Manufacturing an Eight Inch High Explosive Howitzer Shell (1917 ?)

This film is a heritage item from Library and Archives Canada and is only available in English.
Detailed explanation of the manufacturing, inspection and shipping of howitzer shells for use in World War I. The start and finish of each process is shown and the time to complete the operation is noted. Shots of male and female workers leaving the office and factory, the assembly line and a cross section of a shell.
Source: Library and Archives Canada. Dundas Historical Society Museum fonds, 1984-0413, IDC 11099.

[@albundy5228]

You hear that? Silence! Pure golden silence! No crappy music, no robot voice! Thumbs up!

[@hbunnie1120]

A Narration would have been nice

[@zooknut]

@Thomas Paine I remember that episode, classic!!! Still also to this day I say "my mind wobbles"

[@garygraham4679]

Look at the date. This thing was made long before the "Talkies".

[@austinbartose6527]

JMPAZ1 the narrative was the words on the screen 🤦‍♂️

[@kenparnell4297]

That's because in 1917 there wasn't no sound.......usually a guy played a piano in the theater.

[@henkvharten8465]

It is a shame that not a single TV station take the effort to show the uncut full length versions of this kind of films. There are many films like this made, but never showed on Television. I'm glad we have the internet today and KZbin, so we can watch what we like. Great thanks for sharing!

[@constitution_8939]

I have 5 years of Machine Shop experience using lathes and Bridgeports, uh Milling Machines ... but I Never imagined how much time, work and effort was put into a One Shot Destructive Device like an Artillery Shell WOW!!!

[@xxxggthyf]

An incredible amount of precision engineering for something that only has to work once and destroys itself in the process.

[@enthalpiaentropia7804]

Precision engineering for killing...

[@dougankrum3328]

yeah...in the 1980's I worked in a Machine shop as a welder, making parts for the 'Peacekeeper' Missiles...made me sick to see such high precision stuff that will only be used once...@@enthalpiaentropia7804

[@jackfrost2146]

Keep in mind that often it's suicidal mission involved destroying machinery thousands of times more complex than it's self.

[@brianjohnston9822]

Precision machining so that it does not get stuck in a gun barrel, the more true the surface, the more accurate the trajectory.

[@xxxggthyf]

@@brianjohnston9822 What you say is of course absolutely true but from a ballistics point of view I can't help but think other factors made the precision machining of the shell a tad over the top. It's all very well and good having 8" shells machined to a tolerance of one thou but if a cross wind can blow it off course by +/-100' it does seem a bit silly. I'm not having a go at the video by the way... It's fascinating that this ever even happened.

[@fluchterschoen]

*Wow, amazing craftsmanship. I can't imagine being blown up by anything else.*

[@drmodestoesq]

I'd take it as a distinct honour.

[@oldschoolfoil2365]

Really? you cant imagine being blown up by anything else.

[@jimjonrs3932]

I would have hated to be blown up by anything of a lesser quality.

[@deafmusician2]

😂

[@DaveSmith-cp5kj]

"9 out of 10 Prussians can't be wrong!"

[@NikovK]

These forged steel shells were a recent development. By using a high-strength forged steel body with rather thick walls and an overly thick base plug, the explosive force was contained after detonation until the last possible instant when the steel would shatter into lethal splinters. "Manual for the Battery Commander", from the French Artillery School in December 1916, described three "sheafs" of fragmentation coming from this type of shells. The primary and most important one was the lateral band caused by the fragmentation of the shell wall, a lesser amount of fragments from the nose, and a few large pieces from the base plug. When you consider how a shell impacts the ground from a howitzer at high angle, you readily understand why getting the walls to a uniform thickness is crucial to the fragmentation pattern of the projectile. The French manual also describes a cast-iron steel-overlaid shell, which would be cheaper to manufacture, and cast iron shells, which would be cheaper still. However the cast iron shell's fragmentation pattern is described as "pulverized instantly". Other parts of the manual explain how much care had to be taken to have all the heavy guns in a battery fire the same number of shells with the same charges to keep their barrels wearing out evenly, and so minimize the dispersion of a battery's fire. Other concerns like the temperature and the humidity of powder storage and even "powder must be rammed into the breach with uniform pressure from round to round", because more tightly packed propellant would burn differently and cause more dispersal. Since these heavy guns were used on harder targets that needed very close hits to destroy them, like concrete blockhouses or other artillery pieces, artillery commanders knowing their shells were all uniform could be confident of more accurate fire and so reduce how many shells had to be expended to be confident of target destruction. As for the huge bulk of what was being thrown around the Western Front, it was closer to the 155mm "medium" artillery. Heavy guns like these often operated with aerial observers in balloons or aircraft and would even fire one at a time, adjusted by signals from the pilot or balloonist.

[@scottsummers819]

Thank you for putting this up. As a machinist of nearly 30 years now it is very interesting to see how it used to be done. By my reckoning there was about 2.5-3 hours work (not including forging and filling with explosive) in each shell. It makes the mind boggle at how much effort was involved considering the literal millions of shells that were lobbed at the Germans. It would be interesting to see how long modern machines and tools would take for the same process. My educated guess is it could all be done on 1 specialist machine in around 10 minutes. With a couple of robots loading/unloading, I reckon 1 person could supervise 3-4 machines, not the 10-12 people that were involved in each shell in the film. Accuracy and consistency would be better too.

[@scottsummers819]

@Yuck Foutube There is a wide gap between the skill levels of an operator and a machinist, whether it be manual or CNC. Most of the people in the video would have been considered operators. They would be trained to do 1 or 2 specific things and if something goes wrong to seek help. This would be no different today than back then for modern CNC operators. You could train a monkey to run a manual turret lathe but it would never be able to set it up. A CNC operator is not really any more highly trained than some one working on a production line somewhere, particularly if they are doing production work. Here's an example: I spent 2 days once setting up a machine, programming, making jigs etc using the full extent of my skills to do so. I then spent literally 5 minutes training my wife to load blanks and press the go button, she was then technically a CNC operator, but that was all she could do. The people with the real skills in that video would have been the machinists/toolmakers we didn't see but who design and maintain the machines and tooling. My guess is there was a considerable sized workshop just supporting that factory with a ratio of around 1 machinist/toolmaker for every 10 guys out on the production floor.

[@johnc6738]

@@scottsummers819 Exactly. When I worked machine shop I operated a CNC for a while after being a machinist of years. I was never so bored out of my mind as doing that. It was a happy day to go back to a manual lathe and have to actually set up tooling and turn a part from a print.

[@kezzler9556]

@@johnc6738 Agreed, manual machining is quite fun. CNC machining, put in a piece of metal, press start, try not to fall asleep.

[@brainfreeze1925]

​@@scottsummers819, excellent points.

[@AKAtheA]

@Charlie K might have something to do with the not-dumb fuse and required tolerances. BTW are you sure it's not one of the smart guided shells?

[@Defundemorats]

Thank God we live during the age that we can watch films from over a hundred years ago, hats off to the forward thinkers and the cameramen and the camera maker of that age.

[@t.a.7970]

So nice to see old footage at the correct speed.

[@oldschoolfoil2365]

The faster stuff when they work tireless on substance was way better

[@jgstargazer]

It's even more amazing the planing, design, and manufacture of the machinery that made the countless parts for the final product.

[@paulsawczyc5019]

Yep - all of that to kill people on the other side of the world.

[@bnghjtyu767]

Hypnotizing thanks for putting this together I could not stop watching it.

[@nampam3945]

Next time I am under artillery attack, I can be mindful of the dedication and precision of the workers who are trying to get me killed.

[@diagorosmelos3187]

As an engineer I love this. Old school with no fancy computers and lasers. Just pure skill. Nice vid. (and thanks for no commentary and background music.)

[@prsearls]

This was in an era of large steam plants, stationary steam engines, line shafts and leather belts to power each machine. Very professional filming and lighting to show all the machining steps by expert machinists. An excellent film that doesn't require lots of dialogue.

[@Groveish]

By 1917 it was mostly electric

[@dennisyoung4631]

Extensive line shafts showed at the beginning of the film.

[@nigelparker5886]

The cleverness of man’s skills to kill one another astound me!

[@mztrclean]

That is a hell of a lot of work for each shell!

[@RobertKohut]

Nice!! Amazing amount of work for one shell. Millions made!!

[@direbearcoat7551]

I want to see how they're made today. I'll bet nearly everything is automated and the amount of time to make one is greatly reduced.

[@AtelierDBurgoyne]

Je vous remercie d'avoir partagé ce documentaire. J'ai trouvé intéressant de voir les astuces pour tenir la pièce durant toutes les étapes d'usinage, les travailleurs et les machines-outils spécialisées.

[@johncollins6023]

Saved France! And all those beautiful French women!

[@jimsvideos7201]

An 8" collet chuck is something I never thought I'd see.

[@tonytiger75]

Interesting to see the Niles lathe, John Bertram & Sons Ltd. sold their lathe making interests to Niles in 1908. They used to make wood working machines then moved on to larger machine tools for railroads paper mills and other industries. Making these shells was a blip on the radar for this company which lasted 120 years.

[@terryclinard9031]

That Vertical Turret Lathe at 34:00 brings back memories. Not from the War , I used one in a Machine Shop I worked 20 yrs ago. That thing was manufactured in 1908 and still worked every day , without a hitch. We only used it to drill 4 inch bores in 8 inch thick steel blocks , set it up , oil the work piece , hang a weight from the Handle/Bar , walk by every once in a while and shoot some more cutting oil on it. I loved that damn Machine.

[@charleshetrick3152]

Ain’t no school like the old school. Then the world went and got itself in damn big hurry and fewer and fewer folks these days have time to do things well. But on the plus side I spose we get to know all about who Alec Baldwin married...now I need a drink.

[@saskiacalvert9764]

Each one is an exquisite work of art. Such precision and attention to detail went in to every single one of them. Each one identical to the next yet no two are exactly alike. Each one lovingly handcrafted by skilled artisans. What a beautiful thing.

[@rogerscottcathey]

Yes, hope the victims appreciate with what skill and art went into the means of their deaths.

[@zWhistler]

Irony . . .

[@oldgeorge1939]

What nonsense - identical but no two alike??? It can't be both!

[@videowatchaccount]

Tolerances those days were shockingly loose compared to what we do today. With manual processes you get a good bit of variation between parts.

[@oldgeorge1939]

@@videowatchaccount Yes, I understand that but you can't say they're identical and then that no two are alike. Either they're identical or they're not. Semantics! Very gripping film though.

[@cristossinatra9635]

Wow,incredibly labor intensive for one shell.

[@patrickdarcy3863]

wow, no balance of equal times of each operation and so much manual handling but lovely to watch, thank you.

[@TheEvertw]

Presumably, they had more machines doing the time-consuming jobs in parallel.

[@mikeswert7182]

In the Vietnam War I calculated firing data for a battery of 8 inch howitzers. I fired thousands of these rounds, but didn’t realize the work and craftsmanship that went into there creation.

[@bmcc12]

Having worked for the United States Government, I can assure you that the inspector in that factory was truly on the ball! Never met an inspector that would have made all of those checks, even in this computer age!

[@jrb_sland5066]

He was only doing it for the camera, I suspect. In a normal workday, I doubt more than one check per shell, rotating through the various gage rings... Sample testing is a commonplace these days.

[@oldgeorge1939]

Perhaps just done properly for the camera!

[@coyote5735]

He probably only checked one shell in ten in reality.

[@glendooer6211]

Amazing the number of precise machines they had in those days..

[@carmium]

Did you notice the constant flow of cutting fluid spewing everywhere? I wondered if the floor was gridded with drains that lead to filters and pumps for recycling.

[@Zonkotron]

@@carmium Either that or sieves and tanks included in each and every machine. Both schemes are common thoughout industrial history

[@accidentalheadclunkers8517]

Apparently, this facility made just over 20 shells during the war.

[@d.jensen5153]

It was a slow war.

[@rdallas81]

But at least they all worked

[@dacomazielsdorf7618]

@Robert Curtis wasn't our war

[@kezzler9556]

@Robert Curtis Why don't you shut up! Arguing about a war that ended more then 100 years ago, jeez.

[@kezzler9556]

@Robert Curtis Nice try, but I am norwegian.

[@glennkrieger]

So, I noticed the birds chirping outside my house. Nice.

[@bigdaz3903]

fantastic to watch, the amount of skill and workman ship is amazing

[@Nighthawke70]

My grandmother helped make 500lb gravity bombs at the Kansas Army Ammunition Plant.

[@Nighthawke70]

@rats arsed She was more troubleshooter than line worker, helping out in problem spots and keeping things running smoothly.

[@robertblake1032]

Bless her

[@robertw1871]

Thanks for not putting some horrible track in the background... beautiful.

[@ypaulbrown]

Outstanding... thanks so much for posting...we likey

[@LukasDubeda]

You can appretiate the technological advancements these days watching such videos. It's mind blowing. O_O

[@Pete856]

For all those who are saying it's such a waste of effort when it takes hours to make just 1 shell, and millions were used. Just remember that artillery was the biggest killer on the battlefield, so it makes sense to put your energy into making shells, as they might just win you the war.....and they did.

[@jamesm.taylor6928]

Well, shrapnel is the leading cause of death on the battlefield anyway. Artillery is just one of a couple things that produce shrapnel. In American and English forces, artillery, mortars, and hand grenades are the big 3. Where with German forces it's just artillery, and mortars. The famous, or infamous depending on your point of view, was not designed to produce any shrapnel.when it detonated. The potato mashed would kill through the explosion itself and concusive effects. America also produces a hand grenades of this type as well, simply known as the concussion granade, although not often used. Artillery is extremely useful for many things besides killing enemy forces in the open. It's large sizes can be used to destroy structures, bunkers, and as the Germans discovered Tanks and Armored vehicles. Aircraft were also added to the target list in war one as well. Another huge benefit of artillery is physcological. Enemy forces pounded for extended time periods have been known to suffer mental breaks. Even when that doesn't occur the enemy will be disoriented and suffer reduced clarity and reasoning skills. All these make a successful assault of enemy positions far more likely. These reasons above would easily justify the time and money spent on manufacturing the shells. Of course today, in modern times it's all automated and done in a fraction of the time, cost, and effort. There are several different materials used for the shell cases as well, from the good old steel.as shown here to cellulose, or paper, that produces no shrapnel.

[@randallmccorquodale3290]

The Company I work for made back knife lathes during World War 2 to turn rifle barrels. It was truly amazing how many were made during those years.

[@republish368]

That was a HUGE effort to make a BOOM :( Great video, thanks for sharing ;)

[@dav1099]

30:50 lerty-tighty, righty- loosey! great video, thanks for posting

[@clifftrader]

I wonder why they went with left hand hand threads...?

[@ncguyredneck]

@@clifftrader Probably due to rifling. RH twist rifling means you would need RH thread on the nose and LH on the base.

[@c.j.1089]

By God that gauge is going to fit this shell!

[@jamesb.9155]

Cast iron and a hell of a lot of precise work by so many working hands. Artillery shells burst into so many jagged pieces of high velocity, heavy cutting shrapnel, cutting troops to pieces across the battlefield.

[@alasdair4161]

Wow, I have the powder shell for one of those in my collection. I'd love to get hold of the projectile... so much effort put into consistent accuracy and QA. I guess a few thou oversize would jam and destroy the barrel and potentially kill everyone nearby, so it's well in their interests. What a great piece of historic documentary work.

[@AllisterCaine]

No, i dont think so. The driving bands are what create gas seal, so there is not such a need for high precision. and also not because these are artillery shells. they could easily machined for maximum safety without losing their purpose. But i am not an expert, i just know a bit about weapons.

[@alasdair4161]

@@AllisterCaine Makes sense when you consider the accuracy of the barrel boring process, however, I believe the stamping at both ends was done to trace misfiring or breach jamming shells back to the source, so accuracy was probably in their best interest anyway.

[@Urbicide]

There has to be consistency, so that accuracy is retained.

[@drewthompson7457]

Has anybody read of "creeping barrages"? I'm not an expert, but shell accuracy likely had something to do with this.

[@HaqqAttak]

@@drewthompson7457 Also walking barrage. That has to do with troops advancing and not the shells missing. You might be thinking of bracketing fire on warships. Which has more to do with not having a perfect fix on enemy distance and direction.

[@NikovK]

7:15 That U-shaped hook's chain loop at the top just screams "hand-forged".

[@rob1248996]

I worked on torpedoes in the Navy. VERY precisely made. The problem is that you only have ONE chance to blow up the enemy. If it fails to work they then know who fired it.

[@ardvarkkkkk1]

Notice the cordless screwdriver at the end?

[@potatosalad5355]

"Belly" power!

[@riccardoscavo8485]

Yeah I've got one dates back to the 50s. It's ever ready, never need recharging

[@youldhead4017]

I have one in my garage and sometimes I use it. From my grandfather :)

[@NikovK]

I use mine to bore holes in heavy wood beams. They are genuinely fantastic tools.

[@4n2earth22]

I run one of them a'plenty when I was a kid.

[@NathanOkun]

What the video calls an "adaptrr", the US Navy calls a "base plug" to seal the explosive-filled cavity bottom, with an adapter meaning a fuze-holding threaded conical nose ring that can be swapped out aboard ship to allow the use of different kinds of nose fuzes (or even no nose fuze in some HC shells), including fuzes designed for other kinds of shells if the rings have the upper end threaded to hold those.,

[@mmi16]

So much work for a single use product!

[@Erik-rp1hi]

This was a well made "how its made" film.

[@philandrawis6232]

like the vertical milling machine its amazing that they used it 80 years ago

[@skipd9164]

In 1978 during summer break i got my first machinist job. Cutting stock to length, the milling parts to length also lathe work. The job was in a building that use to make shoes. A lot of the buildings were old shoe factories. Lynn Massachusetts and they burned during the great lynn fire 1981 or 82. I got to run old belt driven machines fo my type of work. All others had Bridgeports and other modern machines

[@craigslistrro709]

All that fine craftsmanship, just to blow it up...

[@AndrewTubbiolo]

The efforts and ends we'll go to in order to kill each other. Great video, as an amateur garage manual and CNC machinist I can really appreciate the skill and effort of these shops. Voting populations made up of workers who do this kind of work have a much more mature outlook on what to expect from the world. These people understood the world they lived in.

[@sbell2496]

I toured that factory in the 1983/4 timeframe as a class trip in Welding. At that time it was owned and operated by O&K. How is that for irony? Amongst other things, they were making armoured personnel carriers and repairing the Tundish for the Stelco McMaster Works Slabcaster. It was demolished to build Condos in the late 1990s.

[@vancouverman4313]

Condos, that's the essence of Canada now.

[@bouyant8659]

RIDICULOUS AMOUNT OF WORK FOR A PROJECTILE.. WOW!

[@rodrigomeneses5900]

Awesome the technology for those times. The proceeds almost same this present

[@johnnyfannucci]

You knew you were being blown up by quality

[@gregsummerson6524]

Those cutting tools are a work of art, they were made of tool steel and had to be resharpened often, nowadays they have tool holders with replaceable inserts of carbide or ceramic.

[@backho12]

Yes, I was waiting for the carbide inserts and the constant surface feet feature! That pitifully slow rpm!

[@77gravity]

31:25 Base threads are left-handed, presumably due to rotation of the shell when fired.

[@maitai1133]

I noticed a left-handed thread op as well. Good catch.

[@MichaelClark-uw7ex]

Yep.

[@bearbuster157]

Notice left-hand thread in shell base. I'm guessing it is to prevent unscrewing when fired though rifled barrel.

[@altheliterate]

I wonder if you can get one of the forgings? Preferred without explosive content. I have just the spot in my shop.

[@higgydufrane]

I didn't see how they installed the copper driving band (for engaging the rifling in the barrel). It was just on it suddenly. Also, who fills it with explosive and what type of explosive? Inquiring minds and all that....

[@jaewok5G]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/l2iVZZaIhK-kiaMm53s

[@mytmousemalibu]

I would have like to have seen that too. It could have been by thermal shrink fit or more likely swage'ed in place so it had a good bite into the wave bands machined into the body. No doubt that is why the wave bands are done so that upon firing the rifling engraves the driving band and it transmits the rotation to the shell body without slipping. I have some 30mm, 57mm and a fired/recovered 75mm shell(s). The 75mm has a well engraved band but it also has mark visible on what was in the grooves of the rifling that look like it was stake'ed. What ever the method is, it must be pretty solid so it doesn't slip!

[@nathansmith5229]

looked like crimping marks on the band to me

[@TheRobbiUno]

My exact same question 😁

[@gerrycrisostomo6571]

The size, weight and thickness of the shell, the quality in the way it was meticulously manufactured and the process required to ensure accuracy suggest that these shells were used for naval guns of either the destroyer or cruiser type ship.

[@ke6gwf]

These were for howitzers, so field artillery, pulled by horses.

[@jacquesmorin2207]

They're howitzer shells, therefore destined for ground forces.

[@rosewhite---]

7:50 and 10:00 dual direction lathes are useful.

[@maitai1133]

What a great vid.

[@jimburg621]

cool hats, long work shop coats, no safety glasses, whats gloves? Really cool video, with awesome machinery.

[@bluetoad2001]

everybody looks at the camera while coming through the gate. i bet the camera operator or director told the employees not to look at the cameramen but they all looked. lol

[@Darthilandia]

Thank you

[@peterhunt1968]

That’s one heck of a lot of work to make one shell

[@cluideman]

The man with the hand tap threading the nose got knocked out with the bar handle every 20 minutes for two and one half minutes

[@onemoremisfit]

18:40 Dress for the job you want, not the job you have.

[@smeercat]

I have been on the range and watched 8inch come in. Big boom! Would not want to be on the receiving end of one.

[@AdamBakerBaker]

Love the old footage, but was scratching my head trying to add up Canada + WW1 + Howitzer + 8". Here's what I came up with: Most likely produced for the UK as I don't believe the Canadians used Howitzers during WW1 and they were quite the bedfellows back in the day. The round was used for the Howitzer Mk 1-5. Depending on your source, it's referred to as 203mm or 8". and appears to have been used exclusively by the UK during WW1. The only other reference to that size shell for a Howitzer would be WW2 and used by he US and the Soviet Union. The 8" shell also comes up for the M110 tank which came on the scene in the early 60's(Vietnam era). Union Jack in the last half second of the video is quite telling as well. Hope this helps. Feel free to bust my chops if I got it wrong. Enlightenment is a wonderful thing...

[@antonrudenham3259]

Everyone used howitzers in WW1, these 8" rounds are for the British Vickers 'BL 8" howitzer', a modern design and widely used by the non French Entente powers back then, some of them even saw service in WW2. The shell weighed 200lb and could reach out to c13,000 yards which means they were extensively used for counter battery work. But this is an excellent video isn't it, the time and trouble taken to knock out such things in their millions is incredible.

[@joandodds7626]

ANTON RUDENHAM How times may have changed , a 3D printer perhaps could replace how many workers??

[@patrickroeill8746]

Work in a production machine shop in the late 70s and wasn't much different than this.I remember one run was firing pin for M 60.osha wasn't around yet lol

[@dedos-pima]

Those long sleeves so near that rotating chuck...no mercy when it caches...none at all.

[@devilsoffspring5519]

Damn, if I put this much work into making something, I want to enjoy it for years. Humans are never quite as creative and productive as they are when they're being destructive!

[@exJacktar]

So many steps and excellent QA!!!

[@tomrisar5492]

The 1917 cost of the 8" shell ready to go into breech must have been outrageous.

[@MichaelClark-uw7ex]

They were probably paying the workers in company store script or if real money,about 50 cents per day.

[@markmcdermott8307]

Greetings. I believe war time costs for manufacturing would not be that bad. Remember this is when the "assembly line" was really getting its' act together. See how well the "product" flows from one station to the next? Each Master Machinist performed ONE job, then sent it down the line to the next station. I was amazed how expert each tech was, even the guy nailing the ammo box together with the shell did it in a certain way. I love precision!! Did you catch the wave cut??? Now was that impressive or not???This is NOT computer guided like today with CAD or the new way. This is pure talent with experts who knew exactly how to run those lathes! Sooooo cool!! As an old welder I can appreciate everything I saw in the film and wish we had so many that cared what they did with pride of a JOB WELL DONE, NOT THE "GOOD ENOUGH" ATTITUDE. The 8 inch shell was the largest shell the U.S. produced with it's own brass, anything larger was just a projectile and lots of powder behind it!!

[@bdv861]

@@markmcdermott8307 I can't find any references to an 8" howitzer shell being used with a brass casing and not powder bags. Do you have a link?

[@crazybob1954mo]

@@markmcdermott8307 AND when was the last time you saw machine workers wearing a collar shirt and a tie.?? LOL

[@direbearcoat7551]

@@crazybob1954mo 1917?

[@fairstnaimelastenaime1346]

I'd love to know the coolant/lubricant composition

[@tinkermccardle7393]

Old one eye John was the photographer! No safety glasses!

[@rosewhite---]

Shells have to be made of good tough steel to contain the exploding explosive until it reaches maximum pressure to give the biggest blast and most deadly effective shards of case.

[@ianonymous3803]

Well that's nice.

[@TaintedMojo]

The explosive reaction is faster than the conduction speed of sound through the steel, it’s strength has litle effect on the size of the explosion. It needs to be tough to survive the 50,000 Gs of acceleration.

[@rosewhite---]

@@TaintedMojo Quote: 'Explosives do damage by burning quick and the resulting gas expanding rapidly in a pressure wave. If the charge is contained or restricted, the pressure builds and you have an explosion when the strength of the container is exceeded.' Think about grenades.

[@briand6671]

Quote: Explosive Shells have to be made of good tough explosive steel to contain the exploding explosive until it explodes maximum explosion to give the biggest explosive blast and most explosive deadly explosive shards of exploding case.

[@briand6671]

@@ianonymous3803 yes, isn't that nice?

[@paulrichards2713]

I was in an Eight Inch unit fired tons of those shells in the 60’s

[@mytmousemalibu]

Surprised they still had ordinance that old in arsenal in the 60's. Theres horrific stories about old unpredictable ordinance causing problems that arise with old explosives becoming sensitized and such. Did you use the old stuff in actual combat or training range fodder?

[@fall22123]

Pretty cool seeing how they machined these over 100 years ago. Nowadays, it could all be done in 1 machine, start to finish, except the forging. I'm guessing you could spit one out in less than 10 minutes.

[@lukeingram7655]

I'm not so sure about that, things like lathe cutting steel can only be done so fast due to heat & chatter, no doubt it's been sped up but I'd guess the biggest reductions would be in manpower as opposed to time.

[@josaljo1]

Very nice video.

[@keepingitreal6793]

The scene of staff exiting the office, reminds me of clowns getting out of Volkswagen Beatle. They just keep coming and coming...lol 😂

[@robertleigh559]

I started to wonder if they weren't all doubling around the back and coming through again!

[@rlewis1946]

Thank you for preserving this important documentary film. It is a 102 year old record of Canadian men and women contributing to the WW1 war effort. Thank you for your service! As to the date of this film, as question in the title, (1917?), at 51:07, a closeup of the shell’s base “Adapter” shows the following stamped markings prior to boxing: 8 in HOW V F S 19 1 17 DY JB&S So this shell was stamped manufactured, January 17, 1917. The Adapter used a left hand thread to attach it to the shell body. 42:28. Does any one know why? RL Buffalo, NY

[@asdonut]

Probably so it is opposite to the rifling in the Howitzer barrel- stops it unscrewing when fired.

[@rj4590]

@@asdonut Yep,there's a lot of torque when the shell's rotating band takes the lands right hand twist when fired.

[@scottsummers819]

They also did some turning on the adapter after it was installed, this is naturally a right handed operation so it would help with that also (it wont undo whilst turning).

[@carlbukowsky1931]

Usually day, month, year so it's 19 January, 1917....just too OCD to let that slide. :)

[@theworknet]

@@carlbukowsky1931 Good point. And while the film was shot in 1917 it could have been 1918 by the time it was completed and released.

[@brianjohnston9822]

Wouldn’t want to be the government inspector, that is a lot of work

[@alaric_]

To be fair, they really didn't use that much time on every shell. There simply was not time. Spot checks have been industry standard on anything except barrels which are each test fired. Faults are noticed later down the line and then the checks get more intensive and government starts to cut the money. For example, the checks on the inside, very rare to get anything left on the inside and very little effect if there is. It just needs to hold the explosive when poured in and be thick enough so it doesn't burst while firing. The manufacturing speeds were ramped for the WW2 and they would have even less time run with calibers around every single shell they made...

[@tonybletas930]

The care, effort and infrastructure employed in the service of killing human beings is astounding! Oh, and the profits aren't too bad either.

[@testplmnb]

business is a business.

[@terrygilmour1876]

War , legalized mass murder on an industrial scale .

[@mugsymegaton3769]

And safety glasses hadn't even been invented yet!

[@Valchrist1313]

@NickoLps No, no Nazis in 1917, but anarchists and communists had recently assassinated a US President, and were murdering thousands in coups and terrorist attacks around the world.

[@NikovK]

Who needs safety glasses when safety squints are built-in to the Mk I Eyeball!

[@FoFoxhound]

NickoLps We don’t want your input Mr Edgelord. Years of work safety saved a lot of lives.

[@mugsymegaton3769]

It was a joke you moron!

[@mugsymegaton3769]

Who you calling a Nazi? it was a joke, what are you, sensitive? Everyone wears safety glasses nowadays, lighten up!

[@miikapekk5155]

Look at one of those artillery shells and imagine right now somewhere in northern France its fragments are buried & rusting, so much effort lost forever!

[@bastardtubeuser]

Brilliant.

[@tomwilliam5118]

I wonder how many we're being made at one time. there had to be more than one assembly line or producing line by the number of employees that were leaving the building

[@G53X0Y0Z0]

The way they used to make large volumes of parts was with a lot of redundant machines and employees.

[@joandodds7626]

Do yourself a favour and get out of the house... go to a manufacturer...while they are still around!

[@brentbarnhart5827]

They labeled it OFFICE (so that everybody knew that it was the OFFICE). I like clarity, that sums it up. If the wife comes and checks to see if you went to the "OFFICE" she can look up and see the sign, as you walk in. And think, "well, damnit, HE DID go to the office, I love that man."

[@williamdmason9375]

Silence is Golden 👍

[@johnmehaffey9953]

My mums job in WWII was in a munitions factory filling shells and said most of the girls suffered from headaches caused by the shells filling don't know the exact explosives that were inserted but mum said that different uses used different types of explosives these girls are the forgotten ones of industry during the conflict

[@Romanov117]

It's caused by toxic fumes, since Safety regulation within the early-modern period of Industry was still on it's infancy and working industry is far more harder back then than now.

[@2fathomsdeeper]

@@Romanov117 It's from nitrates. Most will go transdermal. Had a lot of that at Badger AAP from handling nitrocellulose propellant grains for 2.75" rockets, and TNT.

[@masterofrockets]

6:14 can you even imagine the screaming?

[@jackdarbyshire5888]

Satisfaction 😋

[@schnarre0]

...Canadian industry at its finest!

[@theyarehere8919]

You are so right. It all went downhill after that.

[@ffjsb]

Oskar Schindler never made shells this precise.

[@jostouw4366]

He had an agenda!

[@cojones8518]

Smoke Break Time for Complete Operation Seven and one-half minutes

[@WifeBTR123]

Ok, does everything take 7 and 1/2 minutes?

[@joandodds7626]

Yes, absolutely EVERYTHING took 7-1/2 minutes to make.... that’s why they came out with the metric system...and porn...now they can make children in less time!

[@BillKinsman]

Hard to believe that it takes so many steps to finish one.

[@noosebrother]

ah olden times, where everybody, and i mean everybody, wore a hat.

[@habddz]

during those times, hat gives defence and dexterity stats. so its useful to have

[@alaric_]

Don't forget the safety tie. Absolutely mandatory and necessary for the war effort!

[@ccserfas4629]

Ya but no safety glasses