WWII 95 mm Shell Casing, Identification.

Hi Guys,
I am new to this site, and am requesting assistance with the following please.
My daughter has just inherited a WWII Empty Shell Casing, and having revealed all the Head Stamp Marks, would like to try and identify this item, as to its history, what it was used for, what type of Artillery used these shells, and any other info we can find.

Many Thanks
Richard

 

A starting point:

From: Ordnance QF 95 mm howitzer - Wikipedia and Britain - Ordnance Q.F. 95mm Howitzer

For usage as the Churchill tank's main gun: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/meet-churchill-tank-one-best-weapons-world-war-ii-77396

Search with 95mm here and you will use numerous references to the gun, although it will take time to look through them.

Good luck. Others may have far more knowledge and expertise.

 

Hi davidbfpo
Thanks for your response. Yes I had seen the web page on the QF 95 Howitzer, however this did not see service until 1944, but thought perhaps as the shell casing was manufactured in 1943, that it had been designed and made for an earlier weapon. If so, I guess that must have been the Howitzer Infantry Gun. With the Howitzer Barrel being later built into the Tanks as your link shows.

If anyone out there can explain the Head Stamp Marks, that would be good.
1. We realise 1943 is the Casing Manufacture Date.
7. 95mm being the shell calibre.
6. Lot 52 the Manufacturing Batch. But is this the total number of batches, or just for 1943?.
9. VAEL, guessing that this means the manufacturer, and guessing it to be , Vickers Armstrong Engineering Ltd.??? If so where was this factory situated? What else did they manufacture on that site.

Richard

 

No immediate trace on a WW2 Vickers shell factory, but an English Heritage document refers to shell turning and explains how the UK dealt with the need for shells. Note it lists no such shell turning plant where traditionally Vickers Armstrong was known for; yes, Newcastle-on-Tyne. See: via "Vickers Armstrong" + "shell turning plant"

 

Ok thanks, will follow your suggested link.
Richard

 

The little arrow symbol is the War Office mark. Just a way of saying 'This is mine'

Titbit for you. The calibre is actually 94mm. 95mm is just the designation. This is because the 94mm=3.7in. There were several 3.7in guns in service at the time, or in the years proceeding. So to make sure that there was no confusion between the rounds they added 1mm and called it that. Confusion could arise when a company requests '500 rounds of 3.7-inch please!'. At which point the Quartermaster asks 'Ok, do you mean 3.7-inch AA gun, 3.7-inch Mountain howitzer or 3.7-inch 15-pounder tank mortar?'

You've shown us the base with all the details which is good. But how long is it? There are (at least) two versions of the 95mm. If you can tell us how long the case is then we can tell you which version. Ammunition is measured and written down as this:
Calibre X length of case

So in your round it would be:
94x??mm

 

Hi Listy
Responding to your earlier message.

I attach a rough sketch with dimensions. If we add the 6mm flange overlap onto the measured o/length of 198 mm we get an o/length of approx 204mm. How does that fit in with the original dimensions?

Regards
Richard

 

Well that's a curiosity. The sizes I have are:
94x92mm (Separately loaded)
94x206mm (Fixed round)

If you look at the top end of the case are there indentations or 'crimps' into the metal? I suspect there will be.

 

I am guessing that with the method of measurement, and making allowance for the material loss at the bending of the Flange, our O/Length of 204 mm is not really far off the manufactured O/Length of 206 mm.

I am in the process of contacting my daughter to carry out a check of the shell casing for any Crimp Marks.


Will be back in touch in a day or so.
Regards
Richard

 

Cross-posting.

Although this refers to a shell fuse it does help, hence the bold:

Link and see pg. 43: https://www.wessexarch.co.uk/sites/...e/annual_report_2017-2018-final (low res).pdf

 

Hi Davidbfpo

 

Hi Listy
Reference your earlier post thus:-

My daughter informs me that whilst the external surface of the shell casing is a series of small lumps and bumps, which is to be expected from a hand swaged flange, she could not detect any regular crimp type marks.
However, what was obvious, after close inspection, were four (4) equally spaced rectangular indents in the external surface of the casing, just below the flange. They are position at say, N, S, E, W.

Perhaps you are able to say whether these are a form of original crimp, or possibly caused by whatever clamped the shell
whilst the flange was hand formed.



Regards
Richard

 

Hello Pugh,

This is where I'd expect the crimps to be:


Terminology time: The 'Flange' is called a 'rim'. You'll see rounds written such as 94x204mmR. The R denotes that it is a rimmed round.

 

Surely, my photo is showing very similar Indentations, in a similar position to those shown in your own photo.??

With reference to Terminology, yes I agree the Rim is called THE RIM, but that is at the opposite end to where the Crimp Marks would be.
My engineering background causes me to call the swaged over feature, at the open end of the Shell Casing a FLANGE, as that is what has been done to our particular item.

Regards
Richard

 

Sorry did I miss something, it look like the Rim is in your picture? Or has someone tacked a plate over the top of the case?

 

Hi Listy

In Post #7 I included this sketch, to indicate the shell Case Dimensions.
This shows both the Base of the sheel with the Rim, and the Top end with the Hand Swaged Flange.


In Post #8 I explained about the Flange, and how I arrived at an o/Length of 204 mm approx.

In Post # 12 I attached a photo of the Shell Casing, with what I thought were the Crimp marks just under the Hand Swaged Flange, at the open end of the Shell Casing.



Regards
Richard

 

Well spotted, that explains why I was getting confused.

What you have there then, is a 95mm Close support howitzer Mk.I shell case (actually a different gun to the Mk.III that showed up on the Alecto Self Propelled Gun). The Mk.I fired a single complete round and was used in tanks such as the Churchill Mk.V and the Cromwell Close Support.

 

Hi Listy
With reference to your response above. Many thanks for the information, that just about answers all our questions for now.

regards
Richard

 

Oh I nearly forgot, there were three natures of ammunition for the 95mm. Smoke, HE and a really freaky Hollow Charge shell that used a spit back fuse. The HC round was really rare, and I'm not sure if it was widely issued to frontline units, if at all.

 

You have the cartridge case for the HE, Smoke or HE/AT round of the 95 mm (3.7 inch) Tank Howitzer.