Recoilless with a spotty past


#1

Forgive me, but I’m in a punny mood tonight. The attached pix will show an unusual recoilless casing in the 105mm range. It is the casing on the bottom in the first picture. The top round is a 106mm recoilless and the next casing down is a 105mm recoilless given for size comparison. All dimensions are evident with the scales given. Does anyone have any ideas? Thanks for any help, Bruce.


#2

Send me a PM with mailing address and I will send you a copy of the history of the development of the recoiless gun in the US. You can see if you can figure it out.


#3

I have read somewhere that the 106mm recoilless is a 105 too, but had its name changed to avoid confusions.


#4

schneider, Yes and no. I’m sure that this has been hashed out in the past, but here is a brief synopsis. The 105 and 106 reckless rare both nominally 105mm rounds, but they are two completely different systems. If i remember right, the 105 was the M27 system and had it’s own family of projectiles (mainly the HEAT) and the 106 was the M40 system with its’ own particular set. There are projectiles that cross over, such as the HE and the HEP, but all in all, they are two separate systems. The 105, I’m led to believe, was abandoned because of poor ballistics and accuracy that the M40 addressed.


#5

Thanks to Dr. Schmitt, identification is complete. The casing goes to a 105mm T237 Repeating Recoilless Rifle. It was an attempt to produce a recoilless for the M50 Ontos, among others. The concept would have allowed the Ontos to fire the 2 rifles mounted, (each with a 5 shot revolver type magazine), repeatedly without the crewmen having to reload after each shot as was the case with the 6 single shot M40 106mm Recoilless Rifles originally mounted. I would have included a picture of the drawings of it but as usual, my computer won’t comply.


#6


#7

The EXACT same one I couldn’t get my Apple to copy. THANKS Western!!

As soon as I get a sand blaster and some TIME, I’m going to refurb this casing. The case walls are super thick, about .125", so I shouldn’t have any problems.


#8

That is a rare piece of hardware. Thanks for the research.