Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CTV News)   "Uh, yeah, 911? This is the museum down the road, we've got a couple of WW2 artillery shells on display here and we're not sure if they're live. Can you help us?" 911larity ensues   ( ctvnews.ca) divider line
    More: Stupid, World War II, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, war-time shells, explosive disposal unit, st. john, Newfoundland museum, Police  
•       •       •

5591 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Oct 2017 at 2:18 PM (5 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



45 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
5 days ago  
I guess I missed the hilarious part.
 
5 days ago  
Some WW2 shells were found, the authorities were called, and it was dealt with...classic Fark-worthy story!

img.fark.net
 
5 days ago  
Well that headline bombed.
 
5 days ago  

blatz514: I guess I missed the hilarious part.


The part when nothing happened.
 
5 days ago  
The headline was longer than the story...
 
5 days ago  
img.fark.net

Bugsy checked them out
 
5 days ago  
That article was 4 sentences. And contained absolutely no information. Like Why did the museum call? Did someone bring them in to be put on display? Have they been an exhibit in the museum for years and suddenly someone thought they might be live? This comment is longer than the actual article.
 
5 days ago  
Those wacky Canadians and their harebrained antics. Keep up the good work!
 
5 days ago  
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
5 days ago  
Subby's reaction to this going green...

img.fark.net
 
5 days ago  
img.fark.net
 
5 days ago  
img.fark.net
 
5 days ago  

Sand Man: That article was 4 sentences. And contained absolutely no information. Like Why did the museum call? Did someone bring them in to be put on display? Have they been an exhibit in the museum for years and suddenly someone thought they might be live? This comment is longer than the actual article.


If a Newfie had written it, the story would have been longer than War and Peace.
 
5 days ago  
FTFA: An explosive disposal unit was brought in to help with the removal of the shells. Police say they were taken away and disposed of.

Benny Hill Theme
Youtube MK6TXMsvgQg
 
5 days ago  
You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.
 
5 days ago  
I can understand people's apprehension about having live ordnance around, but is there any cases where a live shell has just exploded while sitting in a room? I mean these things were designed to be transported and handled. Do primers just decay and randomly activate?
 
5 days ago  

R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.


Or you could just give it a few good smacks with a hammer.
 
5 days ago  

R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.


your bomb-squad nickname would be lefty
 
5 days ago  

blatz514: I guess I missed the hilarious part.


You just don't understand British humour.
 
5 days ago  

johnny_vegas: R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.

your bomb-squad nickname would be lefty


Why don't you just hit it to see if it sounds hollow?

I know.  My bomb-squad name would be That Guy What's Dead.
 
5 days ago  
OK then.
 
5 days ago  
DNRTFA
I just assume the cops showed up in a tank, killed everyone in a two block radius, and burned the place down.
I also assume the article tells me where I can make donations to help the officers deal with the trauma they suffered.
 
5 days ago  
I think I dozed off during the fun...any part?
 
5 days ago  

ds615: DNRTFA
I just assume the cops showed up in a tank, killed everyone in a two block radius, and burned the place down.
I also assume the article tells me where I can make donations to help the officers deal with the trauma they suffered.


No. This didn't happen in the US.
 
5 days ago  
I think we need a Canada tag. It seems their sense of humor is somewhat lacking, or just nonexistent.
 
5 days ago  

ds615: DNRTFA
I just assume the cops showed up in a tank, killed everyone in a two block radius, and burned the place down.
I also assume the article tells me where I can make donations to help the officers deal with the trauma they suffered.


img.fark.net
 
5 days ago  

GodComplex: I can understand people's apprehension about having live ordnance around, but is there any cases where a live shell has just exploded while sitting in a room? I mean these things were designed to be transported and handled. Do primers just decay and randomly activate?


Even if it is unlikely to explode sitting there, what if someone bumps it and knocks it over? Sure, it is designed to withstand that, but that was seventy odd years ago. Have the explosives become less stable or the safeties rusted away?

All in all better off not finding out.
 
5 days ago  

ds615: DNRTFA
I just assume the cops showed up in a tank, killed everyone in a two block radius, and burned the place down.
I also assume the article tells me where I can make donations to help the officers deal with the trauma they suffered.


Assuming the weight hasn't changed over time due to rusting or other things. And that it doesn't have a filling to match the weight of the explosive.

When dealing with explosive devices, I am happy to be over cautious.
 
5 days ago  

blatz514: I guess I missed the hilarious part.


It wasn't hilarious...  it was 911larious.
 
5 days ago  

dywed88: Even if it is unlikely to explode sitting there, what if someone bumps it and knocks it over?


i.imgur.com
 
5 days ago  
subby:
Judge Smails "Well, We're waiting"
Youtube VQFxmAdyKcg


When does the hilarity start?
 
5 days ago  

morg: blatz514: I guess I missed the hilarious part.

You just don't understand British humour.


This happened in Canada you dolt!
 
5 days ago  

bratface: morg: blatz514: I guess I missed the hilarious part.

You just don't understand British humour.

This happened in Canada you dolt!


Well! You are obviously not Canadian.
 
5 days ago  

Schmerd1948: bratface: morg: blatz514: I guess I missed the hilarious part.

You just don't understand British humour.

This happened in Canada you dolt!

Well! You are obviously not Canadian.


Why is that?
 
5 days ago  
Everybody's dumping on my headline today. No creativity, the lot of you - you have to imagine the reaction of the cops!!!  Hilarity!

/subby
 
5 days ago  

R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.


Even easier, check for indentations at the bottom if it is a QF type of shell (indentations indicate it has already been fired).  Check for holes in the propellant casing or shell (indicating that the explosive-containing part was drilled open, and the entire thing was submerged in water to dissolve the explosives). Check to see if the penetrator/shell part is loosely attached to the propellant casing (if loose, it had already been disabled, because fresh-from-the-factory is snug).   Check for any unsmooth crimping around the point where the penetrator/shell is attached to the propellant casing (again, indicating that it was disassembled and disabled).
 
AOW
5 days ago  
Back in the early 80s a French WW1 museum had a large mustard gas artillery shell on display until a visiting researcher who was a retired ordinanceman noticed that it was a live shell, complete with impact fuse, evacuations occurred,,,,
 
5 days ago  

rebelyell2006: R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.

Even easier, check for indentations at the bottom if it is a QF type of shell (indentations indicate it has already been fired).  Check for holes in the propellant casing or shell (indicating that the explosive-containing part was drilled open, and the entire thing was submerged in water to dissolve the explosives). Check to see if the penetrator/shell part is loosely attached to the propellant casing (if loose, it had already been disabled, because fresh-from-the-factory is snug).   Check for any unsmooth crimping around the point where the penetrator/shell is attached to the propellant casing (again, indicating that it was disassembled and disabled).


Just let a group of 12 year old boys play with it. If it has explosive/combustable potential greater than a wet rock, they will discover and exploit it within 3 minutes.
 
5 days ago  

rebelyell2006: R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.

Even easier, check for indentations at the bottom if it is a QF type of shell (indentations indicate it has already been fired).  Check for holes in the propellant casing or shell (indicating that the explosive-containing part was drilled open, and the entire thing was submerged in water to dissolve the explosives). Check to see if the penetrator/shell part is loosely attached to the propellant casing (if loose, it had already been disabled, because fresh-from-the-factory is snug).   Check for any unsmooth crimping around the point where the penetrator/shell is attached to the propellant casing (again, indicating that it was disassembled and disabled).


Yeah, in case it is live, I will leave those checks to professionals.
 
5 days ago  

Shryke: rebelyell2006: R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.

Even easier, check for indentations at the bottom if it is a QF type of shell (indentations indicate it has already been fired).  Check for holes in the propellant casing or shell (indicating that the explosive-containing part was drilled open, and the entire thing was submerged in water to dissolve the explosives). Check to see if the penetrator/shell part is loosely attached to the propellant casing (if loose, it had already been disabled, because fresh-from-the-factory is snug).   Check for any unsmooth crimping around the point where the penetrator/shell is attached to the propellant casing (again, indicating that it was disassembled and disabled).

Just let a group of 12 year old boys play with it. If it has explosive/combustable potential greater than a wet rock, they will discover and exploit it within 3 minutes.


Just make sure you get their admission payments before hand and have their parents sign away any rights to sue you.
 
5 days ago  

dywed88: rebelyell2006: R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.

Even easier, check for indentations at the bottom if it is a QF type of shell (indentations indicate it has already been fired).  Check for holes in the propellant casing or shell (indicating that the explosive-containing part was drilled open, and the entire thing was submerged in water to dissolve the explosives). Check to see if the penetrator/shell part is loosely attached to the propellant casing (if loose, it had already been disabled, because fresh-from-the-factory is snug).   Check for any unsmooth crimping around the point where the penetrator/shell is attached to the propellant casing (again, indicating that it was disassembled and disabled).

Yeah, in case it is live, I will leave those checks to professionals.


A visual inspection is very easy. And it is incredibly rare to find actual live shells in museums.  Two popular items are 40mm shells and 1.1-inch shells, with a practice shell attached to an already-fired casing, because they are small. Being overly cautious results in history being unnecessarily destroyed.
 
5 days ago  

rebelyell2006: dywed88: rebelyell2006: R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.

Even easier, check for indentations at the bottom if it is a QF type of shell (indentations indicate it has already been fired).  Check for holes in the propellant casing or shell (indicating that the explosive-containing part was drilled open, and the entire thing was submerged in water to dissolve the explosives). Check to see if the penetrator/shell part is loosely attached to the propellant casing (if loose, it had already been disabled, because fresh-from-the-factory is snug).   Check for any unsmooth crimping around the point where the penetrator/shell is attached to the propellant casing (again, indicating that it was disassembled and disabled).

Yeah, in case it is live, I will leave those checks to professionals.

A visual inspection is very easy. And it is incredibly rare to find actual live shells in museums.  Two popular items are 40mm shells and 1.1-inch shells, with a practice shell attached to an already-fired casing, because they are small. Being overly cautious results in history being unnecessarily destroyed.


We don't know the type of shell, be in a bofors shell, from a 25 pounder, or something even larger such as a ten inch coastal artillery piece (though I doubt it as the article sounds like it was easily moved).

We don't know the situation of the shell, was it in the museum for years? Did someone have it in their home? Did someone find it laying around recently?

We don't know the condition of the shell, was it like New or worn and battered? That could make visual inspection difficult.

But if we are dealing with decent five year old explosive devices, I am going to be damned careful. Sure an incident might be one in a million chance, but the implications are so severe that I will take precautions.
 
5 days ago  

dywed88: rebelyell2006: dywed88: rebelyell2006: R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.

Even easier, check for indentations at the bottom if it is a QF type of shell (indentations indicate it has already been fired).  Check for holes in the propellant casing or shell (indicating that the explosive-containing part was drilled open, and the entire thing was submerged in water to dissolve the explosives). Check to see if the penetrator/shell part is loosely attached to the propellant casing (if loose, it had already been disabled, because fresh-from-the-factory is snug).   Check for any unsmooth crimping around the point where the penetrator/shell is attached to the propellant casing (again, indicating that it was disassembled and disabled).

Yeah, in case it is live, I will leave those checks to professionals.

A visual inspection is very easy. And it is incredibly rare to find actual live shells in museums.  Two popular items are 40mm shells and 1.1-inch shells, with a practice shell attached to an already-fired casing, because they are small. Being overly cautious results in history being unnecessarily destroyed.

We don't know the type of shell, be in a bofors shell, from a 25 pounder, or something even larger such as a ten inch coastal artillery piece (though I doubt it as the article sounds like it was easily moved).

We don't know the situation of the shell, was it in the museum for years? Did someone have it in their home? Did someone find it laying around recently?

We don't know the condition of the shell, was it like New or worn and battered? That could make visual inspection difficult.

But if we are dealing with decent five year old explosive devices, I am going to be damned careful. Sure an incident might be one in a million chance, but the implications are so severe that I will take precautions.


I'm just pointing out what I would do if I were at that museum. I have examined artillery shells at a few museums in the past, including my current museum. Those examinations are simple and quick.
 
4 days ago  
FTFA: An explosive disposal unit was brought in to help with the removal of the shells. Police say they were taken away and disposed of. Geez, they were just trying to do their jobs...
 
4 days ago  

R.O.U.S: You'd think this would be relatively simple to figure out. Get a scale and look up the specs for how heavy a shell full of explosive should be. If it's lighter than that, no problem.


damnheroes.s3.amazonaws.com
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report