Grape Shot?

www.youtube.com...

Watch the Video.

I think NAVAL forces should employ these type of rounds in their Conventional Medium/Large guns systems 114mm, 127mm, 76mm OTO MELARA etc.

Why? Certain navy's around the world are advocating using Swarming Tactics using large teams of FIAC (FAST INSHORE ATTACK CRAFT) with medium calibre guns systems or Anti Tank type missile systems. some CIWS systems can cope with them but they are not all suited or configured to these type of engagements. But the new Millenium 35mm Gun still is not established and proved its capability yet.
I think these type of Rounds employed on an FF/DD (Frigate/Destroyer) would prove a cheap and reliable second line of Defence. It would also be easily integrated with zero modifications to the gun system needed.

Any thoughts?

The range on "grapeshot" is not very long at all. It is good for anti-personnel use, or close range ant-air use in tanks. A .50 caliber machine gun has more effective range than grapeshot out of a 5" gun. The 20mm gatling gun ciws is way better than giant shotgun shells out of a deck gun.

I don't believe that to be the case, you could easily get a weapons Manufacturer to get a VT Fuse on it and get it go off 300m before required Range. Plus the Heavier the rounds used the better, TUNSTEN Balls or Flechette rounds. Plus there is no reason why a Large calibre Gun system could not be used as a Second line Tactical Shotgun, The CIWS remains your Primary (Or maybe the ability to 30kts in the opposite direction!) but CIWS are difficult to maintain and if i am honest somewhat fickle. A Large scale Naval Shotgun firing a shell every second to 0.75s would be terrifiying. I think it would have numerous uses, it could be used to put a wall of tungsten up against an incoming ASM. Plus no Naval Officer worth his salt would turn down another item putting more rounds in the sky against an "EXOCET" et al.

Remember Naval Engagements of this nature would be a close in Knife fighting scenario especially against WBSIED (water bourne Suicide IED'S) the aim is surround and pummel a superior opponent with numerous targets. All ROE requires a positive VISUAL IDENTIFICATION unless a relaxation is inforce therefore A CAPTAIN will wait until he has hostile intent/Pos VID before bringing the Rain. Naval Engagements against FIAC type craft do not happen at range. It is not UDALOY, or MEKO 360, its a boat usually under 12metres doing a hell of rate of knots, engagement will be Sub 3nm....

[edit on 1/6/09 by LT mikey]

reply to post by LT mikey

maybe in a last ditch defence but i would of thought grape shot would knacker a modern gun barrel in a few shots

An interesting notion. The Japanese tried something similar in their largest calibre naval guns (16" and 18.1") during WWII for anti aircraft use. It was, by all accounts, less than successful, and damaged the guns that fired it. Can't remember the name right off the top of my head...

The damage was to the rifling of the guns, and if I"m remembering correctly, the recoil mechanisms.

The guns that fire a grapeshot round would have to be smoothbore, and perhaps specially made. A close in system, for those mobbing attacks you mentioned. I don't see a real reason to use them as a stand off weapon. But than I'm nothing even resembling an expert in these matters, though I play one on the internet...

Interesting thought, though...

Hmm... I have been thinking about that, if you went for an ALL UP ROUND that fired the Shell with a VT fuse (Variable Timed Fuse) it would be no different to any other Shell. It could go off 10-30m from end of barrel that way no damage to the barrel would occur.

Obviously TANKs with 120mm Smoothbore guns are used to it.

SABOT rounds with a sack of balls rather than a Dart Anyone?

Sorry guys the term GRAPESHOT was misleading, what i am really advocating is a CANISTER type Shell capable of being fired through rifled or a modded round for smoothbore. Which once fired and clear of barrel seperates to form a Shot Gun Shell type effect in flight and upon landing.

I have terrible visions of you all thinking i was firing ball bearings down my Barrels and pitting and destroying them, as a Gunner i would weep...

[edit on 1/6/09 by LT mikey]

Canister shot won't work well from a rifled gun either. The canister will have an imparted spin from the rifling. When the canister breaks open, the shot will retain the angular momentum, and proceed to spread far faster than the pattern from a conventional shotgun shell. The result will be a very wide pattern, but a very thinly-populated one, in terms of shots per square foot of beaten zone.

As someone pointed out above, you'd be better off to simply strafe a .50 cal or 20mm (or better yet, a 30mm Bushmaster II) over the same area. The result would be more lethal to the target, cheaper (no need to develop, test, and manufacture a new type of round), and easier on the logistical side of things (New types of main gun ammo = fewer rounds of each type in an already crowded magazine, more items to track through inventory, and more updates to the fire-control software). If the hostile targets are too large to be threatened by machine gun / light cannon fire, the odds are good that they'd require the use of HE rounds from the main guns in any case.

As you point out ROE restrictions, and the expected short ranged engagement zone, more light and medium (up to ~30mm) mounts would seem to be more effective. You can always use the big tubes to deal with the longer ranged badguys, but a number of lighter mounts would, I believe, be more effective to counter a 'swarm' attack. Further, there would be less risk of fratricide with lighter rounds, although they would do a proper job on the light boats the badguys would likely employ.

Well i believe "grape shot" was first used in the civil war if I'm not mistaken and was issued to both naval and field artillery by the end of the war it was replaced by canister shot which was quite effective against antipersonnel. The only practicality I see is using it against air attacks but its not like back in ww2 where you had to get close to the ship to bomb it. I mean technology is advanced and as far as naval warfare goes more emphasis is placed on long range because face it most countries nowadays have weapons that can really reach out and touch you. But maybe it could be effective against small ships or whatnot. Hell maybe it'd be a good defensive weapon against pirates you know. Instead of calling in a navy sniper team just get one of them deck shotguns and let it fly. I know if a giant shotgun was aimed at me I'd get the !*#@ outta there!

No, Grape (at least the concept, if not called 'grapeshot') was used very early in cannon development. Canister was used in the US war with Mexico. It may have been used earlier, but I wasn't a redleg, so that isn't my area. Any graduate of the Cherokee County Community College for Cannon-cockers could probably give chapter and verse.

Both grape and cannister go back to the Napoleonic era at least.

Grapshot - where the sub-projectiles are released at the muzzle - would be much less effective than existing rounds for use against small boats.

The closest thing to a serious modern application of grapeshot are the M1028 anti-personnel 120mm US rounds which release a large number of tungsten balls -

www.globalsecurity.org...

We've already been down this road with the use of "Flechette's" ...
Detractors argue that the use of such rounds conflicts with the Fourth Geneva Convention provisions protecting non-combatants.

Here's an article from 22 May 2001 Israel's military debates use of flechette round.

The Israel Defence Force (IDF) is using tank-fired flechette anti-personnel rounds in its conflict with Palestinian militants in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Military sources told Jane's Defence Weekly that the IDF is divided about the employment of the round, with some officers arguing that the shell is effective against certain targets while others warn of an international backlash.

Source: Janes
See Grape shoot or flechette, their really pretty similar in that there are provisions in the Geneva Convention to dictate their use... Their use could trigger sanctions... Still a pretty cool idea though

Obviously such rounds violate the Geneva Protocol if you're going to use them around civilians - as do any other indiscriminate weapons.

That would apply if the only thing in the area were small boats manned by combatants as suggested.
Of course, on previous record someone might blast a boatload of Iranian schoolchildren by accident.

reply to post by LT mikey


I was reading about fast-moving swarm boats being built by certain countries and the difficulties of defending against them, especially if the operators of those boat are bent on suicide and it occurred to me that a good and relatively simple weapon to deploy would be akin to a shotgun but bigger.

I don't know much about modern naval weapons systems as you you seem to but I'm glad to know someone else is thinking along the same lines.

On the one hand you don't want the swarms getting close at all but defending against a hundred or more boats at long range with conventional weapons would seem to be problematic. On the other hand, if you let them get close enough to fire on effectively with some sort of grapeshot, would you be able to shred the enemy fleet far enough out that the explosives they have on board wouldn't still do damage to our big ships and personnel? They most like would be coming from at least two different directions. Guns could be deployed in a "circle-the-wagons" kind of way but that would put the "wagons" at the center of a bunch of exploding boats.

What kind of ranges would we actually want to work with? Any ideas?

gPat

Originally posted by gPattison

What kind of ranges would we actually want to work with? Any ideas?

gPat

Ever since boarding parties stopped being an issue, range has fallen into the same category as money and sex. The more, the merrier.

All joking aside, in a 'swarm' attack, you want to start 'thinning the herd' just as quickly as the rules of engagement allow. I don't know if the Standard SAM has a surface-attack option (I've seen reputable sources claim both 'yes' and 'no', and wouldn't rule out a crafty Senior Chief working out a field expedient in any case), but if it does, that blast / fragmentation warhead would raise He...err..Purgatory on a cluster of lightly built swarm boats. It would be expensive, but it would also be cheaper than a year or more of dock time (or a sunk ship). Same story squared for 5" rounds, 20mm rounds, or, for that matter, the adrenaline-launched kitchen sink.

To boil it down to bumper sticker length, "Nothing succeeds like excess".

reply to post by da pickles

Maybe damage to the gun barrels could be dealt with by making them out of depleted uranium. Would that be feasible?

reply to post by LT mikey


I would shoot you first. Many lives would be saved. Talking out ur @ss

reply to post by Brother Stormhammer

Speaking of excess, what about fuel-air projectiles? Not the big bunker busters but smaller ones. Some can be fired from rocket launchers.

Then there are Gatling guns and autocanons. Such a wide array of weapons to play with!

Of course we could get really outside the box (and maybe a bit silly) by dreaming up some defensive methods; maybe knit some large, light-weight nets out of carbon nanotubes and drop it over the boats or draw it up from underneath them somehow. That would surprise a few people.

Originally posted by gPattison
reply to post by Brother Stormhammer

 

Speaking of excess, what about fuel-air projectiles? Not the big bunker busters but smaller ones. Some can be fired from rocket launchers.

Below a certain size, explosive shells aren't worth the increased cost and complexity...as an extreme example, there's no technical reason that you couldn't manufacture an explosive round for a .22 short. The practical reason you don't see such a thing is that the explosive that can fit in the shell isn't going to add very much if anything to the round's effectiveness. Fuel-air munitions have the same problem...below a certain size (and no, I don't know what that size is, but I doubt the US built the GBU-43/B as a 22,600 lb package just for grins), the explosive payload isn't sufficient to justify the trouble of installing it. I'd imagine that fuel-air munitions will have trouble as cannon rounds due to high velocity, as well. They need time for their charge to spread and mingle with the surrounding air before detonation, after all,

Then there are Gatling guns and autocanons. Such a wide array of weapons to play with!

Phalanx has already been looked at as a possible solution to the problem, and while I can't say 'yea' or 'nay' with any certainty, it would surprise me incredibly if the Goalkeeper system doesn't have some provision for surface use.

Of course we could get really outside the box (and maybe a bit silly) by dreaming up some defensive methods; maybe knit some large, light-weight nets out of carbon nanotubes and drop it over the boats or draw it up from underneath them somehow. That would surprise a few people.

K.I.S.S.
Remember...this isn't a game of Missile Command. This 'game' gets played for the highest of stakes, when it gets played at all. People are going to die (either aboard the attacking swarm, aboard the target, or both). Innovation is a wonderful thing, but reliability is mandatory. In a close-quarters naval engagement, I really don't give a rodent's stern anatomical parts whether my enemy is surprised. I want him / them dead. Full stop dead, as fast as possible.

Keep in mind that an incoming missile can be intercepted. An anti-ship missile zooms your way, usually a ship will deploy another missile or a CIWS cannon (or both) to shoot it down.

How do you intercept a 16-inch artillery shell fired from a old naval gun like those on the USS Missouri? You want to defeat the modern navy, go old school.

Would Grape Shot be good for naval conflicts? Doubtful. The range is too short, the cluster of shot too inaccurate.