<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Learning the Lesson</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/11/18/learning-the-lesson/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/11/18/learning-the-lesson/</link>
	<description>The unbearable lightness of Lex. Enjoy!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:39:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe in N. Calif</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/11/18/learning-the-lesson/comment-page-1/#comment-462187</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe in N. Calif</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:21:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=12487#comment-462187</guid>
		<description>Two links about old school stuff:

http://www.archive.org/stream/cu31924030896819#page/n0/mode/1up

http://books.google.com/books?id=lHcNBLcgVSQC&amp;lpg=PA37&amp;ots=TfpGUlyK1K&amp;dq=grapeshot%20weight%208%2012%2016&amp;pg=PA1#v=onepage&amp;q=&amp;f=false

Enjoy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two links about old school stuff:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.archive.org/stream/cu31924030896819#page/n0/mode/1up" rel="nofollow">http://www.archive.org/stream/cu31924030896819#page/n0/mode/1up</a></p>
<p><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=lHcNBLcgVSQC&#038;lpg=PA37&#038;ots=TfpGUlyK1K&#038;dq=grapeshot%20weight%208%2012%2016&#038;pg=PA1#v=onepage&#038;q=&#038;f=false" rel="nofollow">http://books.google.com/books?id=lHcNBLcgVSQC&#038;lpg=PA37&#038;ots=TfpGUlyK1K&#038;dq=grapeshot%20weight%208%2012%2016&#038;pg=PA1#v=onepage&#038;q=&#038;f=false</a></p>
<p>Enjoy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SCOTTtheBADGER</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/11/18/learning-the-lesson/comment-page-1/#comment-462181</link>
		<dc:creator>SCOTTtheBADGER</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:51:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=12487#comment-462181</guid>
		<description>There were many types of dismantling shot, or, to give it it&#039;s proper name, landridge.  One of the nastier ones was a steel globe segmented longitudinally into 3 segments, like orange peels, that were fastened together with 3 foot lengths of chain, radiating out from a central steel ring. Upon firing, the ball would come apart into it&#039;s contituent segments, and would rotate around the ring, making, in effect, a rotary lawnmower blade sailing across the deck of the target vessel, slicing ratings and sailors as it proceeded.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There were many types of dismantling shot, or, to give it it&#8217;s proper name, landridge.  One of the nastier ones was a steel globe segmented longitudinally into 3 segments, like orange peels, that were fastened together with 3 foot lengths of chain, radiating out from a central steel ring. Upon firing, the ball would come apart into it&#8217;s contituent segments, and would rotate around the ring, making, in effect, a rotary lawnmower blade sailing across the deck of the target vessel, slicing ratings and sailors as it proceeded.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mojo</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/11/18/learning-the-lesson/comment-page-1/#comment-462043</link>
		<dc:creator>mojo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=12487#comment-462043</guid>
		<description>Ah, yes, the &quot;Beehive&quot; round. Nasty, and effective. Take out a bunker like nobody&#039;s business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, yes, the &#8220;Beehive&#8221; round. Nasty, and effective. Take out a bunker like nobody&#8217;s business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Myers</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/11/18/learning-the-lesson/comment-page-1/#comment-462025</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Myers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:35:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=12487#comment-462025</guid>
		<description>Flechette or Beehive round contained a series of metal plates; the little darts (flechettes) were tied together by a string and then coiled in a circle on the plate. Range was set by gunner; minimum range was 100 yards (you needed some time to get good spin on shell).  Shell burst, the darts spun out on string due to centrifugal force.   You basically had multiple strings of razor edged darts each 100 yards long. Number of strings was equal to number of plates in the round.  I don&#039;t know what maximum burst range was that you could set. But if you could burst one on or near a pirate boat, you&#039;d certainly make pre tenderized shark bait of the crew.  

I was trained on the 106 mm recoilless rifle; told that my life expectancy in combat on the North European plain would be ~45 seconds or so.   Basically it was an antitank weapon with a real premium on hitting and killing a tank with your first shot.  Expected range to target was less than 1000 metres since it was a direct fire weapon.  If you missed or if you simply hurt but  failed to kill, you certainly got the tank crew&#039;s attention and those fellows carried machine guns. And the backblast from a recoilless rifle certainly let everybody in the neighborhood  know exactly where you were. 

I think that the flechette or beehive round for the 106  was an afterthought for the Viet Nam war--not many tanks to kill there, but there was a need for perimeter defense.  A flechette round in a 105 mm howitzer could clearly reach out a lot further, but I ask you--who masses infantry anymore?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Flechette or Beehive round contained a series of metal plates; the little darts (flechettes) were tied together by a string and then coiled in a circle on the plate. Range was set by gunner; minimum range was 100 yards (you needed some time to get good spin on shell).  Shell burst, the darts spun out on string due to centrifugal force.   You basically had multiple strings of razor edged darts each 100 yards long. Number of strings was equal to number of plates in the round.  I don&#8217;t know what maximum burst range was that you could set. But if you could burst one on or near a pirate boat, you&#8217;d certainly make pre tenderized shark bait of the crew.  </p>
<p>I was trained on the 106 mm recoilless rifle; told that my life expectancy in combat on the North European plain would be ~45 seconds or so.   Basically it was an antitank weapon with a real premium on hitting and killing a tank with your first shot.  Expected range to target was less than 1000 metres since it was a direct fire weapon.  If you missed or if you simply hurt but  failed to kill, you certainly got the tank crew&#8217;s attention and those fellows carried machine guns. And the backblast from a recoilless rifle certainly let everybody in the neighborhood  know exactly where you were. </p>
<p>I think that the flechette or beehive round for the 106  was an afterthought for the Viet Nam war&#8211;not many tanks to kill there, but there was a need for perimeter defense.  A flechette round in a 105 mm howitzer could clearly reach out a lot further, but I ask you&#8211;who masses infantry anymore?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spade</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/11/18/learning-the-lesson/comment-page-1/#comment-462017</link>
		<dc:creator>Spade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=12487#comment-462017</guid>
		<description>&quot;U.S. prohibited them fifty years later in 1907 under the Hague Convention.&quot;

IIRC we never actually signed the Hague Convention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;U.S. prohibited them fifty years later in 1907 under the Hague Convention.&#8221;</p>
<p>IIRC we never actually signed the Hague Convention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe in N. Calif</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/11/18/learning-the-lesson/comment-page-1/#comment-461999</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe in N. Calif</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:41:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=12487#comment-461999</guid>
		<description>And waterfowl.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And waterfowl.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

