Talk:Beehive anti-personnel round

message: I recall reading about this type of weapon being banned for use, anybody able to substantiate that or heard something similiar?  i will try to do some research when i have more time.  --Ron 20:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're a type of cluster-bombs and as such, they've been out-lawed by about a half of the nations, but u.s., russia, china and a few others refuse to sign the treaty. GMRE (talk) 17:32, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Leaving aside the inherent stupidity of the ban on cluster munitions, it's extremely unlikely that they are covered under that convention given that they are kinetic rounds that contain no explosive content.  Likely to be the same rumour that suggests that shotguns are somehow prohibited under "international" law.  Also false. 143.159.74.194 (talk) 20:37, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Treaty?

message: This article confuses several different types of anti-personnel ammunition - originally called 'shrapnel' (after its inventor), 'grape' and 'cannister'.  Shrapnel and cannister seem to have been mainly land service ammunition while 'grape' seems to have been mainly naval.
Shrapnel was invented circa 1800, but later that century it was used with more modern shaped shells.  A shrapnel shell is like a flying shotgun, the bullets are ejected while the shell is in flight by a small charge and they fly forwards in a cone.  The charge is initiated by a time fuze (igniferious at this period)in the shell's nose, which is blown clear as the bullets leave.  Bullet sizes varied, but by WW1 they were usually lead antimony alloy with a few hundred bullets per pound weight.
Cannister, in contrast, is bullets in a can and the can bursts as it is fired.  This means cannister is short range.  While shrapnel was little used in WW2, cannister was developed for various weapons including tanks.  Australian Centurion tanks in Vietnam had 20-pdr cannister.
:Canister ammunition specifically has always historically used a payload of either lead or steel pellets.  The M1028 canister round for the 120mm M256 tank gun uses tungsten pellets, however.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.41.40.21 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 13 June 2007
Cannister was always carried by British artillery in its 19th century campaigns and quite widely used. Sometimes it had to be locally assembled from old bully-beef cans. Shrapnel remained their primary anti personnel weapon into WW1, and always the ammunition of choice against 'troops in the open'. In 1945 they successfully trialled 95mm shrapnel fuzed VT.
Beehive, correctly called Splintex, was developed by the US in the Vietnam period.  It is a shrapnel type shell - it is fitted with a mechanical time fuze and the flechettes are fired forward from the shell in flight. It was available for 105mm arty, 106mm RCL, 90mm RCL, and probably others.  US policy was for splintex to be only fired at direct fire, ie for arty it was local defence only, presumably for fear of blinds being re-cycled by the enemy into IEDs.  However, the USSR appears to have subsequently developed 122mm and 152mm shells of this type and used them for indirect fire.
:I was under the impression that flechette rounds likewise tended to have no bursting charge.  On the other hand, there was a 90mm tank main gun VT round using a time fuze and a payload of (I think) black powder and ball bearings used extensively by the US in Vietnam.  They were universally hated by tank crewmen because they did not function reliably, most likely due to the fuze being mechanical rather then electronic.
:Speaking of Vietnam I have read that in Cambodia in 1971, a Sheridan light tank of the Blackhorse ACR got over thirty confirmed kills with a single round of 152mm beehive, which may be an all-time record.  This would be noteworthy but I cannot recall the source.  Anyone? .— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.41.40.21 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 13 June 2007
Nfe 01:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: (Comment)

message: I've addded this to an external link section. It was deleted from references a while ago (rightly enough) because blogs are not acceptable as refs. OTOH it contains a number of quotes from sources that probably would be acceptable, and is of interest in itself, so I've added it in this fashion to make it available. </br>
I hope that is OK with everyone. Xyl 54 (talk) 13:10, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link 

message: I hear in a lot of places that beehive rounds will strike sideways at rather than pierce the target like a needle.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.81.80 (talk) 21:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hitting Sideways