MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > GENERAL WW2 TOPICS > WW2 Military History & Equipment

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-01-13, 02:14
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,372
Default

Well, Dave, from what you contend in your first point, any round structured with a light weight nose would be less stable and prone to tumble. Yet Observation rounds (like the Brit L11A1 and L11A2, among others) were designed for great accuracy at long range ie very stable in flight, in order to maintain a pseudo-ballistic match to larger calibre projectiles for sighting purposes. These were typically structured with a light weight flash mixture contained within the nose, and a lead slug behind. Same goes for several US 'flash-spotting' rounds and training rounds, and numerous other specialist rounds with various mixtures housed within the tip of the bullet.

Sure, I don't know of another Ball round structured the way the Mk.VII .303 either, but there are plenty of examples of very stable specialist rounds structured that way.

Mike C
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-01-13, 07:35
motto motto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodend,Victoria,Australia
Posts: 1,068
Default

Terminal ballistics is the bone of contention here, what happens on and after impact. The spotter rounds you mention simply explode and their job is done. The ball rounds job on the other hand has just begun and all it has going for it is its kinetic energy. What it does with that energy determines its effectiveness. If it bores through the target leaving a neat hole then some of the energy is wasted. This is why soft points and hollow points were developed, to impart maximum energy and thus create maximum damage.

Another approach to achieve a similar result is to make the projectile somewhat unstable so as it is quite likely to tumble when encountering more resistance to its path. Why is it so surprising that this course was adopted when not many years before the British military was officially issuing Mk3 and Mk4 hollow point .303 along with the impressive .455 Webley Man Stopper. With its cavernous front end the Man Stopper cartridge was touted as being for use on Kaffirs and Zulus along with the observation that it took 3,000 rounds (of conventional ammunition) to disable a Kaffir.

I refute B A Temples statement as being just his opinion unless documentation or reference material is to hand. The facts seem to speak for themselves.

Dave
__________________
Hell no! I'm not that old!

Last edited by motto; 09-01-13 at 08:02.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-01-13, 16:53
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,372
Default

True, B A Temple doesn't provide a reference or an attribution/source for his statement, which forms but a very small part of his well-researched and well received three part guide to .303 cartridges.


Mike C
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-01-13, 22:22
motto motto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodend,Victoria,Australia
Posts: 1,068
Default Points conceded.

I must admit Mike that research is not my strong point, I merely have an accumulation of information that is not always accurate. The fact is that we may never know the true philosophy behind the adoption of the .303 Mark 7 projectile and its unique construction. Maybe it was simply a wrong headed solution to a perceived ballistic problem, maybe something more sinister. If it was even slightly sinister then without doubt there are people with a keen interest in keeping that knowledge out of the public realm.

We can't believe all we read Mike. You should know that better than any one.

Dave
__________________
Hell no! I'm not that old!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-01-13, 00:36
Mike K's Avatar
Mike K Mike K is offline
Fan of Lord Nuffield
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 5,868
Default books

Quote:
Originally Posted by motto View Post

We can't believe all we read Mike. You should know that better than any one.

Dave
I am shocked, you don't believe in Santa Dave
__________________
1940 cab 11 C8
1940 Morris-Commercial PU
1941 Morris-Commercial CS8
1940 Chev. 15cwt GS Van ( Aust.)
1942-45 Jeep salad
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-01-13, 01:33
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,372
Thumbs up

Mike

Now that one I will take a stand on: No I don't .... (believe all I read, or that Santa exists)

Perhaps that's why I was careful in my posts on the subject to avoid any definitive comment on what I thought was the right or wrong of it, simply threw in Temple's quote and followed where it took us: much more fun and infinitely more enlightening!

Now that we are over all that, take a look at:

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot37.htm

You'll see a graphic demonstration of exactly what Dave is talking about, be the 'tip filler' Al, plastic or wood (depends on where and when a .303 round was manufactured).

Enjoy!

Mike C
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-01-13, 11:58
easo's Avatar
easo easo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Darwin NT
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Cecil View Post
GREAT movie, followed by two excellent series: Band of Brothers and Pacific. Bring on more quality movies/series like those, I say.



Mike C
Agree Mike, but I am get a bit tired of US war movies and TV series. Come on Hollywood what about everyone else!

Regards Easo
__________________
You can tell a lot about a woman from her hands, for example, if there around your neck then she might be a little mad with you!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 00:41.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016