Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Max height of a 105 round??

Status
Not open for further replies.
getting back to the original question.

According to the firing tables (though admittidly not the most upto date version) the max vertex of a shell for the 105mm L118 gun is approx 7500m, which is actually fired at a lower chanrge than top charge due to the limitations on the QE of the gun. If you ignored the limitations and dug a damn big hole for the breech then you could probably get higher, but also probably end up with a buggered gun.

do i sound too much like a spotter now? I'll go away now.
 
An interesting thread, I have to admit that I had never realised how high artillery shells go... I'm trying to find more interesting ways to teach physics, applications of science etc. to make it better for all students, not just those that are cadets. Can anyone point me at unclassified information in the public domain, regarding the maximum height achieved, and range for different elevations - ideally for both a mortar and a large calibre gun?
 
The basics are quite simple to do, Newtons Laws etc cover the basic details of all ballistic flight. The additions within Range Tables etc, include issues such as Met, spin of the earth, weight of shell, relative heights of firing/impact, different propellant types/sizes.

There are basic computer programmes that model these, which are available on the net i'm sure.

I used to be able to do all the basic stuff from newtons laws and probably can if I think about it a bit. But an interesting task would be to he the students think about all the different factors that may affect the shells flight and see what they can produce, and then compare it against what the Firing Tables say....although firing tables are RESTRICTED the basic contents are probably not. Feel free to PM me if you want anything info, might see if the company has any educational info relating to this you never know.

S_R
 
ComeSunt said:
Debate in the Bar from a couple of Infantry lads.

The argument...If a 105 light gun was at sea level then what is the maximum height that a 105 HE or WP round could go. The argument stems from how high would an aircraft need to be to ensure that it could not be hit.

same question posed for a 81mm Mortar round.
Answers on a postcard please!!!!

Bob

If my memory serves me correct the formula for calculating the height of a mortar round is 4T squared where T = Time of Flight. We used to talk about 10,000 ft being the max height of a mortar round. This would be for time of flight of 50 seconds which is pretty extreme.

For a time of flight of 30 seconds which is probably more representative it's only 3,600 ft high.

Hope this helps
 
abeaumont said:
An interesting thread, I have to admit that I had never realised how high artillery shells go... I'm trying to find more interesting ways to teach physics, applications of science etc. to make it better for all students, not just those that are cadets. Can anyone point me at unclassified information in the public domain, regarding the maximum height achieved, and range for different elevations - ideally for both a mortar and a large calibre gun?

Google Artillery Firing Tables Vertex Height and you'll find links to some presentations (mainly .ppt) that might be of use.

Some of them list "non standard conditions", which covers a multitude of factors that can affect the flight of a shell, although the ones I looked at didn't include muzzle velocity and the factors that affect it.
 
As Fluffy says, the best place to look is FTs...and as luck would have it, I have obtained these very things.

They were in my spare room...

I will scan in the relevant sections later on today - wait out!
 
This is a graphical representation of the trajectory for Ch 4.5:

scan-2.jpg


Interestingly enough, the max vertex at this charge doesn't read across to the max vertex in FTs!
 
And also a big thank you to the Arrsers, especially Darth, for advice and help that will now enable me to teach a bit of A-Level Physics in a new way. Hopefully withpout sending the little darlings to sleep.

Many thanks gentlemen!
 
Bob[/quote]

If my memory serves me correct the formula for calculating the height of a mortar round is 4T squared where T = Time of Flight. We used to talk about 10,000 ft being the max height of a mortar round. This would be for time of flight of 50 seconds which is pretty extreme.

For a time of flight of 30 seconds which is probably more representative it's only 3,600 ft high.

Hope this helps[/quote]

This rule of thumb applies to guns as well (vertex in feet) and was very popular in days of yore. Taking Abbot data, HA longest ToF 89 secs at chg Super, gives 31,684 ft. However, L118 is somewhat less, 23,716 ft on the same basis.
 
Petardier said:

If my memory serves me correct the formula for calculating the height of a mortar round is 4T squared where T = Time of Flight. We used to talk about 10,000 ft being the max height of a mortar round. This would be for time of flight of 50 seconds which is pretty extreme.

For a time of flight of 30 seconds which is probably more representative it's only 3,600 ft high.

Hope this helps[/quote]

This rule of thumb applies to guns as well (vertex in feet) and was very popular in days of yore. Taking Abbot data, HA longest ToF 89 secs at chg Super, gives 31,684 ft. However, L118 is somewhat less, 23,716 ft on the same basis.[/quote]

Actually it was me not Bob - but thanks for that info. All this talk of heights and trajectories reminds me of the time we played enemy to the gunners' Cymbaline Cup competition. Mortar lines of one firing on serials with long times of flight during the day, the odd night serial, the occasional night patrol to bump their harbour areas but if not otherwise engaged down to the Bustard for a few beers.

Actually it was quite scary how quickly the good ones could get a fix on us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New posts

Top