previous post next post  

Whatizzit?

By The Armorer on March 16, 2006 | | Comments (28)

Okay, time for another "Whatizzit?" If I can keep it up, this might become a weekly schtick.

Up for your snipe hunt today is a really obscure and the Internet pickin's are slim. BIG CRED to anyone who gets it - with one possible exception, in a sense. If you served in the branches of the right armed force at the right time - you might well recognize it.

Two versions, same purpose. Two rounds of ammunition. On the left, the round and the casing. On the right, the round (different version) in the casing. In the center, a .38 caliber pistol round, in the foreground, a 1 Pound coin. I'm being nice and giving you a size context!

Two versions, same purpose. Two rounds of ammunition. On the left, the round and the casing. On the right, the round (different version) in the casing. In the center, a .38 caliber pistol round, in the foreground, a 1 Pound coin. I'm being nice and giving you a size context!

Much credit for figuring out the probable purpose, Full Gonzo Credit if you can fully identify it. This is Real Grognard Stuff - unless you served in the branches of the right armed force at the right time.

Another view - also an important clue there - and the round on the right is similar.

Another view - also an important clue there - and the round on the right is similar.

Higher-res view - not that it will make that much difference, available here.

I'll put up hints as needed.

Mike L, Jim C., and Pete K. are *not* eligible to play, since I did a show and tell at work yesterday.

I tell ya, it's great to work someplace relaxed enough that when you tell your boss "I brought some grenades to work today!" their response is "Kewl! Show me!" rather than carefully backing away and calling Security... I wouldn't want to work in a place like the latter! Oh, and the grenades@work were on Tuesday, not yesterday. Just in case you were scratching your head trying to figure out how those things were big enough to be grenades. They aren't.

Now, after all that build-up, watch someone sail in and nail it early.

Update. Okay. Here's a hint that should seal the deal.

Share This Article:

Categories:

28 Comments

By High Desert Wanderer on March 16, 2006 8:05 AM
Didn't want you to think I'd missed this edition. I'll be back with a guess... I actually have a clue this time.
 
By High Desert Wanderer on March 16, 2006 9:31 AM
If you guys are waiting for me to solve this it's going to be a while, this isn't exactly my area of expertise.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 16, 2006 9:35 AM
But, but, you *said* you had an idea! 8^)
 
By Blake Kirk on March 16, 2006 10:27 AM
I was initially going to say they looked like ammuniton for the Russian-designed AGS-17 Plamya automatic grenade launcher. But the dimensions and the proportions are wrong for that, so I'd have to guess we're looking at something designed to be fired from a 25mm flare pistol or a similar full-stocked weapon such as police forces use to fire gas projectiles and rubber bullets. That's not an area of ordnance where I have much knowledge, so I'll leave a more detailed guess up to those more expert than I.
 
By J.M. Heinrichs on March 16, 2006 10:27 AM
No, he said he had a clue, which is not the same. Moreover, you assume his clue has something to do with the quiz, whereas he indicates that he will be using a guess in that role. Cheers JMH
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 16, 2006 10:36 AM
John - thank you *ever* so much for your guidance... Blake. Nope.
 
By fdcol63 on March 16, 2006 11:01 AM
It looks very similar to a Dutch 20x22R spotting round, at this link: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Spotter.jpg
 
By Heartless Libertarian on March 16, 2006 11:26 AM
I haven't jumped on at least one, John, because I already have an Ithaca 1911A1...and the Mrs doesn't quite buy the "But dear, this one was made by different people" line. Yet. That, and the fact that I'm in Yakistan, while she's stuck on home with a hyper 2 year old (actually, that's redundant, isn't it?) and an attention hoggin 2 month old. I got the easy end of the TDY.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 16, 2006 11:39 AM
Frank shoots and scores! But it's only a 2-pointer. Spotter round for... what?
 
By fdcol63 on March 16, 2006 12:27 PM
Well, I'd say a spotter round for field artillery. But are you looking for something more specific? LOL
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 16, 2006 12:34 PM
Yes, I am. I hate to put up the visual hint, everybody will jump right on it. But it *isn't* an indirect fire system spotter round.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 16, 2006 12:36 PM
BTW, HDW - what *is* your area of expertise? Mebbe I can find something in the genre...
 
By fdcol63 on March 16, 2006 12:51 PM
Oh. I thought it was something similar to those 14.5mm spotting rounds we used to use at the LTA in Zirndorf, where we affixed the 14.5mm tube on top of the M109 tube, for "direct fire" training. I remember a round was accidentally fired into someone's apartment that bordered the LTA. LOL
 
By fdcol63 on March 16, 2006 12:52 PM
Oh. I thought it was something similar to those 14.5mm spotting rounds we used to use at the LTA in Zirndorf, where we affixed the 14.5mm tube on top of the M109 tube, for "direct fire" training. I remember a round was accidentally fired into someone's apartment that bordered the LTA. LOL
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 16, 2006 1:20 PM
That was Charlie Battery! I remember that. The 14.5 round (which is where I thought you were going) is actually the one to the left of the round in the pic you found (I *did* say the Internet pickins' were slim!).
 
By Boquisucio on March 16, 2006 2:02 PM
Hmmmm - Didn't know that the Coon-Capped Peashoother required a bi-chambered spotting cartridge to find its mark.
 
By fdcol63 on March 16, 2006 2:19 PM
I swear it wasn't MY gun! LOL
 
By Rod Thorsen on March 16, 2006 11:52 PM
How 'bout a training spotting round for the LAW, rather then waste a live one. This is entirely WAG on my part
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 17, 2006 5:23 AM
But it's a correct WAG, Rod. The puzzle is now complete, once again, a team effort!
 
By fdcol63 on March 17, 2006 7:03 AM
Rod, thanks for filling in the missing piece.
 
By cw4(ret)billt on March 17, 2006 7:39 AM
A spotting round for the LAW? Geez, that's about as useful as a gun camera on a Huey. Must have been fairly early in the M72's development process, cuz we were training with the cute li'l 35mm subcaliber rocket in '68. Max range was only 200m and you had a 50/50 chance of hitting the broad side of a barn with it. Which replicates the full-up round perfectly, I'm told...
 
By MajMike on March 17, 2006 8:53 AM
man... i was going down that line of inquiry, but got thrown off by the look of the round on the left. ain't those rifling marks down the side??
 
By fdcol63 on March 17, 2006 9:01 AM
I thought the letters "LAW" were just TOO obvious. LOL
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 17, 2006 9:05 AM
Yes, they are. It's not a rocket, it's a tracer, and fired from a sub-caliber rifle inserted in the LAW. The brass one on the right has two rotating bands, engraved from having been fired.
 
By Rod Thorsen on March 17, 2006 9:35 AM
21mm Trainer for M72 LAW manufactured by Nordic Ammunition Company of Norway. This one? 'Though the one in your photo seems larger.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 17, 2006 9:42 AM
There are two different ones in there, Rod, both different sizes and materials.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 17, 2006 9:53 AM
I found what Rod was referring to - and no, it isn't that. That's a rocket system. Go to page 25 of the document. The rounds I have date from the late 60's and came out of England. I find it amusing that this document makes it sound like they found this wonderful new thing... when we *used* to have subcaliber LAW training rockets. I know, I fired a *lot* of them. Yes, I volunteered to run every range that came along when I was a Lieutenant. I got to shoot lots of stuff that way.
 
By Rod Thorsen on March 17, 2006 10:05 AM
Couldn't get past the google results page. Just kept getting "permission denied". Oh well, just let this be a lesson to the kids out there, too much, but not enough, research always leads to meaningless confusion and increased fog. Sigh.
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.