Talk:Four-forty

Was the calibre size specifically in millimeters, or could it use the Imperial system? 440mm seems way too large for just a piece of artillery.  Specops306 ,  Kora 'Morhek  03:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The Paris Gun from world war one use a 210 mm shell. So since this is 500+ years in the future I can't find it hard to have a gun like that. --KDP3 00:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

And upon examination, I notice that the Paris Gun was actually a failure. But that wasn't my only point. Was it a specific figure, or just an estimate? And which measurement system was it in, if it was specific?  Specops306 ,  Kora 'Morhek  03:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I just checked Ghosts of Onyx, and all I can find is a reference to "Four-Forties". No calibre. Is anyone going to hunt me down and disembowel me if I rename it to Four Forty Artillery?  Specops306 ,  Kora 'Morhek  04:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Is it possible that when the Marines call it a Four-Forty, it's a direct translation to the size, making it 4.40mm. Still small for artilery, but again if the driver of the shot was powerful enough, it's possible. User:Merc 354

Merge
Should this article be merged with .440 Artillery?

Yeah I agree --66.229.35.146 07:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

from darkelf2x1

 * doesnt .440 seems a bit small for artillery
 * the explosions were big enough to make them wonder if it was an archer missile, either way it was a big explosion

Both are true. Unless it was a railgun, in which case it is the speed, rather than the size, of the projectile that gives it its force.  Specops306 ,  Kora 'Morhek  00:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking at this the wrong way?
Well, we're assuming that 440 refers to round size. What if it is the model number? PumasAreReal My PageMy EditsMy Movie

Is it really implausible to have 440mm artillery?
WWII era Iowa-class battleships used 406mm guns, and the Japanese Yamato-class battleship used 460mm.