long relative to caliber.
CB
|
|