Oklahoma man's home hit with stray artillery shell fired from cannon 3 miles away

Daily News ^ | 06/26/2014 | Jenna O'Donnell

[mabarker1]

For discussion purposes...

[SeaHawkFan]

Hence the terms “being shelled” or “shelling”.

What others are calling shells are actually casings.

[mabarker1]

More info

[Darksheare]

Wrong quadrant, wrong azimuth of fire, wrong charge.
So many odd things to consider in that.
The investigators will look at the record of fire, the firing data, the actual info on the pantels, and eventually somebody is in trouble.

[mabarker1]

More More info

[XRdsRev]

An artillery round of the type in this story consists of two basic parts...

1) Projectile - if explosive it is referred to as shell. If non explosive it is referred to as shot.

2) Cartridge Case or Casing - Ferrous or non ferrous metal canister containing propellant and ignition primer.

The terminology used in this story is correct.

[mabarker1]

Captain Dan Dan Fielding

[mabarker1]

Yeah, they always have some excuse.

[biff]

You get a shoulder fired 105.......LOL

[mabarker1]

OUCH!

[TexasGator]

“Wow!! The SHELL went three miles! No telling how far the projectile went!”

I don’t know if it was a shell or projectile to be technical accurate however shell is used generically for both shells and projectiles.

[TexasGator]

“Can’t believe it took 10 posts to offer this point. Thanks.”

Go do your research.

[TexasGator]

“If the shell hit the house how far did the round go?”

Please do some research and come back and edit your post.

[thackney]

Video of the damage and the shell projectile at:

http://www.koamtv.com/story/25862613/homeowner-assesses-damage-after-14-inch-artillery-shell-enters-house

[-YYZ-]

What I want to know is if “cannon” is a proper term for a howitzer? I thought they were called “guns”.

[Hoffer Rand]

Bet you didn’t sit comfortably for a few days, did you?

[thackney]

1) Projectile - if explosive it is referred to as shell. If non explosive it is referred to as shot.
The terminology used in this story is correct.

As it was non-explosive, should that have been called shot and not shell?

[Fido969]

In the 1800s, when artillery was the King of Battles, shot was of various types - for example solid shot, which would be a solid ball of iron, very powerful, but limited in effect unless they hit a target directly.

There were also “shells”, which were hollow iron balls, filled with powder and fused to explode in flight, sending shrapnel over a wider area.

(In addition there was grapeshot, chainshot, etc.)

The term “shell” referred to the casing that held the explosive charge that was sent to the target. Most artillery projectiles nowadays are shells.

It might be possible to have a solid round for practice or for cannon target shooting, those could correctly be called “shot”, rather than shells, although the shell nomenclature might be carried over.

[Osage Orange]

Thanks

[Fido969]

That’s about right, I don’t know what an artillerist would call a solid projectile nowadays.

In this case, where the projectile ended up on the foor, I’d guess it ricocheted and was spent. I’d expect a projectile that hadn’t ricochets would have gone right through the house.