British navy artillery help needed


#1

This classic British case measures 15 1/5 inches in length and the mouth measures 6 3/8 inches ( 6 1/2 diameter ). VERY HEAVY !

Headstamp : RL III* 1900 T N20 Broadarrow BII CFFF 2 3 0 0

Came from South Africa

Gun ?


#2

What are those crimps or cutouts on the rim? Are they ornamental or a design feature of the case? Just curious, I have no clue what gun fired that round. Hope someone does and posts a picture.

Jason


#3

The cut outs help keep the cap in place. This is a seperate loading case which is closed with a cardboard waterproofed or other cap seal. You may not be able to see it but the tongues made by the cut outs are bent over to hold the cap in place.


#4

I do not know which gun it is for without a bit of research, but it may not be Naval.

The CFFF means it has been re-loaded twice with a full charge. CF on the original case means “Charge Full” and an “F” is added for each full charge re-load.

Regards
TonyE


#5

CSAEOD

I believe that this is a 6 inch QF cartridge case mark III*. The * indicates conversion from three tabs to six tabs at the mouth. The ratio of mouth diameter to case length matches an illustration of the cartridge in the Handbook on Ammunition 1909 (By authority of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty). If I am correct then the N below the broad arrow would indicate Naval service. A further check would be to check the thread for the primer adapter. The adapter mark IV for the 6 inch QF had a .8725" x 14 threads per inch thread which is only two and a half thousandths of an inch under 7/8th inch. This is probably just the clearance allowance. Now, it should be dead easy to check the thread in your cartridge case, 7/8 x14 is a standard thread size used on reloading dies.

The adapter sticks out beyond the base of the case and provides a lug for the hand held extractor tool to lock over to yank the fired case out. The adapters were usually removed from fired cases by “civilians” so that the case could stand up on its base.

Sorry about the lengthy blurb above (and the mention of the forbidden reloading tools) I will post some scans later.

gravelbelly


#6

I believe it is only the suggestion of loading data and load information that is prohibited on this Forum. Loading tools, expecially antique ones, are a field of collecting that many cartridge collectors take part in as a primary or secondary collection (I do not). In my opinion, they are a perfectly legitimate topic for discoussion on this Forum, completely ammo-related. The way the reference in loading tools (die threads) was just used, it has nothing at all to do with the reloading of cartridges, so why would it be prohibited? Answer - I can’t see that it is.

IAA doesn’t want loading data discussed here. If someone makes a typographical error, or simply doesn’t really know what he is talking about (the things I have seen some self-styled “Reloading Experts” do makes me cringe), someone’s gun could get damaged, or someone could get hurt. Too much liability. There are plenty of professional sources for loading data - loading manuals, etc… That subject need not be discussed here and it is a good thing that it is prohibited.

That doesn’t mean you can’t explain an arsenal reload mark, talk about an antique loading tool or better, picture it, explain that such and such a country was known to have reloaded ammunition, etc., or identify likely mismatch components in a collector’s cartridge (guess I am talking about “fakes”. I think everyone will understand the difference I am trying to draw between those subjects and that of quoting loading data.

That’s my take on it. If I am wrong, the Forum moderator can tell me.


#7

John Moss–You are 100% correct. It is “Loading Manual” type information that is prohibited for the very reasons you outlined. You can discuss tools, primers, powders, bullets, etc. Just don’t go recommending how much powder to use with which bullet to get XXX velocity. That would be prohibited.

ADNIN.


#8

[quote=“gravelbelly”]CSAEOD

I believe that this is a 6 inch QF cartridge case mark III*. The * indicates conversion from three tabs to six tabs at the mouth. The ratio of mouth diameter to case length matches an illustration of the cartridge in the Handbook on Ammunition 1909 (By authority of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty). If I am correct then the N below the broad arrow would indicate Naval service. A further check would be to check the thread for the primer adapter. The adapter mark IV for the 6 inch QF had a .8725" x 14 threads per inch thread which is only two and a half thousandths of an inch under 7/8th inch. This is probably just the clearance allowance. Now, it should be dead easy to check the thread in your cartridge case, 7/8 x14 is a standard thread size used on reloading dies.

The adapter sticks out beyond the base of the case and provides a lug for the hand held extractor tool to lock over to yank the fired case out. The adapters were usually removed from fired cases by “civilians” so that the case could stand up on its base.

Sorry about the lengthy blurb above (and the mention of the forbidden reloading tools) I will post some scans later.

gravelbelly[/quote]

Thank you. You are right on the money. The 1915 TREATISE has a good illustration of this short case version codite shell for the 6 inch QF gun and the same information about the III*. The III version is longer and was for powder loads.

The 1920 navy reload mark is interesting.

Here is a photo which shows the gun and the original case length of this when it was made in 1900. The second photo shows a land mount for the same gun in S. Africa in 1900.

It looks like this case was converted in 1920 to the short III* version for cordite use.

One reference says that the 6 inch QF gun was used until the 1950s for coastal defense in various parts of the British Empire.

How it escaped reworking in WW 1 is a mystery.


#9

Amazing information. I love when information and historical data can be tracked down like this. Very cool shell with a neat history. Too cool!


#10

Just my 2 cents worth, but I think the “reasons” for the prohibition of discussing loading information are really, really, overblown. As a shooter first and a collector second, I visit quite a few “shooting” sites and forums where loading information is routinely exchanged. I know of no instance where lawsuits have resulted.

Having said that, I support the decision to exclude loading information from the IAA Forum. I would prefer that we stick to discussing cartridges. The same goes for politics and I am glad to see than Ron has created a new forum category for those who wish to discuss same, even when those discussions are related to cartridges.

JMHFBO (Just my humble farm-boy opinion)

Ray


#11

Hello all,

Well, my comment regarding the mention of reloading dies was intended to be light hearted but stirred up a bit of serious discussion! Sorry if my quirky British humour screwed up here.

But, more important than that, now that the gun question has been answered for CSAEOD is it useful for me to scan and post the 1909 illustrations of the sectioned cartridge and adapter, with accompanying text? It may interest collectors who are not familiar with an adapter and hand-held extractor but I don’t want to clutter the site up with unnecessary stuff if it is not required.

gravelbelly


#12

Gravelbelly, please do as I have a cart; primer & extraction tool & would like to see if it is the same as the one I have? If it is ammo related “bring it on”.
Thanks.


#13

[quote=“ozziammo”]Gravelbelly, please do as I have a cart; primer & extraction tool & would like to see if it is the same as the one I have? If it is ammo related “bring it on”.
Thanks.[/quote]

Ok ozziammo, yours was the sole vote in favour, there were none against and no abstentions so that is 100% in favour according to my reckoning. However, I have to be up early tomorrow to go to a cartridge meeting so give me a few days to do the scans etc. If I don’t come up with the goods please shout out a reminder. If you are in Oz, do you have a spare white plastic charger (stripper clip), for blank cartridges, in 5.56x45mm for the Steyr AUG?

gravelbelly


#14

Make that 2 votes. Do you have a copy of the 09 handbook? My 05 is corrected to 08 but I don’t have an 09.

Can one collect ammo in Portugal ?


#15

G-Day Mate,

Yep I am in Oz, no sorry have only seen green strippers for the Steyr out here.

No worries with the timing of the info, life is easy here!

Regards Peter.


#16

[quote=“Ray Meketa”]Just my 2 cents worth, but I think the “reasons” for the prohibition of discussing loading information are really, really, overblown. As a shooter first and a collector second, I visit quite a few “shooting” sites and forums where loading information is routinely exchanged. I know of no instance where lawsuits have resulted.

Having said that, I support the decision to exclude loading information from the IAA Forum. I would prefer that we stick to discussing cartridges. The same goes for politics and I am glad to see than Ron has created a new forum category for those who wish to discuss same, even when those discussions are related to cartridges.

JMHFBO (Just my humble farm-boy opinion)

Ray[/quote]

Ray
As a cartridge stuffer of may years standing I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that even many reloading forums should not give out actual loading data.

The internet has highlighted to me the appalling levels of ignorance about a subject that is vast and increasingly complicated.
I also think that now reloading modern ammunition is growing beyond the capability and expertise of the average shooter.

The old days of loading .32-20s or .38 Special with lead bullets are long past and the present generation of “fashion accessory” high pressure/high velocity calibres should not be entertained except by the very knowledgable.

The people these calibres appeal to most are those least able to understand the issues involved.

Also, the cost savings are not really that significant anymore.
I support, and applaud, the IAA’s blanket ban on reloading data but its hard to talk about ammunition without using the “R” word from time to time.

Also, discussions about reloading drag threads off topic, just like we have done (oops)

Vince


#17

Vince

I cannot disagree with anything that you said. I often cringe when I read some of the loading advice, information, and data on the various “shooting” sites. But my point was that I doubt if a lawsuit would necessarily follow an “accident” that resulted from anyone following recomendations from these sites. There simply would not be any money to be made from such a suit. The lawyers would be more inclined to go after one of the big kids such as Remchester, Ruger, Hornady, etc.

Plus, as a libertarian minded fellow, I question whether or not anyone should be held liable for what he/she freely posts on the Internet. It’s my opinion that there is stuff on some of the more seedy sites that is far more dangerous than loading data. Some of it has been tested in court but it takes a very severe example for a prosecutor to be interested or willing to pursue it.

I’m sure this will change in time and we may find very strict rules on all Internet posting before too long. I’d like to see them start with political ads. ;) ;)

Going back to the IAA and the rules of this Forum, I support the prohibition 100%. But not necessarily for the reasons stated in the rule book.

Q for the Moderators - is making a reference to a 45-55-405 considered loading data? A fine line, isn’t there?

JMHO

Ray


#18

Answer to Ray’s question about is reference “to .45-55-405 considered reloading data?”:

Not “reloading info” as it is merely statement of fact as to historical cartridges already made.

And, there is probably nothing wrong with someone stating that a specific cartridge had a load of xx grains of bullseye as a factory load determined by factory specifications or measurement of a pulled round.

However, the digital digit of death will instantly expunge any post along the lines of “I think I can use xx grains of bullseye in my .455678 whizbang to get more velocity for killing antelopes at 4,000 meters at night from a galloping horse…, but would it be safe in my low number 1903 Springfield with a sawed off barrel that is only a little bent?”

I’m sure that most of us have had to listen to discussion like that when near some of our hunting/shooting brethern who are not cartridge collectors. Invariably they not only do not understand how stupid their question is, they will not understand any caveats made in any replies, and simply do as they please, and declare that whoever they talked to said it was a great idea!

That seems to be the inevitable destination if we were to allow any sort of sliding down that slippery slope. Not only would it present numerous opportunities for the uninformed to present inaccurate and untested information, with the potential for deadly results, it would tend to attract more folks with the same sort of crackpot questions. Given today’s glut of unemployed lawyers and hostile judges and juries, anything related to firearms isa potential target for lawsuits, including well intentioned forums.

NO RELOADING INFORMATION!

Thanks for your cooperation.


#19

[quote=“CSAEOD”]Make that 2 votes. Do you have a copy of the 09 handbook? My 05 is corrected to 08 but I don’t have an 09.

Can one collect ammo in Portugal ?[/quote]

Yes, I do have a copy of the 1909 handbook, it’s been out of print for a while but still a good book.

As to collecting ammo in Portugal, we have to wait and see. At present there are a few collectors but new laws are being trundled through the legislative process which could kill collecting stone dead.

gravelbelly


#20

Here are the promised scanned pages from the Handbook on Ammunition 1909 which refer to the 6 inch Q.F. cartridge. I have included the title page of the book to show where the information was extracted from. The quality of the scans deteriorated in the Photobucket upload, I don’t know why. I hope that they are legible at least.

The White Metal closure disc is made of an alloy of tin, copper and antimony with tin being the main ingredient. The tin acts as a de-coppering agent in its passage up the bore. White metal lids were still in use during my service time and spatters of the molten alloy were sometimes found on the deck after a shoot. The protruding part of the adaptor was used as a lug for the hand-hald extractor to lock over to yank the case out of the chamber.

gravelbelly