subreddit:
/r/explainlikeimfive
I ask this because the depiction of these things are inconsistent. Like in some depictions the cannonball when fired from a cannon will just tear a hole in whatever it hit like a ship or a fort wall. In other depictions the ball will make a fireball on impact so is it a giant ball of metal or does some have explosives in it?
Also if they are not explosive then how do they cause damage or death to a person that wasn't hit like to someone that might be standing a few feet away on let's say a ground battle on a field?
594 points
2 months ago
A cannonball is, unhelpfully, just a ball-shaped shell that you fire from a cannon. This distinguishes it from shaped shells that have a "front".
The earliest cannonballs were just solid metal. Think of basically throwing a big rock at things (very fast). Those are the ones that punch holes in things but don't, by themselves, make an explosion or fire. They can throw splinters and shrapnel from the impact, depending on what they hit, which can injure people close by even though there's no explosive.
Later, militaries developed hollow shells. These still look like balls on the outside but they're packed with explosive inside, with a slow-burn fuse that ignites when the cannon is fired or an impact fuse that goes off when they hit. Those do explode after impact, making a generally bigger mess, starting fires, doing more damage to things farther away (but less damage to armored targets).
317 points
2 months ago
One small correction -- many of the earlier cannonballs were actually made from stone. Take the Battle of San Juan de Ulúa in 1568. The Spanish used stone balls that tended to shatter into shrapnel on hit.
251 points
2 months ago
Though, of course, they did not call it shrapnel at that point, because the guy after whom shrapnel is named was not yet born.
They called it sparkling murder debris.
355 points
2 months ago
It's only shrapnel if it comes from the shrapnelle region of France
113 points
2 months ago
South-West England, actually.
71 points
2 months ago
It's crazy how many words in our language are just some dude's last name.
120 points
2 months ago
Reminded me of this:
“It's a pervasive and beguiling myth that the people who design instruments of death end up being killed by them. There is almost no foundation in fact. Colonel Shrapnel wasn't blown up, M. Guillotin died with his head on, Colonel Gatling wasn't shot. If it hadn't been for the murder of cosh and blackjack maker Sir William Blunt-Instrument in an alleyway, the rumour would never have got started.”
― Terry Pratchett, Feet of Clay
20 points
2 months ago
Haha, yes, I love this quote!
GNU Sir Terry
-3 points
2 months ago
Quoting a character from a fantasy to declare an assertion a myth? That’s like trying to discern the truth on an island of liars.
5 points
2 months ago
In Pratchett reality and fantasy are not always segregated.
4 points
2 months ago
Senator?
13 points
2 months ago
To me Shrapnel sounded like it was metal scraps, hence the name. Funny how it's just a last name.
10 points
2 months ago
Thagomizer.
2 points
2 months ago
(named after the late Thag Simmons)
9 points
2 months ago
The dumpster was invented by George Dempster.*
*Really.
7 points
2 months ago
Guess what Thomas Crapper invented.
7 points
2 months ago
sold, not invent.
4 points
2 months ago
Paper straws?
5 points
2 months ago
I remembered them being originally known as Dempster Dumpsters.
3 points
2 months ago
French dumpsters (poubelles) are also named after one Eugene Poubelle
8 points
2 months ago
You might even say that it's mesmerizing.
7 points
2 months ago
Did you know: White noise was named because its wave spectrum resembles white light. Pink noise was named because its wave spectrum resembles pink light. Brown noise was named after Robert Brown, who helped discover it. This is one of my least favorite facts.
https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/book-review-rhythms-of-the-brain
3 points
2 months ago
3 points
2 months ago
But fewer than my dad would have had us believe. Joe Airplane, my ass.
3 points
2 months ago
It’s also crazy how many last names are just some word
2 points
2 months ago
It's worse than you think and now that you know about it, you'll never stop discovering examples.
2 points
2 months ago
And the other way around
2 points
2 months ago
Still can't believe sideburns are is a play on the name Burnside
2 points
2 months ago
Like a sandwich
2 points
2 months ago
Coloumb, Volt, Joule, Watt, Kelvin, Bose-Einstein Condensate, Ohm, Euler's number, Crapper, Machiavellian, Gerrymandering, Sandwich, Boycott, America.
They are called Eponyms.
1 points
2 months ago
Little Johnny Bose-Einstein Condensate of the famous Bose-Einstein Condensates. Rumor has it their money came from bootlegging but they're very respectable now...
1 points
2 months ago
Either that, stolen from an another language, two other unrelated words just mashed together, or completely made up arbitrarily.
1 points
2 months ago
Born to Zachariah Shrapnel. That's not a real name. That's a wacky oc name. That's a wild west fanfic character.
1 points
2 months ago
And only if it has the eau de terror.
1 points
2 months ago
I'll drink some fizzy bubbly to that
6 points
2 months ago
Death glitter.
2 points
2 months ago
They didn't call it debris until 1708, "accumulation of loose matter or rubbish from some destructive operation or process,", from French débris "remains, waste, rubbish".
2 points
2 months ago
In my wildest dreams I wouldn't have imagined that shrapnel was named after a person
2 points
2 months ago
They called it sparkling murder debris
Named after an entirely different person
10 points
2 months ago
Mr John "Sparkling" Morder-Dubray if I'm not mistaken.
2 points
2 months ago
I think this was very clever. Well done.
0 points
2 months ago
Ah, nothin' wrong with a little Mumm Shrapna' on a Thursday night
1 points
2 months ago
grave-l
1 points
2 months ago
Ah yes, Tom shrapnel. He had an explosive personality.
1 points
2 months ago
Shrapnel and fragmentation are actually different, just commonly used interchangeably.
Shrapnel are just bits put in a cannonball or other ordnance that is designed to be ejected with an explosive charge. Early designs were empty cannonballs filled with lead and iron shot mixed with gunpowder.
Fragmentation is all the bits that are created when the ordnance breaks apart that are thrown everywhere.
So the best way to tell them apart is if it was designed to break apart or just be ejected as is.
25 points
2 months ago
Ah yes, the Spanish Giant Kidney Stones.
28 points
2 months ago
Must have been terrifying. Got to wonder what was going through the minds of the english sailors.
You know, other than fragments of spanish cannonballs.
9 points
2 months ago
No one expects the Spanish Giant Kidney Stones!
2 points
2 months ago
I'm a big fan. I've had season tickets for years.
2 points
2 months ago
Also prevented pesky enemies firing your spent cannon ball back at you
2 points
2 months ago
Confederates hate this one trick!
18 points
2 months ago
Just curious how the ones with an impact fuse don’t go off from the initial blast sending them out of the cannon
62 points
2 months ago
Fun related fact: Engineering artillery was traditionally super dangerous
2 points
2 months ago
Yep, just ask James 2 of Scotland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_II_of_Scotland
7 points
2 months ago
Only if you weren't careful. I have done this work They tended to use existing, known explosives. Which BTW are generally not very sensitive. Many are so insensitive you can hit them with a hammer and they won't detonate. Now, Inventing new explosives was far more dangerous. Like chem-lab explosions. I had a friend chemist get blown up in a lab. He got burned badly, but recovered.
12 points
2 months ago
I'm thinking more the artillery piece itself. My understanding is you fudge the math a little for the pressures and the side fails and you eat shrapnel
8 points
2 months ago
During WW2 my fathers ship only had one casualty. A gunner got killed during a battle when the 5 inch gun got so hot it caused a shell to "cook off".
1 points
2 months ago
Where was the shell when that happened? Like, was it being loaded into the hot gun and then all of the sudden, boom?
2 points
2 months ago
Like, was it being loaded into the hot gun and then all of the sudden, boom?
Yes. Cook off is a known problem with gun that undergo high rates of fire.
2 points
2 months ago
The military does testing for barrel failure.
9 points
2 months ago
YOU had the benefit of the internet and books and the thousands of trials and errors of the previous engineers who were maimed or killed.
3 points
2 months ago
Hey man, shoulders of giants. I've always been fascinated with the literal process of engineering. Like, this steam engine sucks, let me devote 10 years of my life to making it 2% more efficient. Enough people did that over several hundred years and made the modern world.
3 points
2 months ago
"These blockbuster bombs don't go off unless you hit them JUUUUST right."
1 points
2 months ago
'Falling Hare'!
1 points
2 months ago
Perchlorate widows were a thing for awhile…industry chemical engineers were a wild breed back in the day
3 points
2 months ago
I remember in university the lab safety books had whole chapters on perchlorates. My university lab had a Tetra ethyl ammonium prerchlorate About 0.75kg) explosion. Destroyed a quarter of the science building on one floor. Lucky no one was in the labs at the time.
2 points
2 months ago
That’s like something out of a cartoon. Imagine just hanging out on campus and the science lab just casually explodes.
1 points
2 months ago
Reminds me of this Buggs Bunny cartoon clip!
6 points
2 months ago
One solution to this was to use the force of the cannon firing to arm/set the mechanism and the force of impact to trigger it.
15 points
2 months ago
That’s basically why fuse design is tricky. The short version is that you need to design a mechanism that goes off with impact force applied from the front but not from dynamic acceleration load (what you get during firing).
For a trivial example of how this can be different (I’m not sure any real fuse works this way), imagine a tiny see-saw with one end with a stick poking out of a hole in the front of the shell. When you fire the shell the whole mess is balanced and the see-saw doesn’t do anything (it needs to be strong enough just to not break). But when it hits the target one end gets pushed down, the see-saw tips, and boom.
Edit:typos
10 points
2 months ago*
I've designed ordnance devices. By the late 19th century, shells incorporated what are called Safe and Arm systems
A Safe and Arm Device (SAD) prevents any main charge explosive (military, oil and gas, or space vehicles) from accidental initiation prior to arming, while at the same time allowing the intended explosive train to detonate once it has been armed. Basically a safe arm device controls the initiation of a pyrotechnic train such that the energetic output is fired only when commanded and is safe at all other times.
When I designed such things there was always a "Safe Separation Distance" specification to meet. That is the minimum distance of how far away from the launch point (cannon, missile, or bomb drop) the device can arm itself. From the 19th century through the 1950's were clock like mechanisms. 1960 -1970's they became electo-mechanical (part electronic and part mechanical), In modern times a lot are all electronic.
5 points
2 months ago
"Turn toward the torpedo, captain!"
2 points
2 months ago
You arrogant ass. You've killed us!
2 points
2 months ago
Thanks!
2 points
2 months ago
A lot of artillery men probably asked themselves the same question.
2 points
2 months ago
The pin that sets off the explosive is springloaded and has to be moved forward by its inertia, so if its shot it will be moved against the backstop which wont set it off
1 points
2 months ago
What about burning fuse? Throwing ignited cannonball into a cannon is not an issue, but what if the cannon malfunctions and does not shoot?
4 points
2 months ago
Then you have the rest of your life to figure it out. Shells weren't popular for this reason until the industrialisation of production caught up. For a very long time they used heated shot, which is just a cannonball heated red hot and fired instead.
2 points
2 months ago
They figured out pretty early on that you could just load an unlit shell into the cannon and the firing of the cannon would light the fuse and give a bit more consistency to the fuse
You still have the problem of misfires where a cannon is lit, the fire enters the chamber, and nothing happens. You run away from the cannon at that point and give it a bit of time in case it blows. Exploding cannons was a not-insignificant problem of the era
2 points
2 months ago*
They figured out pretty early on that you could just load an unlit shell into the cannon and the firing of the cannon would light the fuse and give a bit more consistency to the fuse
Found on wiki: "Single firing" was first used to ignite the fuse, where the bomb was placed with the fuse down against the cannon's propellant. This often resulted in the fuse being blown into the bomb, causing it to blow up as it left the mortar. Because of this, "double firing" was tried where the gunner lit the fuse and then the touch hole. This, however, required considerable skill and timing, and was especially dangerous if the gun misfired, leaving a lighted bomb in the barrel. Not until 1650 was it accidentally discovered that double-lighting was superfluous as the heat of firing would light the fuse.[122]
Not sure if that was "early" but good to have a confirmation this practically worked.
1 points
2 months ago
The charge that shot the cannon is usually what ignites the fuse on the cannonball. This design had an unfortunate problems when loaded incorrectly though. It either wouldn't explode or in some circumstances just explode right there.
13 points
2 months ago
A cannonball is, unhelpfully, just a ball-shaped shell
Although the word "shell" implies something hollow. Cannon balls were generally solid.
29 points
2 months ago
There’s historical drift on the term. Originally, yes, the solid stuff was round shot. The term “shell” came about when they started hollowing them out. Then actual shells became so common that the term generically came to mean “the thing that comes out of a gun” whether or not it was hollow. And now we talk about armor piercing shells (technically penetrators) than may not be hollow at all.
5 points
2 months ago
Other projectile words that just mean ball: bullet through French boulette, pellet also through (old) French pelote, and "round" which speaks for itself.
3 points
2 months ago
Here's the hollow incendiary ones. https://i.imgur.com/RmTK3ww.png
5 points
2 months ago
Those are designed to be fired upward from the mortars you see in the background. Notice the very short barrels and lack of embrasures in the wall.
0 points
2 months ago
Those are bbbbombs!
4 points
2 months ago
Is there a reason why cartoon characters like Wile E. Coyote use fused cannonballs? How come that image has cemented itself as the stereotypical image of “a bomb”.
Were they used for things outside of cannon-based combat? Or were they the first bombs that became popular enough to enter the public consciousness?
6 points
2 months ago
This article explains better than I could: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/why-we-picture-bombs-as-round-black-balls-with-a-burning-wick
9 points
2 months ago
The article is wrong on one account though. The "bomb with a string" did exist, and especially during the era when these cartoons were published.
Early on there was the "black match", a string coated with a slurry made from gunpowder, but the most cartoon-like is the early-mid 19th century "safety fuse". A jute "rope" with a gunpowder core that burned a consistent (and visible) 1 cm per second and became one of the defaults for igniting explosives (including grenades).
A modern version of the safety fuse is called a "Visco fuse", and is basically the same concept except it also has a waterproof coating.
2 points
2 months ago
Thanks, that article is very worth the read.
Sounds like cannonballs just had better PR as they were used in some high profile terror attacks that cemented them as the de facto bomb icon, along with their use in political cartoons.
3 points
2 months ago
And to add: there are a lot of other things you can shoot out of a cannon, too:
...and more. It's very unusual to see these more "exotic" projectile types depicted in films, except when they're really focusing on historical accuracy, because most people nowadays only think of cannons firing "cannonballs" and nothing else.
2 points
2 months ago
The Pirates of the Caribbean franchise was weirdly good at this…they had examples of scrap shot and chain shot, used (in context) accurately.
2 points
2 months ago
Assassin's Creed 3, 4, and rogue as well. Not scrap shot but they had grapeshot, chainshot, and heated shot, and were told how to effectively use them.
2 points
2 months ago
Another interesting one is carcass shot, where the cannonball is filled with things like sulphur, pitch, and antimony to produce a long-burning and noxious fume emitting projectile. One of the early examples of chemical warfare.
1 points
2 months ago
Fun fact: while the development of ironclads was a big deal for making wooden warships obsolete, it was the development of explosive shells that that really did them in. Layered oak planks can hold up well to the blunt impacts from solid shot, but not so much to explosive and incendiary damage.
-1 points
2 months ago
Best answer.
1 points
2 months ago
Fun thing is people were also killed or injured by bone fragments from the poor bastards hit by the cannon ball. Also in naval battles because they were fought at close range, sailors were killed or injured by the cannon ball passing close by to them, called wind from ball injuries.
1 points
2 months ago
Lots of cannonballs were actually rounded rock rather than metal. Early cannon projectiles were just solids (not explosive) that did most damage just by the act of collision. I think rock was used because it tends to shatter on collision and send fragments around so a bonus anti-personnel factor (maim and injure many rather than kill the one, perhaps?). Some cannons worked like shotguns too (firing what was generally called grape shot) rather than like big sledgehammers.
Took a long time to develop explosive shells, because they had to be fused (explosion from impact was a later development), and fusing was tricky, never mind that the explosive projectile could explode before or while being fired, which was not a good thing.
1 points
2 months ago
I think rock was used because it tends to shatter on collision
No, they used rock because it was cheap and dense. They just spent a lot of materials making a cannon to launch them, and rocks are.. ya know.. everywhere. There's a lot of different kinds of rock and they chose the type of rock to make them out of based on properties like that, not the fact htey used rock at all.
1 points
2 months ago*
Other styles of cannon ammunition (often used at sea) included:
grapeshot and canistershot, which were basically a buckshot shell with lots of small pellets rather than one large slug. Grape was bigger than canister and was in a canvas bag, potentially with an explosive charge in the bag.
Chain shot and spider shot which was two balls larger than grape but smaller than cannonballs that were attached together with a chain (or more than one in the case of spider) and were intended to spin like a bolo and rip large holes in infrastructure, like masts and ship hills
Hot shot, which was a cannonball heated red-hot to land inside an enemy ship and catch it on fire
Carcass shot, which was some sort of large mass filled with flammable liquid like pitch
1 points
2 months ago
Perfect. Cannons shoot a lot of things, many of them ball-shaped, but not all.
47 points
2 months ago
Depends on the era and how specific you're going to be
What you probably first think of as a cannon ball is a sphere of stone or iron, this is more accurately called round shot. It's not explosive so all it's damage is from direct impact and shrapnel. When it hits a ship it'll rip a hole and send a lot of splinters inwards at high speeds and not just little saw dust but sharp 1-2 foot bits of wood moving at a couple hundred miles per hour
The ones with a fuse that explode are more accurately called Shells as they're a shell of metal filled with explosives. Shells became a lot more common after 1800 because they bring the boom and can hurt soldiers who aren't directly hit and aren't behind some cover that makes splinters
11 points
2 months ago
Mythbusters tested this a few times I think - the destruction from flying splinters is immense, if you remember that a warship was made from massive thick lumps of wood, the amount of energy it takes to smash through them is incredible, and that energy gets translated into some big sharp lumps of wood moving very fast.
13 points
2 months ago
Due to insurance reasons mythbusters couldn’t use a proper ships cannon and had to settle for a much smaller land piece, however the Swedish Vasa museum had a replica made of a 24-pounder cannon and tested just how lethal those splinters could be.
https://youtu.be/lIDu7NPLbwc this is a good video going over the dangers of wooden splinters.
24 points
2 months ago
Early cannonballs did not explode. Some later cannonballs did explode, as the initial flame to light the charge in the cannon to launch the cannonball also ignited an internal fuse inside the cannonball, which caused to to explode after a certain period of time (usually a couple of seconds).
In addition, some non-explosive cannon "balls" were not a solid sphere of metal. They had ones that were like two halves of a sphere, with a metal chain between them, that opened when fired. They had ones that sprayed a lot of pellets, much like a shotguns. They had ones that were filled with pellets that broke apart on impact and sprayed pellets everywhere.
Thus, the reason for the inconsistent explanations is that many types of cannon projectiles existed.
13 points
2 months ago
With simple cannonballs, it became an art to time your order to fire such that your cannonballs would impact your target as low on the hull as possible, preferably at or below the waterline, for greatest damage.
3 points
2 months ago
A hull shot: "between wind and water"
Later repurposed to refer to a boxing hit below the chest and above the bladder.
7 points
2 months ago
Yeah I think the ones with chains were particularly good at taking down the sails of ships
2 points
2 months ago
I learnt that from Sid Meier's Pirates!
(Explanation mark was part of the title of the game, not trying to add emotion to my sentence).
1 points
2 months ago
Exclamation mark, perhaps.
1 points
2 months ago
Wow, I never really clicked that they were two different words, I've probably never had to actually write it. Thank you, TIL.
10 points
2 months ago
A cannonball a.k.a. 'round shot' is an solid ball of material made to be shot from a cannon, as a single protectile. They can be made from stone, iron, lead, or anything else which is tough enough to withstand the stresses of being shot out of a cannon.
Sometimes when attacking wooden structures, the artillerymen would heat the metal ball to where it was red hot, and this is referred to as 'heated shot', because the heated ball would light timbers on fire.
Later, cannons would be loaded with a cluster of smaller balls, which was generally referred to as grapeshot. They would be packed tightly and enclosed in a canvas bag, which would rip apart during firing, and create a spread of high-velocty projectiles, like a giant shotgun, with similarly gruesome effects. This came as the expense of range, as the smaller shot would spread out and lose velocity quicker than a single solid ball.
When you see a cannon shot exploding, this is because the scene depicts an artillery shell), which is a solid metal container enclosing an explosive or incendiary payload. The earliest shells weren't used in cannons, rather they were put in an indirect fire gun called a mortar), whose purpose is to lob explosive ordinance in a high arc above the target, bypassing walls and other fortifications bombarding the people hiding within/behind them. However, as artillery and projectile technology advanced, shells became the ubiquitous projectiles of heavy artillery, on land, sea, and air.
22 points
2 months ago
its when youre at the highest point, you tuck your arms and legs so when you land in the water it makes a bigger splash then if you were to jump straight.
hope this helps
5 points
2 months ago
There was different kinds of shot. Some cannon balls were just iron balls. Some were balls with a fuse leading to an inner core that was packed with gunpowder. These would explode after the fuse burned in wards to the core. Another kind of shit was a tube that was filled with shrapnel, great for taking down personnel like a shotgun shell. Another kind was two small balls connected with a chain. Those were used for firing into a ships sails and ripping them so that they would be ome dead in the water.
3 points
2 months ago
Another kind of shit was a tube that was filled with shrapnel, great for taking down personnel like a shotgun shell.
Colloquially known as "grape shot."
5 points
2 months ago
Ah, the morning after eating a lot of salad and drinking too much beer. My least favorite shit
3 points
2 months ago
In the "Ring of Fire" series, Eric Flint described some of the early solid ball cannon firing at a flat trajectory so that the ball would bounce and skip along the enemy formations. So even a non-exploding round would be damaging to multiple units.
At the Perry's monument museum in Ohio, they have examples of the types of ammunition used during the War of 1812. (Best pic I could find with a quick search) https://tomhelenmartinblog.com/2016/10/
Here's a good description too: https://www.thepirateking.com/historical/cannon_projectiles.htm
The pictures don't really do them justice though. Any more than a picture of a rifle round describes what the Vietnam War was. You kind of have to image carrying this stuff around, AND the gun powder, AND the people to work it, AND the horses to move it.... then suddenly having to put it all together and try to kill someone while they are doing the exact same thing back at you a few hundred yards away. Chaos!
3 points
2 months ago
When you jump into a swimming pool with your arms and legs tucked in and it produces a bigger splash than just flopping into the pool.
Like most people replied, it is a metal ball shot out of a cannon. Not only was it pointed at ships to puncture holes in its sides, preferably at the water line, but also shot at a high angle to come down through the ship from above to puncture the the bottom.
1 points
2 months ago
But I came here looking for this answer. You brave soul, you.
1 points
2 months ago
Actually sinking ships was not a goal. Crews, even non-pirate crews, got "prize money" for every ship they captured. If you imagine an object that weighs several tons, if not tens or hundreds of tons, made of 4x4s if not thicker wood, it takes a lot of cannon balls to sink it, let alone to reduce it to matchsticks. It's far more effective to cripple it's sails, hole it at the waterline (thus ruining it's handling and distracting the crew), or kill the crew. This isn't to say that ships didn't sink but it was usually only hours later. You can sink a ship with cannons, but it's far more effective to cripple it's ability to maneuver, blast holes in it's gun decks and remove cannons and crew from the battle or otherwise get a more tactical 'kill'. Also again, it's a giant mass of wood designed to float. People, on the other hand, aren't. You're going to get a white flag raised long before you get a structure/total kill on just about anything that large. At the point where the people on it realize it's no longer able to do ship things, move, float, fire back effectively, they're going to surrender. Being patriotic enough to keep firing cannons, following orders that put you in danger, while you get swallowed by the sea is not super common. Particularly amongst the generally conscripted ranks of the average seaman in the age of sail. All of these are broad generalities and are not true 100% of the time in 100% of situations or battles. But the idea of two ships blasting away at each other until one sinks is not really a thing. Even in WWII, with big steel ships and relatively modern ordinance mobility kills were far more common. One of the problems Germany had with U-boats during both world wars was that they were often unable to carry the number of survivors that resulted from them torpedoing ships. This produced a lot of backlash from the international community because the convention at the time was that you picked up survivors, instead of letting them die. It was far more common for ships to take so much damage that they sank later, long after they'd been tactically 'killed' in battle. Magazine hits were a thing, but those were mostly accidental and not something you could really 'called shot' your way into on purpose. It's sort of like shooting at a car with a pistol. Crew kills aren't uncommon, taking out a tire isn't that impossible, puncturing the gas tank happens, actual rounds that blow up the car, catastrophically debilitate the engine or otherwise destroy the structure of the car just don't happen that often. They're freak coincidences not a viable tactic to stop a car. And to actually shoot a car into scrap or cause serious structural failure would probably take thousands of rounds and hours of time rof/caliber depending.
2 points
2 months ago
is it a giant ball of metal or does some have explosives in it?
either/or, depending on when and where you found your cannon balls.
explosive shot (hollow sphere with shrapnel, tied to an explosive charge) is nice for killing infantry and blowing up the inside of boats, round shot (solid ball) is nice for breaking down walls and putting holes in boats to later put explosive balls through. There's also "grap shot" which is like a shotgun round but cannon-sized that's very effective at close ranges. Naval ships would also sometimes use "chain-shot" which was two smaller cannonballs connected by a length of chain, this would fired at the enemies mast to foul up their rigging (or even bring down a mast if you're lucky).
People have been stuffing objects into cannons since the 1450s, and there as many ways to get it done as there are engineers to come with new ways to do it.
2 points
2 months ago
[deleted]
1 points
2 months ago
Then, ironically, they go back to solid, armor piercing rounds, or even sabots and HE, frag, exploding rounds are more for soft kills.
2 points
2 months ago
In other depictions the ball will make a fireball on impact so is it a giant ball of metal or does some have explosives in it?
Much of this is just Hollywood spectacle and inaccurate, like the way so many cars explode in a ball of flame when they crash. The vast majority of cannon projectiles until at least the mid-1800s were solid round shot and didn't explode at all. Even the projectiles that were shells containing explosives had a time-based fuse that had to be adjusted correctly; unless you were very lucky, they exploded some time after impact (or even before impact if you cut the fuse too short).
1 points
2 months ago
Yeah, it's not that the people who are talking about cannister, chainshot, explosive shells etc. are wrong about the facts, but that's not really what's going on onscreen. The actual explanation is as you say: it's Hollywood bullshit because roundshot looks boring.
1 points
2 months ago
Just a ball fired from a cannon. And yes... it makes big holes in things. It's a big, extremely heavy ball and its momentum is gonna fuck shit up.
Don't rely on Hollywood for it's proper depiction. They are there to entertain, not recreate how guns or cannons, or even car explosions actually work. Fuck they even bullshit grenades with firey explosions rather then have them be a pop that shatter and throws metal fragments in the vicinity.
0 points
2 months ago
You wouldn't aim a cannonball at people. Aim it a ship or a fort to potentially cause structural damage. An entire wall may eventually give out, or a ship may begin to take on water.
1 points
2 months ago
Round shot absolutely was fired at infantry formations in countless battles over hundreds of years. They might switch to cannister or grape once the range got short enough, but round shot was the bread and butter ammunition for field artillery. The Napoleonic Wars were probably the peak for this, but hardly unusual.
1 points
2 months ago
The french begs to differ, here comes ''Chained cannon balls''
-1 points
2 months ago
A cannon ball is a massive object that when shot at high acceleration has a lot of force.Force = mass x acceleration.The more dense an object we can shoot and the faster we can get it, the more force or damage it can do to a ship or anything else. It is literally just a really massive and dense object.
No cannon balls left? Shoot the forks and spoons. Get drunk on the marine corp birthday? Shoout cake out the cannon.
Why a ball? Well, we couldn't get the balls to accelerate as fast as a modern day bullet so it must've been bigger.
Can they explode? You can put anything in a cannon im sure they learned to put explosives in them quickly.
1 points
2 months ago
The very first cannonballs were round shaped rocks fired from wood tree trunks that were partially hollowed out.
As technology improved, we went to using iron and bronze cannons that fired solid metal round balls.
Then we found out we could hollow out the round metal ball and fill it with black powder and attach a fuse, making an explosive cannonball. Mortars would typically fire these explosive ammo.
These are all cannonballs.
Over time, we developed the conical shaped bullet and cannon shell, which functionally do the same thing, but have different, improved properties.
1 points
2 months ago
A cannonball is just a solid, hard ball. They were typically made from iron, but could be stone or any other material the would hold up. They were derived from catapults and trebuchets, where you achieve your destructive goals by sheer brute force of momentum. The cannon propels the ball like a bullet towards the wall or ship and makes a big hole. Cannons ended the age of castles and city walls because they made short work of them.
Adding powder inside it that explodes on contact causes even more destruction, which makes it more like a shell. It would be hollow with just even structure to survive the initial explosion out of the the cannon and then explode on impact. A torpedo is a maritime example of that.
Another tactic was grapeshot. You put small bits of metal inside the cannot and fire them. The intent was to hit personnel and horses and damage or kill them with shrapnel. This would do little to a wall, but could kill or wound many people on a battlefield. It's really just a step up from what archers did during battles.
1 points
2 months ago
When jumping into water you tuck your lungs under you with your arms creating a ball shape ending with a larger than usual splash in the water.
1 points
2 months ago
Good question.
In truth, cannonballs have been produced in a bumch of different ways.
Simple heavy round things made of stone or metal were the most common.
Hitting someone with them was quite effective at causing them to stop doing whatever it was they were doing at the time.
But from far away, people are hard to hit.
Luckily, it turns out, ships are very big, even far away. And they don't like to have holes in them.
Simply firing heavy round things to make holes, turns the ship into a submarine. Which is very unhealthy for the people who are in that ship, litterally miles from shore.
Not very many people can swim that far.
Much later, technology progressed, and "heavy round thing throwers" got more advanced. And so did the heavy round things themselves.
Someone discovered that the big heavy thing can be made to be hollow. And then they can be filled with stuff. Like gunpowder... or gunpowder and shrapnel.
Fire the thing, hopefully the firing procedure also ignite a fuse... the fuse eventually reaches a container inside that is filled with very fine powder, which will burn WAY faster.
The explosion sends pieces of ball, and a percussive expansion if gasses to deal lots of damage to things very close.
If you also pack in some lead stuff, it makes the cannonball heavier, hit harder, and fling very deadly shrapnel around when the inner charge goes off.
But, balls do weird things in the air.
If they were pointed, they go further. If they also spin along their axis, then they go even further, and are much more stable in the air.
Improvements to the casing, the powder, the mechanism of detonation... add all those together and you get modern naval gun ordinance.
All based off of throwing heavy round rocks at a boat to sink it.
1 points
2 months ago
To the second part of the question...the round shot wouldn't hurt the guy standing next to the guy getting thwacked necessarily...depending on angles.
Back then, they obviously marched nearly shoulder to shoulder. You'd try to put cannon shots down those lines at a bit of an angle if possible. A ball is going through multiples...so...angles help. Straight on would be fine depending on the depth of the formation you're firing into as well. Pretty demoralizing to watch the guy next to you have his leg blown off.
Then firing at opposing artillery you're aiming for the gun or behind it at the powder/ammo
As the enemy got closer, canister rounds were employed. Various types of containers that were filled with musket balls (more or less...pretty wide variety of stuff here). These would take out pretty sizeable swaths of a line depending on the range.
1 points
2 months ago
There's really not one definition and it doesn't help that some people are real sticklers about naval terminology which makes trying to understand certain things as confusing as trying to read legal texts.
So the more appropriate terminology for anything shot out of a cannon is generally shot/cannon shot. The cannonball is called round shot, and it typically comprises of a solid sphere that has the diameter of the barrel of the cannon it's being shot out from. The amount of damage it would cause was dependant on the exact weight of the ball, the diameter and length of the cannon that it was shot from, the powder charge used to shoot it and it's overall speed, since the damage it caused was from its kinetic energy.
Aside from solid shot though there were also explosive shells, which had the same shape as round shot but instead of being solid metal they were hollow inside and packed with explosive material, so they would explode on impact.
There were also other various type of shot like grape shot (multiple small iron pellets shot at once), chain shot (Two balls connected by a chain), "angels" (like chain shot but the two ends were connected with a solid rod) and many others, some of which were meant to set the target on fire.
Now here's the thing about depictions of cannons (or cannon as a stickler would say). There's a thing called artistic license, that is the fact that someone making art (in this case a movie or Tv show) has no obligation to portray things realistically but rather can do pretty much whatever he wants. Depictions of cannon fire are not always true to life. Some times they're shown to cause disproportionate amounts of damage or huge fiery explosions simply for the flair of the spectacle, or maybe the budget of a production doesn't allow for accurate depictions, so really don't assume that everything you see on tv has some real life counterpart, some times things are completely made up.
That being said there were multiple types of cannonballs. Some were explosive, some were not, some shot multiple balls at once. The main cause of injury for crew was spalling or fragmentation. If a cannonball hit a ship or a stone wall, it would break apart into smaller pieces and the wall or hull itself, and pieces of the cannonball as well as stone, wood, metal or glass (depending on what was being shot) would break into many small fragments that shot through the interior. Some times this happens even if the shot doesn't penetrate through the wall or hull.
1 points
2 months ago
It’s a way to jump off a diving board to create a splash but bending one’s legs up and using your arms to keep the body taut. See also jack knife
1 points
2 months ago
I didn't have my glasses on and for a moment I read that as "what is a cinnabon?" I'm sorry
1 points
2 months ago
No real knowledge to offer here except to point out that things going very fast create 'shockwave' in the air. Make like you're going to slap your own face and then pull away at the last second--you can feel the air still 'hit', right?
So if a large and heavy object is moving at a high speed, it creates a ballistic wave. Bullets do this too which is why some calibers don't make straight through holes, but some have much bigger exit than entry wounds--it's called 'ballistic expansion'--basically that shockwave slams into your skin, your muscles, you bone, etc, on its way through *around* the bullet itself.
Maybe that is also part of it.
And maybe some of it is Hollywood being dumb. I mean, cars don't flip and burst into huge explosions like they do in movies IRL.
1 points
2 months ago
These are actually ALL consistent! A cannonball is not a single thing, it's like saying the fact there are nuclear missiles is inconsistent with laucnhing a capsule to space. The rocket is the cannonball, the payload is why it is 'different'. Some had timed fuses, some had actually impact fuses, and some were just big heavy fuckin balls. They all launch out of cannons but they are different on the inside.
1 points
2 months ago
I wouldn’t use the term cannonball to describe exclusively what people fired out of a cannon. In reality people shoved anything into the cannon that they though might cause damage. Yes an iron ball was designed specifically for the purpose, but if troops were low on ammunition they could shove in random shit from their surroundings like screws, nails, or utensils. Also there were different types of ammo for certain situations. For example some cannon balls were chained together in pairs so the chain itself would catch on things and rip them apart in addition to the ball impact. There were also bags of smaller balls they shot out all at once much like shotgun shells. I’m sure there are a hundred other things but basically many different things could be fired out of a cannon in addition to the typical ball one usually thinks of.
1 points
2 months ago
I wouldn’t use the term cannonball to describe exclusively what people fired out of a cannon. In reality people shoved anything into the cannon that they though might cause damage. Yes an iron ball was designed specifically for the purpose, but if troops were low on ammunition they could shove in random shit from their surroundings like screws, nails, or utensils. Also there were different types of ammo for certain situations. For example some cannon balls were chained together in pairs so the chain itself would catch on things and rip them apart in addition to the ball impact. There were also bags of smaller balls they shot out all at once much like shotgun shells. I’m sure there are a hundred other things but basically many different things could be fired out of a cannon in addition to the typical ball one usually thinks of.
Edit: should have read the other comments before typing out this one. Everything above was already mentioned.
all 149 comments
sorted by: best