American WWII 15.2x114 "SL 44" cartridge


#1

This beauty is about 114mm long and her fired distorted mouth is around 15-17mm. I assume it is an AA calibre. How is she called?


image


#2

.60 cal.?

Soren


#3

I might be wrong, considering the date, but:
It kinda looks like the 60US / 60HMG (Heavy Machine Gun)
What’s the base diameter?
Is it be the same as a 20x102?


#4

I think I’ve found my answer in this thread viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7939
I’ll get the base measurements when I get back from work.


#5

My round’s base is 29.5mm. If these were never implimented into an active military role, how rare/common are these?


#6

They are not too uncommon can easily be found at SLICS. The prices I have seen for complete ones is usually $40 or upwards depending on projectile type.

Even if a cartridge is never used in active military service, large qauntities of the ammunition can be manufactured for testing. Another example of this is the British .280/30. Only 50 of the EM2 rifles were made, but the ball cartridges are common (at least in the UK).


#7

The .60 US was first developed for an experimental anti-tank rifle in the early 1940s. It was then used during WW2 in some modified existing guns, including a Mauser MG 151 (T17), which were never adopted (although some 300 of the T17 were made). It was finally used in the early prototypes of US rotary and revolver aircraft guns, before being necked-up and shortened to 20x102 - in which form it entered service in the M61 and M39 respectively.

There was also an experimental 50/60 version, plus the USN adopted a lengthened 20x110 cartridge on the same basic case for the MK11 and MK12 aircraft guns.

The group of four cartridges on the left (from my web article on Military Cartridge Relationships) shows the ones described above:


#8

[quote=“Falcon”]They are not too uncommon can easily be found at SLICS. The prices I have seen for complete ones is usually $40 or upwards depending on projectile type.

Even if a cartridge is never used in active military service, large qauntities of the ammunition can be manufactured for testing. Another example of this is the British .280/30. Only 50 of the EM2 rifles were made, but the ball cartridges are common (at least in the UK).[/quote]

This is digressing from the original thread but the above is actually a simplification and also slightly erroneous.

It was not just the EM-2 that was chambered for the .280 and .280/30 cartridges. There were at least eleven EM-1 rifles made at RSAF Enfield and fifty nine EM-2 rifles made by various manufacturers. However, only the first fifteen from RSAF were in .280 calibre, the rest in either 7x49mm, 7x51mm Compromise or 7.62x51mm.

Then there were twelve BSA 28P rifles and a number of prototypes of the Taden GPMG. Add to these at least two of each of the following converted weapons, No.5 Rifle, Vickers gun, Bren gun, M1 Garand and Browning M1919.

Fabrique Nationale also made prototypes of the FAL in .280 and possible other weapons.

All these weapons underwent extensive firing trials, for example one EM-2 rifle firing 57,000 rounds.

When no agreement could be reashed with the USA Britain formally adopted the EM-2 as the Rifle, 7mm, No.9 Mark 1 in April 1951, and whilst plans were being made for mass production of the rifle, ammunition manufacture continued. When Churchill won the general election later that year he countermanded the adoption and work continued on the improved 7mm rounds to try to reach a compromise, but of course this was inevitably doomed.

Returning to the original question, it is often the case that when a developmental weapon is expected to reach production staus it is advantageous to make a large amount of ammunition, both to reduce the cost per round and also to gain experience of full production techniques.

Regards
TonyE