|
|
|
|
#1
20-09-14, 01:00
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks Rob...
You most certainly have been part of this restoration. Cheers and keep that Scottish whiskey flowing. Rob
__________________
1942 C8A- HUW " Wireless Nipper" 1943 F-60S LAAT and 1939 Bofors 1942 C8 Wireless 1943 FAT/ 17 pounder 1941 C15 GS 2B1 
|
|
#2
02-10-14, 01:44
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes... a APCBC projectile...
has finally showed up, minus the ballistic cap. Thank you Rob Love for this lead. Looking forward to the repaint and script restoration on this little gem. Notice double band. Cheers Rob
__________________
1942 C8A- HUW " Wireless Nipper" 1943 F-60S LAAT and 1939 Bofors 1942 C8 Wireless 1943 FAT/ 17 pounder 1941 C15 GS 2B1
|
|
#3
02-10-14, 05:17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
02-10-14, 09:44
|
|||
|
|||
|
This round has an unusual profile compared with others I have seen, is there any stampings on it to give you a clue as to where it was made ?
Attached is a pic of an APC and an APCBC round with the pointed end as a comparison . Rob...............rnixartillery. Last edited by rnixartillery; 27-07-19 at 20:59.
|
|
#6
03-10-14, 01:33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi Rob
There are some very faint markings on the underside of the projectile, nothing I can make out. Although the different nose cap is solid and of heavy steel construction, I think it is an add on because of the absence of the ballistic cap? No welds present on that location, and I have not tried to pop it off. It is pretty solid. The only discernible markings are on the band...marked SHC 056 inert. I spent a little time today making the round look presentable, the old lettraset decals are already falling off. A winter project to get it up to snuff. Was the ballistic cap something that could be pried off? Cheers Rob
__________________
1942 C8A- HUW " Wireless Nipper" 1943 F-60S LAAT and 1939 Bofors 1942 C8 Wireless 1943 FAT/ 17 pounder 1941 C15 GS 2B1
|
|
#7
03-10-14, 02:21
|
|||
|
|||
|
That cap had me wondering what the round was. But in a google search I did find an image that showed a cutaway with that cap underneath the nose cone. I would suggest it is proper, but no nose cone.
In the Canadian military, SHC used to mean stock holding code, but the number 56 is not one I am familiar with. However, I did not deal with ordnance. The SHCs were dropped about a dozen years back. Not sure if I could find any reference to them these days. Back then, 10 meant serviceable, I think 90 was unserviceable, 80 was quarantined...but even that last one I can't guarantee anymore. So much UFI, so little storage space.
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
