ComradeHuxley
Donor
Or WI fin stabilized smooth-bore cannon projectiles not forgotten ?
(I try to learn from my mistakes so this time no long technical title
.)
Introduction of Concept
Okay, this idea obviously needs a bit of explaining. After browsing the google groups alternate history thread I came across this idea/thread by Alfred Montestruc :
In the 1960s smooth-bore tank guns were reintroduced by the USSR where some clever engineer figured out one could use fins to stabilize a projectile and have less loss of muzzle velocity. "To reliably penetrate the thick armor of modern armored vehicles, a very long, thin kinetic-energy projectile is required. The longer the projectile is in relation to its diameter, the higher the spin rate must be to provide stability. Practical rifling can only stabilize projectiles of a limited length-to-diameter ratio, and these modern rounds are simply too long. These rounds are instead formed into a dart shape, using fins for stabilization. With the fins for stability, rifling is no longer needed, and in fact the spin imparted by rifling would degrade the accuracy of a finned projectile.
The first tank with a smoothbore gun was the Soviet T-62, introduced into service in 1961; today all main battle tanks except the British Challenger 2 and Indian Arjun MBT use smoothbore guns. The Russian navy conducted experiments with large-caliber smoothbore naval guns, which were halted by budget cuts." -
Now the fascinating things is that the concept is pretty basic and could have revolutionized martime warfare whenver it is invented. As the thread in question already explored such rounds would be a lot more accurate and have a much higher range. The only question left is why nobody came up with this invention earlier. Curiosly they did, but then forgot about it for the next 700 years.
As explained here:
"The first projectiles in early gun systems dating from the 14th century were typically hand wrought iron flechettes wrapped in a leather sabot. However, due to the expense and trouble of making these darts in a pre-industrial society, they were soon replaced with the less accurate stone cannonball."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Needlegun
Though occasionally made with cast bronze, the pot-de-fer was essentially an iron bottle with a narrow neck. It was loaded with powder and an iron arrow-like bolt, feathered with iron. It is believed that the middle of the bolt was likely wrapped in leather for a snug fit, necessary to enhance the thrust from the gaseous pressure within the cannon. However, this feature is not shown in manuscript illuminations. The cannon was set off through a small-diameter touchhole, where a red-hot wire could be thrust to set off an explosion and fire the cannon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot-de-fer#Description
And for those not trusting wiki the weapon is also referenced in "Deadly Metal Rain: The Legality of Flechette Weapons in International Law" by Eitan Barak.
Further Speculation on Concept
Now to the actual question. How would world history change if people kept experimenting with these flechettes?
According to Alfred Montestruc:
1) Range and hitting power, arrow shot would more than double his effective range, while hitting the target at a large fraction of the muzzle velocity, and doing a large fraction of the damage round shot would do at point blank range. A long slender rod with fins on the back will have enormously less loss of speed by drag than a "bullet" or ball shape all else held equal. The same starting muzzle a long slender projectile of the same mass as a bullet shaped projectile, should fly many times further, and hit at a much higher velocity.
2) Accuracy, un-rifled round shot was notoriously inaccurate. The reason for this was the round shout would get random rotational vectors coming out the barrel as the ball touched the bore of the gun at random locations. Arrow shot would have fins and would fly straight as an arrow. Net effect, a much smaller ship, say a frigate, could fire devastating broadsides, that will do great damage on a ship of the line at ranges the SOL could not reply with any effect at using standard round shot.
(I try to learn from my mistakes so this time no long technical title
Introduction of Concept
Okay, this idea obviously needs a bit of explaining. After browsing the google groups alternate history thread I came across this idea/thread by Alfred Montestruc :
In the 1960s smooth-bore tank guns were reintroduced by the USSR where some clever engineer figured out one could use fins to stabilize a projectile and have less loss of muzzle velocity. "To reliably penetrate the thick armor of modern armored vehicles, a very long, thin kinetic-energy projectile is required. The longer the projectile is in relation to its diameter, the higher the spin rate must be to provide stability. Practical rifling can only stabilize projectiles of a limited length-to-diameter ratio, and these modern rounds are simply too long. These rounds are instead formed into a dart shape, using fins for stabilization. With the fins for stability, rifling is no longer needed, and in fact the spin imparted by rifling would degrade the accuracy of a finned projectile.
The first tank with a smoothbore gun was the Soviet T-62, introduced into service in 1961; today all main battle tanks except the British Challenger 2 and Indian Arjun MBT use smoothbore guns. The Russian navy conducted experiments with large-caliber smoothbore naval guns, which were halted by budget cuts." -
Now the fascinating things is that the concept is pretty basic and could have revolutionized martime warfare whenver it is invented. As the thread in question already explored such rounds would be a lot more accurate and have a much higher range. The only question left is why nobody came up with this invention earlier. Curiosly they did, but then forgot about it for the next 700 years.
As explained here:
"The first projectiles in early gun systems dating from the 14th century were typically hand wrought iron flechettes wrapped in a leather sabot. However, due to the expense and trouble of making these darts in a pre-industrial society, they were soon replaced with the less accurate stone cannonball."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Needlegun
Though occasionally made with cast bronze, the pot-de-fer was essentially an iron bottle with a narrow neck. It was loaded with powder and an iron arrow-like bolt, feathered with iron. It is believed that the middle of the bolt was likely wrapped in leather for a snug fit, necessary to enhance the thrust from the gaseous pressure within the cannon. However, this feature is not shown in manuscript illuminations. The cannon was set off through a small-diameter touchhole, where a red-hot wire could be thrust to set off an explosion and fire the cannon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot-de-fer#Description
And for those not trusting wiki the weapon is also referenced in "Deadly Metal Rain: The Legality of Flechette Weapons in International Law" by Eitan Barak.
Further Speculation on Concept
Now to the actual question. How would world history change if people kept experimenting with these flechettes?
According to Alfred Montestruc:
1) Range and hitting power, arrow shot would more than double his effective range, while hitting the target at a large fraction of the muzzle velocity, and doing a large fraction of the damage round shot would do at point blank range. A long slender rod with fins on the back will have enormously less loss of speed by drag than a "bullet" or ball shape all else held equal. The same starting muzzle a long slender projectile of the same mass as a bullet shaped projectile, should fly many times further, and hit at a much higher velocity.
2) Accuracy, un-rifled round shot was notoriously inaccurate. The reason for this was the round shout would get random rotational vectors coming out the barrel as the ball touched the bore of the gun at random locations. Arrow shot would have fins and would fly straight as an arrow. Net effect, a much smaller ship, say a frigate, could fire devastating broadsides, that will do great damage on a ship of the line at ranges the SOL could not reply with any effect at using standard round shot.
Last edited: