|
|
|||||||
| Japanese and Allied Air Forces in the Far East Please use this forum to discuss the Air War in the Far East. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
3rd April 2005, 10:02
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: "Blue Nose" .50
Sorry for the delay, just seen this one....
When incendiaries were first used in WW1, they were generally of the type which ignited on firing and burned all the way to the target. This had the advantage of leaving a smoke trail so they were effectively 'incendiary/tracers' and sometimes described as such. The British had these in use in the BoB (as the B.IV) alongside the new 'De Wilde' (B.VI) which was different in that it burst into flame on impact with the target. This was obviously more efficient as it didn't waste the incendiary compound. It also helped that the ignition caused a bright flash on impact, so you knew when you were scoring hits. The US .30 and .50 incendiary ammo was based on the British 'De Wilde'. They were purely filled with incendiary compound - no HE - but the fact that they burst violently into flame on impact gave them the appearance of explosive rounds. There were some US explosive .50 rounds developed in WW2 but they remained experimental and were never used. The Soviets, Italians, Germans and Japanese all used HE shells in 12.7-13 mm calibre weapons (the Japanese used them in rifle-calibre MGs as well). Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk][/color]website and discussion http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/] [/color]forum 
|
|
#2
3rd April 2005, 14:19
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: "Blue Nose" .50
Quote:
When a bursting round is explosive or incendiary, it may have some differences, but also many similarities. Please note that I am not aiming for the final word (You are the expert!!! - although I have a couple of titles on the shelf and a number of documents I am far from knowledgable on the subject), but I've read about De Wilde being "incendiary" (sorry, no source), and this annecdote by a dutch commanding officer surprised me. Wouldn't he know the difference as well, especially considering his long and active service, still he wisely used "explosive" instead of HE. Again pointing towards a "fuzzy" distinction. Perhaps we now look upon Incendiary ammuntion as being of the "De Wilde" type, yet those of pre-war training saw it for what is actually (?) was, a round bursting violently upon contact, sort of explosive in effect, but without true (legal) explosive content? Am I mistaken, or is "De Wilde" not sometimes discussed when it comes to its true function/effect? Just questions.
__________________
Ruy Horta 12 O'Clock High! And now I see with eye serene The very pulse of the machine; A being breathing thoughtful breath, A traveller between life and death;
|
|
#3
3rd April 2005, 17:22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: "Blue Nose" .50
I think that there may be a difference between the technical and popular descriptions. The 'De Wilde' definitely contained no explosives in the accepted sense of any of the various HE natures (TNT, PETN, Hexogen etc), the content was purely classified as 'incendiary'. Technically, the difference would have been in the rate of burning of the material: gas from an explosive expands extremely violently causing a shattering effect (brisance), incendiaries burn relatively slowly even when they appear to burst instantly into flame, and have no brisance.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum
|
Hybrid Mode
