February 19, 2008
I didn't really take the whole weekend off...
...we did have a winter storm blow through that caused us to lose connectivity to the satellite. We got around 8 inches of snow in about 5 hours. The fluffy, heavy, wet stuff. Fortunately, it came with enough wind that it didn't build up too much on the trees, which haven't had a chance to recover from the ice storm yet.
Saturday, I did take off to get some work done 'round the Castle while the weather briefly permitted. That involved schlepping all the downed limbs from the ice storm of December and building a funeral pyre for them. It's green wood, so it took all day to burn the debris of the 6 trees in the immediate area, what with cutting them up and piling them on, and keeping the fire hot enough to burn green wood without too much smoke (it was all Chinese Elm).
Sunday, we got hit with the snow, and the temps were back in the teens. So, I worked on the Vickers guns in the basement.
I have two versions of the Vickers, the corrugated water jacket and the later smooth water jacket. I keep them (generally) in WWI configuration for the corrugated jacket gun, and WWII Indirect Fire configuration for the smooth jacket. Both are ex-Turkish guns. The smooth jacket sits in an Australian WWII tripod, the other in the original Turk tripod, which sits higher, and has provision for an anti-aircraft extension in the long leg of the tripod. Purists are gouging out their eyes already, as I've got mixed parts and bits from all the users of the Vickers - Brit, Aussie, Kiwi, South African, Canadian, and Indian, too. Part of the appeal of the gun to me is all the users, and the true interchangeability of the parts. Purists are also tearing their hair at the anachronism on the corrugated jacket gun as currently displayed... Let's see if there are any purists present who will point it out...
These particular guns are dummies made by Sarco. As such, they have thicker-than-original sideplates, and do not have the recoil plates installed. The reason for the thicker sideplates is so that the recoil plates *cannot* be installed, making it much harder to rework the guns into a shootable condition. They are also minutely longer than the original receivers, so that the locks will not come far enough forward to actually strip a round from the belt. The Vickers/Maxim locks (Vickers on the left, Maxim on the right in the linked picture) are fully capable of firing a cartridge without the cartridge being in the chamber. The firing pins on the locks have been nipped, so that they won't protrude through the lock - but since the locks can be removed, idiots and the ignorant could still get themselves in real trouble.
Another artifact of this particular ATF-approved design is that the maker didn't want to do to the extra effort to drill and tap holes for the "check lever," which is a prominent component of the Vickers gun. It served to help regulate the firing speed of the gun and to prevent the charging handle from moving too far when the gun starts to wear. Simply put, they didn't come with the guns. The guns were also missing the tripod stop (which was a Brit variation not present on the Turk guns). While all the other bits and pieces were present, some weren't in the best of shape, so I spent the day cleaning and repairing and doing some arranging in the display. I'm going to build some stepped shelves to put the gunners kits and platoon parts chest, etc, on.
So, I went digging into the bits and pieces I've been collecting for 11 years now (I started after SWWBO gave me the early version of the gun for Christmas before we got married) and spent a lazy afternoon epoxying on the check levers (after some judicious grinding off of two bosses that would have fit into the sideplate), cleaning up some rust that was starting to show through the paint, replacing water plugs that didn't have the heat resistant scales on them with ones that did. And more stuff like that. I'll behead some screws to put in the screw holes on the check lever mounting plates - because I'm too lazy to drill and tap, too.
I then swapped the WWII gun so that it faces the wall, and a visitor can see the dial sight and clinometer of the indirect fire configuration (as well as the gunner's end of the gun) and the WWI gun is facing the viewer, to give them access to that view. I then arranged a good chunk of the bits and pieces around (there's more, believe me) to add visual appeal and provide props when I drone on about the guns to unsuspecting visitors. Still plenty of work to do, but I thought I'd share a window into the slow progress on the Arms Room of Argghhh!
If you'd like a little closer a view, click here.
Oh, and if you'd like to own a shootable Vickers - there is one available right now. Aside from not being legal in Kansas (and because it's a sideplate gun, possibly not in Missouri, either - though an original would be), the price is one reason why I don't own any shooters.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Sarco, Cholly Steen's personal Joysey's fiefdom.
I used to source many toys from him.
by Boquisucio on February 19, 2008 11:25 AM
I was just emailing MGDave on some parts... fortunately for the budget, the thing I really wanted wasn't available any more...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 19, 2008 11:35 AM
Heh. Note to self. I might just have managed to drive away all the gun geeks. Usetabe a post like this would get 30-40 comments!
by
John of Argghhh! on February 20, 2008 8:14 AM
Well, how about an essay on the sideplates and recoil plates, with dimension drawings. And advice on how to set up the machine tools, and what to say to the nice BATFE man?
by
Justthisguy on February 21, 2008 12:27 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
July 12, 2007
Now that is one fine piece...
...of Brit- or Canadian-built pulchritude.
Yes, of course I mean that Bren Mark 1 sitting on the table. Geez, remember where you are, people! The home of the Armorer!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
John, that pic is smokin'!
by
Chuck Simmins on July 12, 2007 9:53 AM
izzn't that Julie Andrews??
by MajMike on July 12, 2007 10:39 AM
Lovely Gas Vented Humped Butt... on the Mk1 dat is
by Boquisucio on July 12, 2007 10:42 AM
I always wondered how the sights were arranged on that piece, what with the big magazine sticking up there.
by
Justthisguy on July 12, 2007 1:39 PM
I don't know what would upset squishy post-modern libs worse; the gun or the cigarette... ;)
John, how would you compare the Mk 1 to a BAR?
...found this on YouTube:
re-enactment of British Paras firing a Bren Mk 1.
by
Casey Tompkins on July 12, 2007 1:49 PM
JTG - the sights are offset to the left side of the piece.
Casey - I've never *shot* the Bren, only held it and schlepped it around a bit. I have fired a BAR.
For advancing fire, shooting from the hip, I would prefer the Bren if only for the pistol grip and it isn't quite as nose-heavy as the BAR.
That's said, of course, without ever having actually *fired* it from that position, only carried it.
I suspect in most other considerations it's a wash - though the 30 round magazines of the Bren vice the 20 round magazines of the BAR might be telling in a sustained fire role.
by
John of Argghhh! on July 12, 2007 3:32 PM
I've used one as a section gun, very very accurate weapon. I also top scored on my basic meaning I killed my snowman the fastest and started working over other peoples before getting bawlled out.
The Sgt used one like a rifle to clear the sheep before we started.
I've also seen a 90 year old North Africa vet shoot six figure targets off their sticks then be helped back into his walking frame. some things you don't forget how to do.
I've used the hard barrel SLR which is a more recent idea on the theme of the BAR and I'd prefer the Bren.
by Murray on July 12, 2007 6:09 PM
Oh, kewl, answers! :)
While I'm pestering people, I'll ask a question which has been bugging me for a while. Why didn't the US Army purchase Colt Monitors as their main rifle, instead of the M1 Garand? Or (at least) why didn't they buy the Monitor instead of the BAR? From what I've read, the Monitor is lighter, the compensator eliminated muzzle climb, and the thing was five pounds lighter than a BAR.
I suppose there are valid reasons why they didn't buy the Monitor which aren't obvious to the moderately-informed laymen such as myself, but the bloody thing even looks like an M-16 prototype! I keep wondering how things might have been different if our troops had a fully-automatic, 20-round per magazine rifle available, instead of the Garand, which I grant is still one of the classic designs of all time.
I'll say that the Garand is as nearly a work of art (for its milieu) as the Pennsylvania long rifle. Still, the Monitor seems superior.
So what am I missing? :)
by
Casey Tompkins on July 12, 2007 11:16 PM
Um, because the Monitor was a modified commercial BAR and the Army already *had* the BAR? It would have been simpler, to just arm everybody with a BAR... btw - have you ever *carried* a BAR? Suckers are heavy.
Total Weight of Rifle: 16 pounds, 3 ounces.
Weight of Filled Magazine: 1 pound, 10 ounces.
Weight of Compensator: 11 ounces.
Loaded Weight of Weapon: 18.5 pounds.
Length of Barrel: 18 inches.
Length of Rifle: 38 1/2 inches.
With Compensator, 42 1/2 inches.
Caliber: .30-06
Cyclic Rate of Fire: 500 rpm.
Aimed shots per minute: Semi-auto, 60.
Vice the M1:
Weight 9.5 pounds, loaded.
Weight With bayonet M1 and sling M1907 11.2 pounds, loaded.
Length: (over-all) rifle only 43.6 inches
Length (over-all) with bayonet M1 53.4 inches
Length of barrel 24 inches
The M1 weighed less, was slightly more accurate, and while I can't find any cost numbers, probably cost less, too.
Those would be some reasons, Casey.
by
John of Argghhh! on July 13, 2007 6:54 AM
Also there was a lot of resistance even to a semi automatic rifle in the hands of the troops for fear of excessisve ammo consumption. Check out "Hatcher's Book of the Garand" if you can find a copy. And a personal observation, while I've never fired the BAR, it is more difficult to shoot accurately with a weapon that fires from an open bolt.
by
Pogue on July 13, 2007 10:57 AM
I wasn't going to go into the whole "Ghost of Ripley" aspect of the thing - I hadda get posts up this morning!
by
John of Argghhh! on July 13, 2007 11:39 AM
Ooookay, that answers that question! :)
I was under the impression that the weight of the Monitor was suffciently lower than the standard BAR to make it preferable. I suppose not.
...So using the Garand took off 10 pounds, was much more wieldy, and was (probably) cheaper. Gotcha.
by
Casey Tompkins on July 13, 2007 2:15 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
May 21, 2007
Hee!
A couple of weeks ago, I was at the Dole Institute at Kansas University, where GEN (R) Myers, past Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, delivered the Dole Leadership Lecture. Follow the link if you're interested in that, this is just stage-setting.
While we sat in the lecture hall waiting for the crowd to arrive and settle in, as is my wont I was listening to the conversations around me. The students who come to these things are usually pretty political and motivated, so you can hear interesting stuff - to include civil conversations between liberal and conservative students.
A conversation behind me turned to the subject of firearms, with the usual earnestness associated therein.
So of course I had to interject myself. Mark, the very nice and polite student arguing for the Gun Banners, got my attention when he told his conversational adversary "We're just a few elections away from being able to confiscate all those handguns and rifles. We've already gotten the machineguns, we're going to get everything else, soon. Except maybe hunting guns."
I turned around at that point and asked - "Are you going to compensate me for them? Or just take them and tell me I should be happy I'm not in jail?" That startled him - mostly that someone else was listening, methinks. He stammered "Well, uh, yes, I guess we should have some form of compensation, er, um... " Clearly, he'd thought his nefarious plan through. I let that drop.
I countered with, "Why do you think you've 'gotten the machineguns'?" He responded, "It's illegal to own a machinegun in this country."
"No, it isn't. It's illegal in Kansas, to be sure, as the result of a law passed in 1934 because of something that happened in Missouri, between gangsters and Federal agents, two groups *unaffected* by the law, but it's not illegal federally to own a machinegun. In Missouri it's illegal to own a machinegun that is less than 50 years old or not on the NFA Curio and Relic list, but it's patently legal otherwise. In fact, come to think of it, in Kansas, it's technically legal to own a federally-recognized machinegun, too - just not one that is functional. However, registered DEWATs are legal, specifically exempted in the law. I assure you, sir - as a collector, I keep up with the law on the subject."
"No, no - I'm sure you're wrong. We banned [note the us of "we"] machineguns back in the 80's!"
Heh. "No, the law President Reagan signed in 1984 banned the manufacture of new weapons for sale to anyone other than governmental entities, or private security operations operating under a government mandate. It also "closed" the NFA registry to new additions. For example, the sub-machinegun Uncle Bill brought back from Korea but was never entered into the NFA registry. There was a two year 'amnesty' period where those weapons could be made legal, but after 1986 all you can do if you find one is call law enforcement and have them come pick it up, or make arrangements for an accredited museum to accept it. But it's still perfectly legal to own 'em. In fact, I can't remember Colorado's laws, but machineguns are legal in Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Nebraska, to name a few states around here. Been a lot of machineguns used in crime around here, too, huh?
Unable to argue from a position of knowledge, he essentially let the subject drop - though I'm sure he still had doubts. So, I open up email this morning and I find this, from JTG, which inspired this post:
Just the Thing for those Annoying Golfers.
Hi there!
See this: http://www.ccfa.com/MK19.htm
Snork.
All the best, Tregonsee [Aka, JTG].
Okay, I admit it. I want one. But not that badly. Danged expensive to feed, that monster.
In fact, those guys have *several* items of interest at the moment.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
I have to agree with you about the MK-19, nice, but expensive to feed. It is also one of the few weapons that you can see the actual projectile in flight and "walk" your rounds onto the target.
by
Jon The Mechanic on May 21, 2007 8:13 AM
I figure if I give up the luxuries; food, clothing and housing for the next 10 or 12 years I could afford it. Of course sales taxes would take another year or two and by then the wife would have left me. On second thought I think I'll give it a pass.
by
NevadaDailySteve on May 21, 2007 9:22 AM
So, Steve, by your timeline, it will take 12 or so years for your wife to leave you because of the deprivation... get another job, cut the whole thing to under a decade, you should be golden, right?
by
John of Argghhh! on May 21, 2007 9:31 AM
I just hit the link about the Union Station massacre and one of the names jumped out at me, one of the gunman was named Vernon Miller; the same as a former Kansas Attorney General. I remember when Vern Miller made headlines for arresting women who went into bars by themselves. It seems that Kansas had an old, unenforced statute on the books about unescorted women in bars that Miller decided to enforce. When he was criticized for it he said he didn't make the laws, he just enforced them. If people didn't like the law they should change it.
Here's a link to a 2002 story about him.
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2002/jul/14/the_attorney_generals/
by
NevadaDailySteve on May 21, 2007 9:34 AM
You think I could keep money away from my wife for even 10 days? You obviously don't know my wife. And I don't mean she spends it -- she socks it away for those luxuries I mentioned earlier. In addition to all else she does she's also Keeper of the Exchequer.
by
NevadaDailySteve on May 21, 2007 9:44 AM
NDS - there is an Armorer Family Connection to the Union Station Massacre as well. Frank Nash, the slain hood, grew up and lived across the street from my grandmother, and was known to the family. When the FBI was watching Nash on his visits home to Paragould, they would park in front of my grandmother's home.
While the events were separated by 60-some years, they both rest across the aisle from each other in the mausoleum of Linwood Cemetery.
by
John of Argghhh! on May 21, 2007 9:57 AM
Yes, Jon, and yer victim can see 'em coming, too, which is what makes it such a great terror weapon when one is feeling really cruel and grumpy. Only in my dreams, of course.
by
Justthisguy on May 21, 2007 10:55 PM
Not saying I only feel cruel and grumpy in dreams, just that I like to think I'm a rational grownup who controls his violent passions.
If you never have any violent passions, there's prolly something wrong with you, like maybe not enough Celtic or Cherokee genes, or something.
by
Justthisguy on May 21, 2007 11:14 PM
Did I read the price on that gun correctly?
450K - that's 450,000.00!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by
Beth on May 22, 2007 5:56 AM
Yes, dear. You read it correctly. It is the *only* one of those legal for civilian sales.
I predict it will sell, and at something close to that price.
by
John of Argghhh! on May 22, 2007 6:05 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
January 15, 2007
The Whatziss of a different color, answered.
If the title of this post makes no sense - start here.
You guys did pretty well. Chief Shaffer correctly id'd the Whatziss as a Colt M1895 "Potato-Digger" machine gun. He provided this link, too.
Sanger came in and offered up the Czech Legion, again correct. While he offered up a pay train - he was close, if obliquely. This was one of the trains that held some of the Russian gold reserves the Czechs found themselves in possession of... Good work, fellas.
The Czech Legion is an interesting story that I didn't know that much about. Rather than regurgitate it all here, I'll just give you this link to the Wikipedia entry and this link to The Czech Legion Project, which has a lot of photos.
Another thing I found interesting about the picture was the fact that all of the Maxim guns are Russian M1905's with the smooth waterjacket, vice the M1910's which had a corrugated jacket (and is the type of Maxim in the Castle Armory). But where I can tell, they are all on the later, type II style Sokolov wheeled mounts with shields, which were made without the extra legs seen in the photo below.
The M1905 is the gun in the rear. The legs of the Sokolov mount are extended. The M1910 is in front, with the legs folded for movement.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
oh, cool - we have a Sokolov mount. For Maxim!
by
Beth on January 15, 2007 1:47 PM
very cool post.
a forgotten moment of warfare, captured in time and revealed by your post. thanks for that!
by
MajMike on January 15, 2007 2:11 PM
Wow! ^^^^^^^^^^^ buttons ^^^^^^^^^^^^
The Czechs really do have a pround history, w/ a lot to brag about, including one of the oldest universities in Europe, the oldest Jewish Cemetary in Europe, a bridge built with egg-yolks for cement (Karlovy Most, Charles' Bridge), and etc. The country was free from 1918 until Hitler was given it, and had an interesting time. The first President was Tomas Masaryk, who declared Czechoslovakia's independance from the steps of Independence Hall. The Czech flag is Red, White and Blue because our's is. Czechoslovakia was one of the few Warsaw pact countries that had a citizenship treaty with the US (Czechs who became Aericans were no longer deemed Czechs and could travel there without fear of being conscripted.) Lot of other stuff. I was not aware of all the Czech Legion stuff until I started looking for the photos, but I'd heard about them--about the same time I learned about the extent of American involvement (a land Army!!) in Siberia at the end of WWI... Now THAT is an interesting read!
V/R
by
SangerM on January 15, 2007 4:55 PM
The arty pieces look like WWI Russian (75?), similar to
these, but I can't make out much detail... The Officer behind the far left gun (in the saucer cap) looks Russian. The second gun from the left looks broken (in full battery). Siberia?
by
SangerM on January 15, 2007 7:41 PM
Battle of Zborov.
1917, Ukraine.
by
John of Argghhh! on January 15, 2007 8:12 PM
So, the ribbing on the waterjacket was to increase surface area for convection then?
by ry on January 15, 2007 10:26 PM
Battle of Zborov.
Note sure if that's the answer to the arty picture or more Czech stuff, but it made me think some more about the Czechs.
1) Frank Zappa was a national idol, credited with being a primary inspiration behind the Velvet Revolution ... No kidding, I knew many Czechs who knew the lyrics to lots of Zappa's songs, and were always surprised to find we Americans didn't all love him too. This is an article about "The Plastic People of the Universe."..
"In January of 1990, just as the new democracy had begun, Frank Zappa flew to Prague at the invitation of Havel, one of his greatest fans. 5000 rock fans were waiting at the airport to witness the historic arrival of the famous American. A Prague film crew captured Zappa's arrival at the airport just as Shirley Temple Black, the former "good ship lollipop" girl, then the acting ambassador to Czech , was leaving. Mrs. Black was asked about her views on the distinguished Frank Zappa's visit. Czech citizens did not understand her horrified reaction to this question. Zappa met Havel at Prague Castle and presented the new president with several ideas on how to help Czechoslovakia move into the democratic age, such as cellular phones and tourism. Zappa was emotionally overcome upon meeting older fans of his who had endured beatings by the Secret Police for the sake of his music."
Link I knew people who felt that way about him. It was very odd...
2) The term ROBOT was coined by a Czech writer named Karel C'apek (Chapek) in a 1920 play titled R.U.R. (Rossums Universal Robots). He also wrote War with the Newts a classic of Science Fiction.
3) Saint Wenceslas is the patron saint of the Czechs. Yes, that Good King Wenceslas, of "Feast of Steven" fame. Duke of Bohemia (907-935).
There's lots more, but that's what I remember.
Oh, and every time I asked a Czech why they didn't fight back in 1968, the answer was always, "we survived." I guess they did.
by
SangerM on January 15, 2007 10:34 PM
Ry, the most common reason given for the fluting is strength. The water boiled, regardless, and the steam was taken off by the hose to the water can, where it condensed, the end of the hose being submerged in water in the can. The jacket was refilled from the can. Interestingly, the Germans never fluted their Maxims, the Brits started with fluting, and went to smooth (and a heavier jacket to make up for the strength loss, which was really popular with the troops... not) to save time and complexity in manufacture.
The Russians started out smooth, and went to fluted. During WWII they developed the "snow cap" which was a much larger hole in the top of the jacket so the troops could pack the jacket with snow.
Sanger - the Battle of Zborov in the Ukraine is a Czech Legion battle, and those guns are Legion guns - according to the picture source.
by
John of Argghhh! on January 16, 2007 5:42 AM
"Ry, the most common reason given for the fluting is strength."
I would've thought that the simple smooth jacket had more strength. Bending metal does things to the metal. And odd surface shapes, may, cause odd force vectors. I'm surprised that it's the other way. Is there a short answer for why the flutting was stronger?
by ry on January 17, 2007 2:39 AM
Ry,
Take a look at the following - it focuses on barrel fluting which doesn't really apply because the jackets are closer to corrugated metal than a mostly-solid barrel, but see the "Ridged Roof Analogy" subsection which discusses how thin metal is bent to add strength.
http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/RealBenefitsBarrelFluting.asp
The takeaway I had from the article (bear in mind I'm not a structural engineer and I would definitely check my comprehension) is basically that the metal strength is a quality of its thickness and the ridges turn the load-bearing aspect from the thickness of the material to the thickness/depth of the ridges - the same function as an I-beam where the strength is more related to the web between the top and bottom of the "I" and not the thickness of the steel making up the top and bottom.
by
XCavTrooper on January 17, 2007 8:35 PM
Thanks XCav.
by ry on January 18, 2007 7:12 AM
The same reason aircraft like the Ford Tri-Motor and Junkers 52 used corrugated skin, stronger, yet lighter overall.
One of the reasons you'll see holes in structural members is actually to provide points of stress relief, which makes them stronger without the weight.
by
John of Argghhh! on January 18, 2007 7:18 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
January 1, 2007
Some Armorer Zen...
061203-N-3560G-052 Fort Hunter Liggett, Calif. (Dec. 3, 2006) - Construction Mechanic 2nd Class Albert Guerrero of Naval Mobile Construction Battalion Four (NMCB-4) mans the M2 .50-caliber machine gun during field exercise Operation Bearing Duel. NMCB-4 is homeported at Naval Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme, Calif. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Ronald Gutridge (RELEASED)
Ah, night sights and a blank adaptor... kewl look on what may be the longest-serving machine gun design - the M2 traces back to 1918, when we took the German T-gewehr 13mm anti-tank round and made it into the 12.7mm round better known to most of us as the .50 cal. Sergeant B will be drooling over this pic.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Daytime. Kid should have the cover on the night sight, with the daytime holes open so he can use it.
Yes, I'm being nag.
by
Heartless Libertarian on January 1, 2007 10:28 AM
Don't forget the multiple services it has been used in. For a time it was used for the Navy's CWHIZ (See Whiz) Anti Aircraft systems. I think they have replaced most of them with a rocket type unit now, but I believe there's a few still floating around. Literally.
And of course the other numerous applications. Good Ol Ma Duece. Just remember to have that Charging handle discharged before you take off that butt plate :)
by
BloodSpite on January 1, 2007 10:50 AM
Dave - mebbe it was dark and the photog used a *really* good camera... 8^D
by
John of Argghhh! on January 1, 2007 11:01 AM
Not only is it the longest serving machinegun design, but the optic on top may not be far behind. I still had TVS-5's in my armory when I was company XO not long ago, the only times we cracked the cases were for serialized inventories.
by
Lightning on January 1, 2007 3:19 PM
We were actually using TVS-5s when we trained NG troops on light cav (HMMWV mounted) gunnery tables up until April 06.
And yes, they did work.
by
Heartless Libertarian on January 1, 2007 4:16 PM
Actually, I thought the CIWS(close in weapon system) was more like a 20mm gattling gun BlSp, http://navysite.de/weapons/phalanx.htm , which is still around.
Or are we talking about two completely different systems here?
by ry on January 2, 2007 12:23 AM
nice piece, but one would think that a Construction type unit would be able to dig a hole and put some overhead cover on it a wee bit more effectively than this depicts.
by
MajMike on January 2, 2007 7:36 AM
Well, we don't know how soon after occupation the picture was taken... and does anybody know the Hunter-Ligget rules? Lots of places don't allow you to make elaborate bunker/fighting hole positions out of environmental and safety concerns.
Well, at least they didn't. My experience in that regard *is* pre-war.
by
John of Argghhh! on January 2, 2007 7:53 AM
Same system Rye. My wonderful lack of a spellcheck and rudimentary Navy knowledge strikes me down again :)
Before CWIZ they used, and still used, manned .50 cal turrets, stand alone's, and nests in Navy and Coast Guard and a similar technology existed on B-52Gs and Hs (50 cal chain gun-radar guided)G models have 4 x 0.50 cal and H models have a 20mm rotary (but not a "chain gun" type unit) but it was not an automated system like the CIWZ. Hell even Canada has manual .50's HMG's on their ships ;)
As I understand it one of the initial conceptions for the CIWZ was the .50. They tried it out on the USS Bigelow around the year I was born. But then the Navy figured out they could stick a 20mm, (and now a 30mm gun) on the frame mount could take the vibration easily. More bang for the buck. The .50 never saw production but it got played with a lot in Norfolk until the Navy got wise and hauled it off to what ever scrapyard in the sky. (They used to set it beside a F4 training cockpit to get pilots in "the right frame of mind")
So yes your right.
But most of the newer systems are an inertial guidance phase CIWZ missile relies on infra-red, passive radar/ESM or semi-active radar terminal guidance (Sometimes called C-RAM with a 21 launcher tube, They also developed a land version which uses the Army LCMR, they mate it up to a AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder Radar and some times reffered to as LPWS ) and some of the really new systems are .30 caliber. But I can not confirm this, so its possible I'm completely wrong.
Goalkeeper, the UK/Dutch version, is also .30mm
Aside from that, Army has developed a newer platform called the Assault Weapons System, that includes the M2, an experimental turret-mounted, multi functional weapon system attached to a humvee. Ahh TRADOC....
Might be something worthy of you and John's expertise to check in to! :)
by
BloodSpite on January 2, 2007 8:16 AM
A Little Love for ya
by
BloodSpite on January 2, 2007 8:22 AM
John: true all, and it was probably the fault of a Red Cockaded Woodpecker or such...
i just loved the fact that Navy actually appreciates the manifest virtues of Mama Deuce, and i hadda find something to poke 'em about.
by
MajMike on January 2, 2007 9:17 AM
AH! I've been turned into bread! Quick, hide me from Cricket before she decides to make ham and ry sandwiches!;)
I'd heard a rumor of using Phalanx on land, but never heard anything about it in the span of two years. So I figured it was just a rumor. Nice to see that someone found a way to make it work. Now if only we could get enough dough to mount several of them at ever installation we have over there some people might start getting good nights of sleep.
by ry on January 2, 2007 4:53 PM
Ry - we covered that topic here at the Castle just under a year ago... you are forgiven for not remembering.
by
John of Argghhh! on January 2, 2007 6:51 PM
D'oh! (ashamed)
And please give a word of thanks to LvnCenturion from me John. My buddy Moran made/is making his way back, him being a Marine Fobbit running an electronics 'shop', because of guys like Lvn doing their utmost to protect Moran's behind. Excellent.
by ry on January 2, 2007 11:18 PM
*drool*
Yes, John, I'm drooling...
Now if we can get the Denizennes up to the firing line to shoot off a few belts...
...In bikinis...
by
Sgt. B. on January 2, 2007 11:51 PM
"...In bikinis..."
Well, I did make the Castle Argghhh! shooting bibs, of heavy weight but translucent polymer, after all.
by ry on January 3, 2007 11:24 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
November 21, 2006
The Sunday Whatzis, revealed.
Confused? Click here.
That's a bullet for the Nordenfeldt 1-inch anti-torpedo boat gun. The Nordenfeldt guns were an early type of machine-gun. Like the Gatling gun, they used multiple barrels and mechanical power to operate. Unlike the Gatling, the didn't last very long in the grand scheme of things, much less enjoy a renaissance when someone realized what electricity might accomplish when applied to the concept.
Here's a group of Brit tars training with one (though no feed hopper has been loaded).
The Nordenfeldt guns were developed between 1873 and 1878 and were very popular in Europe, especially amongst the sailors. They generally had four barrels in line horizontally and were fed by gravity-feed hoppers. You can see them with 5 barrels or as few as two. One advantage the Nordenfeldts had over the Gatling was that the mechanism was much easier to get to for the purpose of clearing jams. Plus, if the jam was too complex and the situation dire, you could simply disconnect the barrel and keep firing with the remaining barrels. Unlike the Gatling, which used a rotating crank to cycle the gun, the Nordenfeldts used a lever that was moved back and forth. I've seen both a lever in the vertical plane, on the left side of the gun, or a handle that moved in the horizontal plane, on the right side of the gun. The sailor on the left right (sigh, I suppose, in the future, I'll just submit all posts to CAPT H for editing before publishing) in the picture has his hand on the lever for this particular gun. The cyclic rate of fire was about 350 rounds per minute.
Here we can see some more sailors getting it on for the camera. This gun has its feed-hopper mounted.
All that flailing about did affect accuracy a bit, but heck, they weren't used as sniper weapons.
The Brit National Maritime Museum has a wonderful copyright protected (way too expensive to buy permission to use) photo of a 1-inch Nordenfeldt anti-torpedo boat gun right here.
The Ordnance Museum at Aberdeen Proving Grounds has a nice little four-barrel Nordenfeldt - which shows the lever nicely, too.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
now that is certainly an interesting little bit of bang stick.
by MajMike on November 21, 2006 8:27 AM
Interesting. It makes me think of harpoon. Is it based on the design or am i delusional again?
by
Trias on November 21, 2006 12:04 PM
So did the barrels fire sequentially or volley?
by Pogue on November 21, 2006 12:57 PM
Trias - as in a harpoon gun? Not really. Perhaps I don't understand the question.
Pogue- they fired in sequence.
by
John of Argghhh! on November 21, 2006 3:06 PM
Before the "progressives" took over, the Melbourne Museum (Australia) had quite an impressive firearms gallery. The Nordenfeldt in the collection took pride of place at the entrance to the gallery, and was able to be touched and operated. Thousands of children must have put millions of imaginary rounds in defence of Her Majesty's Victorian Ships through that weapon.
by
SezaGeoff on November 21, 2006 4:42 PM
Ooh, the Museum still has it - even if it is spelt wrong. Go to Nordenfeldt and click on the pictures for a larger image.
P.S. ours is nicer than yours (snark) - is that because it is squid equipment?
by
SezaGeoff on November 21, 2006 4:55 PM
"The sailor on the left ..." hmmm, looks like what sailors would refer to as "... to starboard".
Tsk
Cheers
[Oh, feh, I fixed that in the version that got... dumped.]
by J.M. Heinrichs on November 21, 2006 5:59 PM
Interesting note.
The guy who brought back all the Martini rifles from the Armory in Napal also found a couple of twin-barreled Nordenfelt guns there(not to mention a pile of other interesting boomenshooters).
by emdfl on November 21, 2006 8:50 PM
Geoff - I rather think the one at the National Maritime Museum in Blighty is nicer than yours... all that gleaming bronze.
As for the condition of ours - yep, we took (and at many museums, still take) crappy care of things like this.
Especially at Army Museums. The Navy and Air Force, with all that flight pay to draw on, have much better private support than us dumb grunts.
by
John of Argghhh! on November 21, 2006 8:51 PM
Oh, and the middle picture? HMS Cerebus, which might ring an Ozzie bell...
by
John of Argghhh! on November 21, 2006 8:54 PM
Oh, and the middle picture? HMS Cerberus, which might ring an Ozzie bell...
Though I got the picture elsewhere, it's there on that site, too.
by
John of Argghhh! on November 21, 2006 8:54 PM
Interesting about the Cerberus picture, because I had a thought that the 4 barrel may have been from Cerberus, but most of the data indicates that they were 2 barrel 1-pounders. I also wondered about the long barrel in the background as it originally had no secondary armament, but some sources list a pair of QFs added later. Wiki has timelined armament specs.
by SezaGeoff on November 22, 2006 5:41 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
November 15, 2006
Random thought from yesterday.
Fuzzybear Lioness linked to this breathlessly reported threat to public safety yesterday: Bullet Found In Doorway!
Bullet found in doorway
By David Williams
LETHAL: The .22 calibre bullet found in Walthamstow High Street on a market day morning (D6W1001)
LIVE ammunition has been found lying in the doorway of a busy high street shop.
The .22 calibre short round bullet was found at the entrance of the 99p Stores in Walthamstow High Street on Wednesday morning, November 1.
Haroon Khan, who has a firearms licence and is a member of a local gun club, was alarmed to discover live ammunition in a Walthamstow doorway.
The bullet, of Swiss origin, was still in its brass casing, complete with enough gunpowder for it to fire itself.
Heh. Thrice-damned Swiss! Leaving their ammunition laying around like that.
What struck me as funny was the breathless nature of the reportage. Parking your old junker on a hillside and forgetting to set the parking brake is quite possibly more dangerous - but wouldn't get reported that way. Of course, in England, with their gun laws, something like that is cause for alarm to their budding police state, but that's a different post. I was just struck by (Have I mentioned this?) how, well, breathless the reportage was, to my ear at least.
To put that in context, yesterday morning I got out of bed at 5AM to put the dogs out, feed the cats, make coffee and then come here to feed you guys. I stepped on a bullet. A nice, shiny, 1944 dated .303 round. One of four I found on the floor. I picked 'em up, and took 'em to the living room, where they belong, with the others (okay, I just said that for effect - the Castle Vickers, which went junketing this past weekend needs to be staged back into the Arsenal, and is in it's assembly (actually disassembly) area. No, we don't entertain much.
Anyway, the day before yesterday, the nice man delivered a package to the house, containing a 1944-dated Vickers belt (where the ammo on the floor came from), and a 1950's era disintegrating-link Vickers belt (visible in the post below), and some other artifact ammunition. And night before last was spent watching television with SWWBO while I re-belted the WWII ammo (those dang belts were dang hard to load, but once loaded, they get all loose and this one dropped a boat-load of rounds, and it takes a while to hand-load a 250 round belt of ammo. Besides, I needed to inspect 'em all to make sure they were in decent shape, right? You mean it isn't like this in every home?
Regardless, I just found it amusing to be reading that story in the morning after stepping on loose rounds in the bedroom the morning after having spent the evening before belting machinegun ammo for the Vickers...
I also had a bunch of loose rounds, which found their way into the Turkish aluminum Vickers belt - though, s'truth, they should be 8mm rounds, that being the caliber the Turks used in their guns. But Doesn't the mix of steel, brass, copper, and aluminum make for a pretty picture?
I'll hafta keep an eye on 'em for signs of dissimilar metal corrosion. The aluminum links are actually pretty fragile - one reason you don't see a lot of them around any more.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
LOL! Too funny. Note to self: when Brits visit, hope they don't snoop in closets, they might find my *toys* ;)
by
Laurie on November 15, 2006 9:52 AM
Hmmmm.. sounds to me like Laurie has a "silver bullet" in her closet, as opposed to John's brass ones....
hmmmmmm
BUZZZZZ
by
WereKitten on November 15, 2006 9:59 AM
They'd be shocked to know that my wife used to keep a couple of 7x61 S&H rounds in her office desk drawer. Their arrival in her desk coincided with an abrupt halt in the day to day petty theft that had been going on for weeks. Coincidence I'm sure.
I would have loved to see the look on the thief's face when he reached into the drawer and came up with those.
by
hdw on November 15, 2006 11:04 AM
John,
You need to pick up a loader / unloader for your belt-fed toys. Assuming there's one that will work with enough of them to be worth having, of course.
I think I saw one on K-Var's website one time when I was getting goodies for my PSL (Romanian variant of the Russian Dragonuv sniper rifle). The 7.62x54R rounds from it look quite impressive if you leave them lying about. Much bigger than the 7.62x39 for the ever-indulgent wife's AK.
Oddly, we don't have many vistors either.
by KCSteve on November 15, 2006 12:35 PM
Actually, Steve, I have a loader for the M1919, Maxim, and RPD. I haven't been able to score a loader for the Vickers that where my budget matched the asking price.
I keep meaning to see if the Maxim loader will work...
by
John of Argghhh! on November 15, 2006 1:42 PM
taken from http://www.theothersideofkim.com
A woman was released from the hospital a day after she was shot in the head six times in an attack police blamed on her ex-husband, Brazilian media reported Saturday.
Patricia Goncalves Pereira, a 21-year-old housewife, was shot Friday after an altercation with her ex-husband, who was upset because she refused to get back together with him, Globo TV reported.
“I know this was a miracle,” Pereira told the TV network. “Now I just want to extract the bullets and live my life.”
Doctors could not explain how Pereira survived the attack. The .32-caliber bullets didn’t break through her skull and didn’t even need to be immediately extracted, doctors said. Pereira also was shot once in the hand.
So for those who think that a little pocket .32ACP pistol is okay for a full-time carry piece, this should make you think a little.
Another hard headed woman eh? Someone call them Brits up and tell them not to bother anyone unless and until they find a .38 or larger. If they do they should immediately evacuate the country.
by
jim b on November 15, 2006 2:03 PM
John,
After my post I scrolled down to the answer to the latest 'Whatzit'.
If I recall correctly the loader I saw for a cloth belt was a pretty simple thing - just a wooden tray with routed-in grooves for the shells and a larger one for the belt. A fixed cross piece at the top and a lever-actuated one across the bottom. Drop a shell in each groove, line the belt section up above it, pull the lever and a set of about 20 shells is pressed up through the loops.
by KCSteve on November 15, 2006 4:26 PM
Ah, Steve. This is the Castle. We want *issue* belt-loaders!
by
John of Argghhh! on November 15, 2006 4:57 PM
I suppose it would be a minor concern if kids were to pick them up and do something stupid which kids are so awfully skilled at doing, especially in a country not used to guns and bullets.
by
Trias on November 15, 2006 11:21 PM
And THAT is the correct answer to the question, "What is Natural Selection?"
by
jim b on November 16, 2006 7:52 AM
And THAT is the correct answer to the question, "What is Natural Selection?"
by
jim b on November 16, 2006 7:56 AM
Just in case Trias wasn't sure, eh, Jim?
And yes, Trias, you are correct, ammo laying about isn't good. But I was just tickled at the tabloid breathlessness of it all - and that it was *news* sufficient to make the paper.
by
John of Argghhh! on November 16, 2006 8:32 AM
Wow. It was pretty bad when guns started running around killing people, but now the bullets can fire themselves! That's really dangerous, because they're not aimed or nuthin'.
by
Tim on November 16, 2006 9:54 AM
Yes true it does have that breathless tone yet really it’s almost as remarkable as a changed lightbulb in the news of the world. Maybe a lead in for another 'infallible' assertion on the evils of guns.
Guns don’t kill people bullets kill people?
by
Trias on November 16, 2006 11:10 AM
John,
Well of course an issue loader would be better, but a home-made one would be functional until such time as you can acquire an issue one.
BTW, over on http://www.missouricarry.com and the forums there's a member who has several live belt-fed toys. I believe his handle is BeltFedMG or something very close thereto. PumpkinHeaver makes his own cannons (mostly) so they're only of interest to you for the (rather large) amusement value.
Oh, and while you're over there check the thread on the Christmas Party in the 2006/2007 Picnic section.
by KCSteve on November 16, 2006 2:11 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
September 18, 2006
This one is for John of Oldguns...
...regarding his answer to question # 10549 - Carbine Double Size Trainer (located on this page, 3rd question down)...
How do you know it's a lazy Sunday at Castle Argghhh!!! and that SWWBO must be on the road?
Because this is on the deck, being cleaned (with all the kittty litter 'round here, *everything* gets dusty)
The Arsenal's double-sized, aluminum, M1919 cut-away trainer. Which was made for the Navy, btw.
Now if John could just find me the bullets and belt that go *with* this... he *claims* to be a full service source for collectors... 8^)
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
That is too cool. I've seen wooden/metal training aids like that, but not all metal. Makes you wonder if there wouldn't have been a market for a .60cal M1919. What a co-ax that would have made!
by
Doug K on September 18, 2006 12:58 PM
Doug K
There is, it's called the Browning 50cal HMG.
Cheers
by J.M. Heinrichs on September 18, 2006 6:32 PM
J.M.....
Well, almost. M2's were sometimes fitted as a co-ax in M47's, as in this dismounted main/coax example at the Military Vehicle Technology Foundation:
http://www.nmpproducts.com/2030397b.jpg
...but more often than not, were simply the M1919A4 (or later, the M37), though the Israelis made some use of .50's as a co-ax. Ammo loadout has often been a factor in the U.S. choice of weapon at that station, augmented by the TC's .50.
Mostly, though, I was jes' kiddin' about the ".60" (even if it would have been fun on a tripod). I was amazed to train on the M1919 when I was in AIT in '71...I thought that gun had LONG since been retired.
by
Doug K on September 18, 2006 9:54 PM
I think I have a source for rounds for your .30 BMG trainer, but will have to check and get back to you. Not sure about belts, but suspect Betsy Ross or some other talented damsel will have to be pressed into service to improvise one for you.
My condolences on the critter passing- family is family regardless of leg count, and we miss them all. Good on ya'll for taking care of the herd and adopting them.
by
John S. on September 18, 2006 10:28 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
June 16, 2006
Another Arsenal Artifact. The RPD.
Not everything in the Arsenal is a relic, or antique.
Meet the Castle RPD, this one a Bulgarian example. Note to the aghast: Legal Where I Live, may not be where you live. Which is *your* problem. Not mine. And I'm not your problem, either. So put the phone down.
Basic stats:
Caliber 7,62x39 mm
Weigth 16 pounds empty, on integral bipod
Length 41"
Length of barrel 20.47"
Feed: 100 round belt loose or in drum
Rate of fire 650 rounds per minute
Muzzle velocity 735 m/s
The RPD (Ruchnoy Pulemet Degtyarova - Degtyarev Light MG) was one of the first weapons designed to fire the then-new intermediate 7.62x39mm cartridge, the same one fired by the SKS and AK-47. Development started in 1944 and the RPD became the standard squad automatic weapon (a BAR equivalent with a lot more firepower, being belt-fed) of Warsaw Pact armies in the early 50's through the 60's when it was supplanted by the RPK. The RPK, being based on the AK action, is, in my humble opinion, not as effective in the role as the RPD was due to controllability and accuracy (I've fired both weapons) and magazine changes. You can still see them around - the Jihadis and Somalian Warlords like them, for example - and the Chinese have their own version, the Type 56.
The RPD is an extension of Degtyarev machine guns, tracing its ancestry to DP-1927 LMG. The RPD is a gas operated, full auto only weapon. It uses a long stroke piston and a gas regulator, located under the barrel, the regulator is the round thing under the barrel, and it can be "tuned" as the weapon fouls or wears, using a combo tool contained in the gunner's tool kit, which is stored in the butt, along with an oil bottle.
It uses a simple and robust bolt locking system common to other Degtyarev designs (much like this DP-28 bolt), which uses two locking flaps that are pushed out of the bolt body into recesses in the receiver walls to lock the bolt. The flaps are pushed out by the bolt carrier to lock and are withdrawn from recesses to unlock the bolt by specially shaped cams on the carrier. The RPD uses a belt feed, generally feeding from a detachable drum magazine that clips to the receiver. The drum can hold a 100-round non-disintegrating metal belt. In a sustained fire role, such as in the defense or from a support by fire position belt feed is used and the belt in the magazine is left there, available for use immediately when the situation requires picking up and moving. Each drum has its own carrying handle, but usually drums were carried in special canvas pouches. Unlike earlier Degtyarev guns, the return spring is located inside the butt, vice under the barrel, where in the DP series of guns they were adversely affected by heat. The heavy barrel cannot be replaced quickly, which reduces the sustained fire rate, but the RPD provides a significant firepower to the fight at ranges up to 800 meters. The rear sights are ajustable for range and drift, and a folding integral bipod is located under the barrel. All RPDs were issued with carrying slings and could be fired from the hip, using the sling to hang the gun on the shoulder.
Bill didn't like these.
Just because I knew you wanted to know.
by
John
on
Jun 16, 2006
�
The Cool Blue Blog links with:
Star Chores: Red Shoes
March 14, 2006
Infantry Pr0n
Today, Infantry Pr0n. Tomorrow, Armor Pr0n. Thursday, Artillery Pr0n. Friday? How about reader-submitted Military Pr0n? Not limited to US, either. In fact, Allies are encouraged. And that includes Afghanistan-only Allies, too. Only caveat - gotta be in-theater.
U.S. Army Pfc. Derick Fullmor from the 1st Armored Division, conducts a combat patrol in the city of Tal Afar, Iraq on 20 Feb. 2006. (U.S. Air Force photo By Staff Sgt. Aaron Allmon)(Released)
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Pr0n submissions, eh? I've got some stuff in the archives you might like.
Like this, for instance. Yeah, it's just a salute battery. Still cool though.
by
brogonzo on March 14, 2006 8:08 AM
Here's another one. These guys are Marine reservists training at Fort Knox's Zussman Urban Combat Center. I shot this last summer.
by
brogonzo on March 14, 2006 8:12 AM
Both are *very* nice, Brogonzo! Verra nice, indeed! Pay no attention to that *snip snip whirrrr* sound in the background.
That's just the harvester at work!
by
John of Argghhh! on March 14, 2006 8:15 AM
Okay, a couple more.
Artillery pr0n.
MOUT pr0n.
Armor pr0n. (This one looks nice and clean -- they were shooting an "Army of One" commercial).
And one of my personal favorites: WWII Flame-thrower pr0n.
by
brogonzo on March 14, 2006 9:09 AM
Crud. That didn't work at all. Let's try again.
Artillery.
MOUT.
Armor.
Flamethrower.
[The pics are best viewed by right-clicking the link and opening in a new window. ed.]
by
brogonzo on March 14, 2006 9:15 AM
What's the sight thingy? The big one looks at the little one that looks at the steel sight?
Isn't there an attachment for the flashlight? Duct tape works, but...
by
Chuck Simmins on March 14, 2006 9:33 AM
The sight thingy is an ELCAN optical sight that functions independently of the "iron" sights.
There is a mount - but they get worn pretty quickly. Duct tape makes sure it stays. Duct tape can do anything...
by
John of Argghhh! on March 14, 2006 9:52 AM
Duct tape can do *almost* anything.
Don't plan to patch the bass boat with it while you're still in the middle of the lake...
by cw4(ret)billt on March 14, 2006 11:32 AM
The one thing he seems to be missing from this view is his IR laser- PAQ-4C or PEQ 2A -although that may be on the left side rail.
Other than that, straight up CQB rigged M249 SAW-collapsable airborne stock (in a decidedely non-AB unit), shorty barrel, and tac light. Oh, and the nutsack to hold 100 rounds of ammo.
by
Heartless Libertarian on March 14, 2006 12:15 PM
An Empire built on rubber bands.
How did the Romans do it without them?
by
CDR Salamander on March 14, 2006 1:03 PM
'Phibian - They didn't have as many fiddly bits on their kit. And they hardly ever ran anywhere. And they only flopped down on the dirt if they were dead.
Bill - if you've already capsized the boat, yer kewl.
by
John of Argghhh! on March 14, 2006 1:20 PM
Bill - if you've already capsized the boat, yer kewl.
Tell me about it. That water's *cold*...
by cw4(ret)billt on March 14, 2006 1:52 PM
Bill, you're just using the wrong type of duct tape.
Red Green, baby. You can do anything with duct tape.
by
Damian on March 14, 2006 2:41 PM
HL - I know during the early days of the war I got requests for help in acquiring the airborne-style butt stocks. Turns out the ones made for the Airsoft guns fit. I have no idea about durability.
But you know how this works. As long as the war is pretty hot, no one is going to care. Get us back to an essentially peacetime optempo, and the bean counters and reg-masters will assert themselves, saying "Your TOE doesn't authorize that. You have to turn them in and order the proper buttstock!"
Unless saner heads prevail and pretty much say you can have what ya want.
But you know how the process-oriented types are...
by
John of Argghhh! on March 14, 2006 3:07 PM
I've often wondered how it is the Romans conquered half the world they knew, without coffee.
by Sigivald on March 15, 2006 5:35 PM
I've often wondered how it is the Romans conquered half the world they knew, without coffee.
by Sigivald on March 15, 2006 5:40 PM
Simple:
Nobody *else* had any coffee either.
by
steveH on March 15, 2006 10:27 PM
Simple:
Nobody *else* had any coffee either.
by
steveH on March 15, 2006 10:28 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
September 9, 2005
Since Boquisucio needs help..
...with his Rangefinder ID, here is the Castle's Barr and Stroud Rangefinder that is part of our Vickers kit. Also in the pic are a Carl Gustav 84mm recoilless rifle and a PIAT. The Gustav and PIAT are for use against people who drive tanks or hide in bunkers. People like that, well, they suck. Of course, the sorry jerks who gave the PIAT to the Brit soldier in WWII suck too. But that's a different story.
Next up is a sample of the Castle Argghhh! LRS, Looter Repellent System. Rabbit ears (German made, ex-Argentine) for target acquisition, sniper loop w/rifle for retail responses, Max the Maxim should a more robust response be needed.
The minefield sign doesn't hurt, either.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
... and Gunners BLOW, BIG TIME, like hurricane Ophelia!
Take that, you Arty person! I pick my nose at you!
Cheers
JMH
by J.M. Heinrichs on September 9, 2005 7:30 AM
And this after I was nice to you Canuckistanians and posted pics of the Navy responding to Katrina.
Fie!
Tankers still suck!
by
John of Argghhh! on September 9, 2005 7:38 AM
Long Rod Penetrators!
Cheers
JMH
by J.M. Heinrichs on September 9, 2005 9:52 AM
Feh, John. Ask any target you're trying to penetrate... they prefer width to length.
LRP's are definitely sub-caliber and arrive too quickly.
by
John of Argghhh! on September 9, 2005 9:56 AM
Ya'll need to uncock your pistols and put them back in their holsters.
the truth is, if you cananot deliver on target everytime for more than thirty minutes, penetrate the target, regardless of types of barriers, and insure less than 3% failure rate, you will not make it in this woman's army.
Might as well send you back to the mess as a baker's mate.
by
kat-missouri on September 9, 2005 10:08 AM
***PapaGulf-17 twitches into coniptions***
by Boquisucio on September 9, 2005 10:45 AM
What's wrong with talking about artillery and ammunition, Boq? *looking around innocently*
by
Fuzzybear Lioness on September 9, 2005 10:50 AM
Kat, 30 minutes Heh..not a problem.. and I can GUARANTEE 100% success rate, and then some... and multiple 'targets'.....
*i think the PG-17 just ran into a hole to hide...*
by klkk on September 9, 2005 1:14 PM
I agree K-MO, a long and sustained FFE Heavy Arty Barrage, is what is requied to fulfill the mision, no matter how reinforced the target may be.
FbL, there's nuthin' wrong about discussing Arty and Ammo. It's just that ol' PapaGulf-17 gets sparking too easily. ;)
Oh and Boss, that Barr&Stroud standing rigidly on that mount, is sure to find the range to any required target.
***BZZZZTZAAAP*** ***SNAP-SNAP***
"Down boy - DOWN"
by Boquisucio on September 9, 2005 1:46 PM
When we get to ramming the round to seat the projectile and then tossing in the powder, bending over, peering in the breech and saying "Charge 6 White Bag, I see Red!", the PG-17c will consult its glossary and just... *twitch*.
by
John of Argghhh! on September 9, 2005 1:57 PM
did i just hear the sound of an angel's wings getting clipped? LOL
you folks are just...just...BAD!
by
alix on September 9, 2005 2:04 PM
no, alix, we are very, very, VERY good.....
by klkk on September 9, 2005 2:09 PM
And humble, too! ROFL
by
Fuzzybear Lioness on September 9, 2005 2:15 PM
hehe.
by
alix on September 9, 2005 3:17 PM
*still here, quietly stirring the fire*
Ooop.
*brushes errant ember from 27" zipper*
by cw4(ret)billt on September 9, 2005 3:18 PM
*fans self*
Long Rod Penetrators; width; deliver on target; multiple 'targets'; standing rigidly; 27" zipper....
must...resist...POLE DANCING....
oh, SO hard to resist!
by MAWK on September 9, 2005 3:55 PM
Easy there MAWK. At this pace PapaGulf-17 MOD C will burn out a fuze before sundown. We do not want him to be out of commission for the rest of the week-end.
by Boquisucio on September 9, 2005 4:04 PM
Weekend... Do I hear the stirrings of a (careful now!) Castle Party?! Nahhh.... surely not. :)
by
Fuzzybear Lioness on September 9, 2005 4:22 PM
Acquiring the target requires extensive knowledge concerning positioning of the weapon and using the range finding equipment. You should know how to work the elevation screw in case of a system failure requiring manual override.
by
kat-missouri on September 9, 2005 4:28 PM
Before the inroduction of electronic equipment and contained ammunition, the gun captain would select appropriate elevation using an elevation screw. He would eye the target and, using calculations learned from long years of school and practice, adjust the proper angle of the gun. He would use a number of types of ammunition with the most effective being the explosive ball. Though, the ball and chain ammunition could cause extensive damage to the enemy's masts.
Keeping the powder dry in wet conditions was extremely difficult. The balls would be lit using a specifically measured fuse. Once the balls were seated and the gun was raised to the proper elevation, another fuse would be lit causing the large bore weapon to eject it's ammunition.
A gunner's mate would be standing by to swab the gun whenever it became overheated.
by
kat-missouri on September 9, 2005 4:49 PM
Speaking of mine warnings... here's a souvenior I brought back from my deployment to the Zone in the late 70s.
Hope nobody wandered into the field after I took the sign... heh
by Neffi on September 9, 2005 5:30 PM
Yep, counterfeit assignations.
by Justthisguy on September 9, 2005 5:45 PM
Ah, Boqui? That's Fuse with an Ess? The electrical kind, not the kind that sputters and makes yummy smoke and then causes something to go boom?
Pedantic, c'est Moi! Heinrichs ain't in it!
(He was normal enough that the docs let him join up. Well, he may have memorized the answers to the psychological tests...)
by Justthisguy on September 9, 2005 6:02 PM
Ah - I stand corrected JTG
by Boquisucio on September 9, 2005 6:23 PM
Scruffy The Scruple sez: DID SOME ONE SAY PARTAY!!!.
by Boquisucio on September 9, 2005 6:36 PM
Boq, that is one ugly kitty...
Looks like she could use a maragarita!
[kick] [kick] [kick] Oh... turns on gas valve
kick... sput pop sput varoomm............
...and the Harley powered Margarita-Matic purrs into life......
by Neffi on September 9, 2005 6:50 PM
Hi, Neffi! *waves*
Got any Cosmopolitans around?
*snuggles down in the couch*
by
Fuzzybear Lioness on September 9, 2005 6:55 PM
Damn..kat knows balls as much as she does oranges.....
by klkk on September 9, 2005 9:04 PM
oh...sorry..CANNON balls... just wanted to clarify that...
by klkk on September 9, 2005 9:06 PM
Not in the mood to Par-Tay, m'self, aged Daddy being in h'ptal and maybe leaving planet sometime soon, but will look in from time to time, for distraction, to keep from going completely batso.
Dang! That's a damper, ain't it! No, really, y'all have a good time, I'll stop by now and then, just to keep from getting too weird.
Whoops! Already too late for that.
by Justthisguy on September 9, 2005 9:22 PM
cannon balls, oranges...you're all a buncha coconuts! :oD
by
alix on September 9, 2005 10:49 PM
I'll be spending today in writing salacious proposals to the government in an effort to entice them to have their way with me... for money.
We know what I am... we're just negotiating on price.
by
John of Argghhh! on September 10, 2005 8:35 AM
Since the original theme of this was guns, thought I'd give you an update. Remember back in March, I went to the range and earned the German Schutzenschnur? Well, I finally got it in the mail yesterday, and they apparently awarded me the Gold medal. I thought they had said Silver at the range, but then again they were speaking German. So I earned the Gold, AND I get to wear it...(neener, neener...)
by msg keith on September 10, 2005 9:48 PM
Since the original theme of this was guns, thought I'd give you an update. Remember back in March, I went to the range and earned the German Schutzenschnur? Well, I finally got it in the mail yesterday, and they apparently awarded me the Gold medal. I thought they had said Silver at the range, but then again they were speaking German. So I earned the Gold, AND I get to wear it...(neener, neener...)
by msg keith on September 10, 2005 9:50 PM
Heh. Well, okay, we have the same one, you get to wear it... and I think I'll check my paycheck stub...
Plllppppttt!
by
John of Argghhh! on September 10, 2005 10:47 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
August 30, 2005
The way to the Armorer's Good Graces...
...is via firepower.
Something SWWBO knows well, having bought me this for Christmas before we got married, and *this* after, and not being annoyed by this or this or this.
Now comes AFSis, fresh from New York. (Happy Anniversary, kiddo!)
And she sends this, a 24 pounder in Castle Clinton... who could ask for more?
Heh. Mebbe cannon with a Cute Chick? Like this?
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
*laughing*
I thought you'd get a kick out of those pix....
I should have more up later today, along with your military history lesson for the day.
by
AFSister on August 30, 2005 1:36 PM
Hubba-hubba - a 3"/50 Packing Mama!!!
Who could ask for anything more.
by Boquisucio on August 30, 2005 1:49 PM
Eat yer heart out, Jane Fonda! The Castle's got the Kitty with *real* firepower...
by cw4(ret)billt on August 30, 2005 3:31 PM
hmm. John dear, perhaps I should pose with the Vickers?
he he he.
by
beth on August 30, 2005 9:33 PM
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Cheers
JMH
by J.M. Heinrichs on August 30, 2005 9:35 PM
*glancing up and counting*
*gazing over the assemblage*
Motion has been made, seconded and those in favor have been heard. Any
*flicking thumb-latch of shoulder holster*
opposed?
The "ayes" have it. Polish up the Vickers, John...
by cw4(ret)billt on August 31, 2005 8:25 AM
Argghhh! Now we're letting Canadians vote on domestic policy?
by
John of Argghhh! on August 31, 2005 8:42 AM
Oh yeah! Go for it Beth!
Good thing Cricket is so far away- she might wrestle you for that Vickers spot....
And thanks for the compliments guys... very nice.
by
AFSister on August 31, 2005 9:11 AM
LOL. I love old cannons. What is the correct plural for them anyway?
Now, in our history lesson for today, we were watching the history channel and one of the Child Labor Units was impressed with a huge cannon. He asks the Armorer this:
Was the gauge of the cannon determined by the weight and size of the cannonball? IOW, was it called a ten pounder or a 400 pounder because the ammo weighed that much?
We can look it up, but I would rather have an answer from someone who has not only been an artillery officer but has studied them closely
as it related to his profession.
Thank you.
by Cricket on September 1, 2005 11:35 AM
Cannon is both singular and plural. Cannons is also acceptable.
When you see a gun referred to as a 6 pounder, 10 pounder, 12 pounder, 18 pounder, etc, that refers to weight of the "standard" round, normally solid shot, though in later eras it would refer to the standard HE round (such as the 18 pounder howitzer of the Brit Army in WWI).
Caliber references bore diameter, and you'll see that in two fashions. One, the generic 105mm or 8 Inch designations, for example. You will also see guns classified as 5inch/38 caliber,5inch/54 caliber, and 5inch/62 Caliber. This is more common in Naval service, where there might be several different versions of a cannon in service. The second number is barrel length expressed in terms of barrel diameter... in the terms of you normals, barrel length divided by barrel diameter.
Ground artillery makes those distinctions as well, but in Army usage it rarely makes it into the nomenclature, the Army preferring to use the "M" number, such as the M110 vice the M110A2 howiters, which had 8inch cannon of differing lengths.
by
John of Argghhh! on September 1, 2005 12:22 PM
So, to get the caliber, you divide the length of the barrel by the width of the diameter of the barrel?
Is that like 'sizing up a weapon?'
by Cricket on September 1, 2005 2:43 PM
Darnitall. I hate when that happens. Otay.
Third question: So, caliber or weight isn't always
consistent?
You can have a four hundred pound cannon fire and ten pound round?
by Cricket on September 1, 2005 2:46 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
June 21, 2005
Dayton, Ohio, Day 1
Got here yesterday, spent the afternoon at the Air Force Museum (I'm with Mythilt, the new name is pretty pretentious, all things considered - even if it might be true...) Mythilt is also correct in that can't do it justice in one afternoon - or day, really. Heck, I filled up a one-gig memory card in the camera and didn't get all the pictures I'd have liked. And that doesn't count all the little film presentations scattered around. I did see the IMAX movie "Fighter Pilot," which was well worth the price of admission.
I also got to meet AFSis! My first official Denizen meeting besides SWWBO. A good time was had by both of us, and we shamelessly gossiped about all of you, and about, oh, have the crowd that hangs at ALa's! (And no, ALa, she didn't wheedle pics out of me, either...)
Wandering through the museum, there was plenty of Armorer-fodder...
Bombs!
Hi-res, click here.
Machine Guns!
Hi-res, click here.
Planes! When I saw this Boeing P26 Peashooter - I immediately thought of Neffi - this just looks like the kind of pimped-out ride you could see him in, scarf flying.
Hi-res, click here.
More later - I need to go learn how to lead!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
First step, aim ahead of the target ...
Cheers
JMH
by J.M. Heinrichs on June 21, 2005 6:56 AM
I like that little plane!
by
Beth on June 21, 2005 7:01 AM
For small planes, my favorite is the Goblin. Just tickles my Science Fiction bone, images of a large carrier aircraft disgorging a couple dozen little planes like that......
by Mythilt on June 21, 2005 7:40 AM
Hey John!
It was so good to meet you last night! Very cool.... You should all meet him if you get the chance.
Great Neffi-plane pic- why do I have the urge to break out into "Snoopy and the Red Baron"???
by AFSister on June 21, 2005 8:04 AM
mmmm nice P-26...you know, we have a trucking dock out at work, John. If I wuz to send the address, and you were to pull some strings- you know, call in some favors at the Pentagon...
by Neffi on June 21, 2005 9:12 AM
Hey Neff, The Massa found you a pocket Zoom-Zoom; lucky you.
Can I have that purty Inertial Operating Tail Fuze??? I dont akse for much.
by Boquisucio on June 21, 2005 9:26 AM
That is a cute plane, Neffi ... But how do you expect do give the Denizettes rides in it? No second seat ;-)
John and AFSis swapping gossip, eh? Hmm - thought I felt my ears burning!
by
Barb on June 21, 2005 9:46 AM
We were stationed at Wright-Pat in the mid-70's. I seem to remember the XB-70 being on display outside the museum. Is it still there? I thought it (and the SR-71) were the most gorgeous planes.
I also remember my Dad, even though he was a helicopter pilot, made a point of taking us kids down to the flight line at Edwards to watch the B-70 land. Soon after, while he was in Vietnam ('65-'66), we were visiting Mom's family in Illinois and saw on the evening news about a chase plane and the B-70 colliding and crashing.
We were back at Edwards by late '66 and got to see the B-70 several more times. Great plane. Great memories.
by TxAFbrat on June 21, 2005 10:19 AM
Wow. I will pass on the IMAX Flight Movie. I don't do well in those kinds of theaters...and even the Grand Canyon gives me vertigo from the parking lot.
I am glad you had a good time.
by Cricket on June 21, 2005 11:24 AM
TxAFbrat, the B-70 is now indoors along with the B-52. As they can they are moving the aircraft indoors where they can control the climate as needed.
by Mythilt on June 21, 2005 12:01 PM
Wow, I really Like the P26 too. Minus the peas, I could use it.
by
mensabarbie on June 21, 2005 12:38 PM
Got any crops need dustin'?
by
Ciggy on June 21, 2005 12:49 PM
Mythilt, it HAS been a long time since I was there but they have evidently done some major expansion!
by TxAFbrat on June 21, 2005 1:50 PM
Yeap, current plans are to add a fourth hangar and a 'class room' hangar starting sometime next year I believe.
by Mythilt on June 21, 2005 2:06 PM
I ran out of memory before I got to the Valkyrie. They have very few aircraft out in the open anymore. After I get a chance to process (i.e., make smaller) the pic (we're talking days to weeks here, over 500 so far) I'll slap 'em into an album and put up a link.
by
John of Argghhh! on June 21, 2005 3:11 PM
Oh, and good point John - especially when Neffi comes by, scaring the livestock!
by
John of Argghhh! on June 21, 2005 3:42 PM
...with beef prices the way they are, I might be doing more than just scaring them. That thing packs twin .30s heh
by Neffi on June 21, 2005 5:09 PM
Re: "Mythilt is also correct in that can't do it justice in one afternoon - or day, really. Heck, I filled up a one-gig memory card in the camera and didn't get all the pictures I'd have liked."
Damn straight. I used to live in Dayton and visited the AF Museum many times, and found something new on almost every visit. I swear the place is a time warp - you spend what feels like half an hour inside, then come out into normal timeflow again and realize it was most of a day. Just an incredible place -- and because it's the AF's Own Museum, you can find things there you'll never find anywhere else -- like the XB-70, the Have Blue stealth prototype, the Goblin parasite fighter, and lots more. I remain convinced that George Lucas conceived the opening shot of Star Wars while standing below the Valkyrie and looking forward along its underside.
Oh, and don't forget the Memorial Garden outside next to the parking lots. Last time I was there it was about a half-acre or so of ground full of trees and small memorials placed by veterans of USAAF units in the Second World War, in tribute to their units and to their comrades who didn't make it back.
by wolfwalker on June 21, 2005 5:20 PM
I don't need the pics from AFSis...maybe I have already made arangements with your Other!
*evil laighter*
*winks at SWWBO*
by
ALa on June 21, 2005 9:58 PM
We discussed that last night... she doesn't *know* where the good ones are... just the buckethead ones.
by
John of Argghhh! on June 21, 2005 10:05 PM
HAH! The blogosphere is not yet ready for the "secret file" photos of JoA... and I expect SWWBO keeps those to herself anyhoo heh
by Neffi on June 21, 2005 10:45 PM
Barb, I think the Naval Aviation Museum has an SBD, which has a back seat. It has a radar, lotsa radios, a coupla machine guns, even stick and rudder pedals and a few instruments back there. Lots of stuff to *amuse* the harried rear-seat(wo)man. I think there's even one in private hands (though I think it's actually a repainted A-24) which you might conceivably get a ride in after a sizeable donation to the Confed- oops - Commemorative Air Force.
by Justthisguy on June 22, 2005 1:50 AM
Funny about the well-streamlined shapes those bombs have. They look like the ones designed in the '20s. Then, in the Second World War, one sees that we went for size over shape. Later, with jets, and hanging them on the outside of the airplane again, we went for slippery shapes again.
by Justthisguy on June 22, 2005 1:57 AM
ALa-
I tried the SWWBO route too... with no luck. DRAT!
by AFSister on June 22, 2005 10:26 PM
Sigh! I make an insightful, intellectual comment about bomb shapes, and it falls off the edge of the Earth. I make a silly social comment about two-seat dive bombers, and it starts a whole new thread by The Owner.
It ain't fair, I tellya!
by Justthisguy on June 28, 2005 11:53 PM
Now you know what it's like to be the "The Owner" and make an insightful, intellectual post, only to have the comments hi-jacked by some golf-course hating Floridian, morphing it into a discussion of 'type' or somesuch...
8^D
by
John of Argghhh! on June 29, 2005 6:26 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
May 16, 2005
A Post just for JTG
Since he's whining in email to SWWBO about less politics, more guns! (hmm, there's a political statement in there, somewhere).
So, JTG:
This
Post
Is
for
You!
Wow. I used to have a *lot more time* for this stuff.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Ah yes- 'Less politics, More guns'... the cry of revolutionaries everywhere heh
by Neffi on May 16, 2005 9:27 AM
Ooh! Shiny! Thankee kindly, sir.
by Justtisguy on May 16, 2005 10:15 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
May 5, 2005
A crying shame.
This little movie is going to make Sergeant B break into tears.
Click here for the horror.
Update: Due to extreme bandwidth theft, I have blocked the videos. Please drop me a line at the Armorer's contact email, and I will be happy to provide this video.
The attached note made *me* grind my teeth.
All,
Please take a moment to look at this short video clip and feel free to use it for training, etc...it was put together by one of our Senior TACOM Small Arms Equipment Specialists at Rock Island who operated our Small Arms Support Center(SASC)in Balad, Iraq; essentially a "mini Depot" repair facility for all Small Arms...his comments are below.
This was done at the Ware Lab here at Rock Island to re-create the mistakes that continue to occur in Iraq. The troops screw the barrel into the 50 without pulling the bolt back to release the locking spring.
They then loosen the barrel up 3 to 4 clicks and attempt to fire it.
I would see between 5 to 8 of these guns a week at the SASC in Balad.
It destroys the gun, and can injure the soldier.
Dammit, it *ain't* rocket science. It's a failure of leadership. There is simply *no excuse* for blowing up a Ma Deuce because you don't follow proper headspace procedures.
Argghhh!!!
Sergeant B sez (pulled up from the comments):
There are horror stories of M2s blowing up because of a failure to set proper headspace... Headspace is the "gap" between the face of the bolt, and the beginning of the chamber. The case of the round (the brass part that holds the gunpowder) is supported by the walls of the chamber (located in the barrel)... To comply with the laws of explosive force, the pressure of the gas created by the burning gunpowder in the round after firing will attempt to escape using the path of least resistance, normally down the barrel, pushing the actual bullet before it. This is the way it is supposed to work... Unfortunately, if the headspace has not been set, that force will blow out of the side of the cartridge.
As each round contains the equivalent of a quarter stick of dynamite, this causes devestating damage to the gun, and normally to the gunner and team leader as well.
I have seen guns where the receiver walls have been blown out, or severely deformed, cooling blocks shredded, and Marines flat on their backs as the Corpsman tried to disengage the backplate assembly from their chests...
In one instance, we were firing a "mad minute" also called a "Final Protective Fire" at 29 Palms. We were firing our M2s from tripods, and had our supporting AAVs beside us, with their turret mounted M2s. In the midst of the firing, I heard an explosion in the turret of the nearest AAV, and saw a three foot long bar go spinning down range. I grabbed the Corpsman, and ran into the back of the AAV, where I saw the track commander (who happened to be the brother of one of our platoon sergeants, sliding out of the turret. The track was filled with smoke. The turret M2 had exploded, and the bar that we had seen was the barrel of the gun. We grabbed the sergeant and dragged him out of the vehicle, and began checking him for wounds... He got lucky, and had minor burns, but no new holes.
Turns out that during the movement over rough terrain, the locking lug on the barrel extention (that holds the barrel into place) had broken off, and the vibration of the vehicle had unscrewed the barrel from the gun. The sergeant hadn't checked it before firing, and derned near blew his head off. This was one of the few times when a sergeant got his butt chewed by a corporal.
The very first thing you do after screwing the barrel into the receiver is check headspace and timing... This is Gunner's Law... Not perfroming this is a failure in leadership, and is almost criminal negligence, especially with the M2...
Thanks for the word, John.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
There are horror stories of M2s blowing up because of a failure to set proper headspace... Headspace is the "gap" between the face of the bolt, and the beginning of the chamber. The case of the round (the brass part that holds the gunpowder) is supported by the walls of the chamber (located in the barrel)... To comply with the laws of explosive force, the pressure of the gas created by the burning gunpowder in the round after firing will attempt to escape using the path of least resistance, normally down the barrel, pushing the actual bullet before it. This is the way it is supposed to work... Unfortunately, if the headspace has not been set, that force will blow out of the side of the cartridge. As each round contains the equivalent of a quarter stick of dynamite, this causes devestating damage to the gun, and normally to the gunner and team leader as well.
I have seen guns where the receiver walls have been blown out, or severely deformed, cooling blocks shredded, and Marines flat on their backs as the Corpsman tried to disengage the backplate assembly from their chests...
In one instance, we were firing a "mad minute" also called a "Final Protective Fire" at 29 Palms. We were firing our M2s from tripods, and had our supporting AAVs beside us, with their turret mounted M2s. In the midst of the firing, I heard an explosion in the turret of the nearest AAV, and saw a three foot long bar go spinning down range. I grabbed the Corpsman, and ran into the back of the AAV, where I saw the track commander (who happened to be the brother of one of our platoon sergeants, sliding out of the turret. The track was filled with smoke. The turret M2 had exploded, and the bar that we had seen was the barrel of the gun. We grabbed the sergeant and dragged him out of the vehicle, and began checking him for wounds... He got lucky, and had minor burns, but no new holes.
Turns out that during the movement over rough terrain, the locking lug on the barrel extention (that holds the barrel into place) had broken off, and the vibration of the vehicle had unscrewed the barrel from the gun. The sergeant hadn't checked it before firing, and derned near blew his head off. This was one of the few times when a sergeant got his butt chewed by a corporal.
The very first thing you do after screwing the barrel into the receiver is check headspace and timing... This is Gunner's Law... Not perfroming this is a failure in leadership, and is almost criminal negligence, especially with the M2...
Thanks for the word, John.
by Sgt. B. on May 5, 2005 10:14 AM
lessee, if I remember correctly:
If the Go don't go, or the No-Go goes, it's a no-go
If the Go goes and the No-Go dont go, it's a go.
CHA-ching!
by SangerM on May 5, 2005 11:41 AM
Yes... But in a pinch, one dogtag is a go, two dog tags is a no-go... Or back the barrel off three clicks...
The GOOD gunners memorize the number of clicks that each barrel requires, but they still check the headspace anyway...
by Sgt. B. on May 5, 2005 11:46 AM
Heh. I marked the guns and barrels to each other, and the number of clicks on the barrel - and made 'em verify. The numerology was a 'combat emergency only' SOP.
by
John of Argghhh! on May 5, 2005 1:15 PM
The failure in the clip was not the worse case failure. Back in the deep dark days (1978 or so) with the old and venerable M60A1 RISE AOS (w/IR elbo) a mastergunner was seting up for a minni tank range using the M2 HB mounted on the serchlight mount (not unlike the system used by the IDF. THe master gunner test fired the gun and the cover flew a good 30 meters downrange. But for the grace of God no one was hurt. But the gun ended up condition code X.
by mudpuppy1975 on May 5, 2005 2:54 PM
Yes
I just had a soldier injured in Afghanistan due to this very same issue
Failed to correctly headspace and time the M2 and caught part of the round in his leg-- he's OK
But what criminal is only getting 1500 rounds a year to qualify 10 gunners in the Bn (BTW- it can't be done when 590 round is req'd for qual)
But poor leadership and a paratrooper out of action
by redleg on May 6, 2005 9:13 AM
Redleg, I am complete agreement with you, and your tone of disgust(?)over lack of training...
If you're going to use the beast in combat, you should have the proper training, properly funded.
No matter how proficient your people are, there are certain actions and procedures that must be made instinctive... For you, the procedure for deploying your reserve chute is something you can do in your sleep... Same-same with the M2... There's a balance of blame here, between the Gun Team leader, and the command for not dedicating enough gun time for these procedure to become automatic. (I know, preaching to the chior on this one...)
Unfortunately, this is a condition experienced aby ALL services... ('Lest ye think that I'm denigrating the warriors of the Army...)
(Now if us Jarheads could break you of this unhealthy habit of throwing yourselves bodily out of perfectly good airplanes, ya'll would be GREAT Marines!!!)
*wink*
Semper Fi, Redleg! Keep the faith!
by Sgt. B. on May 6, 2005 12:07 PM
Tell ya what, SGT B, you let us jump out of airplanes, we won't talk about you guys driving tracked armored vehicles off the stern.
by
John of Argghhh! on May 6, 2005 12:49 PM
What, like this?
Hmmm... Okay, deal... But I reserve to right to shake my head in bemusement...
by Sgt. B. on May 6, 2005 3:48 PM
No doubt our years of not getting enouhg rounds to qualify liv fire with the M2 are coming back to haunt us. I would bet big money that the gun crew was "eye balling" HS & T in stead of using the gauge, probably not newbies, but guys who had gotten too lackadaisical.
by SFC SKI on May 8, 2005 4:41 PM
No doubt our years of not getting enouhg rounds to qualify liv fire with the M2 are coming back to haunt us. I would bet big money that the gun crew was "eye balling" HS & T in stead of using the gauge, probably not newbies, but guys who had gotten too lackadaisical.
by SFC SKI on May 8, 2005 4:41 PM
That's freakin' scary.. That's one too many M2's exploding. Yikes!!!!!
That's definitely a leadership issue that should not be neglected any longer.
by
Desult on May 8, 2005 5:28 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
by
John
on
May 05, 2005
�
Winds of Change.NET links with:
Iraq Report, 09 May/05
April 29, 2005
Gun Zen
The crud has migrated to the chest, enough so that I finally conceded and didn't go into the office today. Via the joys of a wireless connection (and anticipating the event yesterday) I brought the work machine home and will be slaving away, anyway. Dang those suspenses. But, since I slept in, feel like crap, and gotta get this thing done - here's what I've got for you today, courtesy the Admiral of the Moat Fleet and the Blogfather.
Gun videos! Prolly ought to right-click and save-as, but do whatcha want...
Via Boquisucio: Fun with machineguns!
Remember Jaws? Where Roy Scheider shoots the scuba tank in the shark's mouth? I remember when I saw the movie thinking - that kinda steel wouldn't fail that way... but aluminum might. Well, someone has tested the theory. The shark prolly would have been unhappy, regardless...
And finally... *rubbing bald head, staring at nothing* "the horror... the horror..."
Did someone mention cannon? Cannon-cockers? Heh. Musta been me. No, wait - it was Murdoc - talking about the infantry of the 2nd Battalion, Eigth Regiment of FIELD ARTILLERY. AUTOMATIC!
But what's more important... besides that Jointness - is the ratio of 'Combined' (i.e., allied forces)... 3:1.
That, and the fact that they scored some eBay material there - all those Ba'ath Party medals!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
AAAHHHHHH!!!!!!
A kitten cannon? A kitten CANNON? *sniff* *sniff* And here I thought you *liked* having the kittens around the Castle.....
*gather up fellow Castle Kittens and heads for the hills, far away from cannon*
by Were-Kitten on April 29, 2005 10:14 AM
Good thing for sharks, that they can count on never ending rows of new teefs.
by Boquisucio on April 29, 2005 10:28 AM
Hey! I said "The Horror!"
by
John of Argghhh! on April 29, 2005 10:42 AM
When I tried it, little fluffy got to meet the spikey thingy up close and personal. OUCH!!!!
by Boquisucio on April 29, 2005 11:07 AM
Someone has too much time on his hands, doesn't he?
Poor kitties. I will put out some catnip for them and some smoked salmon and see if they come back, and you guys quit doing the cannon thing.
I thought it was a kitty setting off a cannon and you were thinking of your cats getting into the arsenal.
by Cricket on April 29, 2005 11:23 AM
Ooooh, my kitty went 1,156 feet. Good kitty.
by PigBoatSailor on April 29, 2005 11:31 AM
Beat me. Mine only went 796 feet.
by
John of Argghhh! on April 29, 2005 11:55 AM
Boq - A lovely video to start my day off right *Grin*!!
Really, John - shooting kitties from a cannon? How rude...
I couldn't get past 324 ft, I'd never make it as a redleg.
by
Barb on April 29, 2005 12:03 PM
Oh yea,
Nothing sez GOOD MORNING like David Cassidy & The Partridge Family.
by Boquisucio on April 29, 2005 1:12 PM
Ha 262ft. Right into Audreys mouth, nuth'n but rim.
FEED ME SEYMOUR!!!
by Boquisucio on April 29, 2005 1:44 PM
*btw- my kitty went 1200 feet*
RRROOOOAAARR!!
by Were-Kitten on April 29, 2005 3:26 PM
My best was 1,756 but I've been practicing.
by
Punctilious on April 29, 2005 4:39 PM
Were-Kitty... *gather up fellow Castle Kittens and heads for the hills, far away from cannon*
heh... 1200 feet, eh? Methinks the Lady doth protest too much...
by Neffi on April 29, 2005 7:25 PM
So enough of this kitten cannon stuff. I just did the weapon meme came up desert eagle. So what do you think? The .50AE in mauve or should I stick to the 357 version in boring old dark grey?
by
Punctilous on April 29, 2005 9:46 PM
here is a link to your gun.
http://www.collectorsfirearms.com/pr4559.htm
where is the link to your quiz?
by
rammer on April 29, 2005 9:58 PM
Oh, go with the .50 - but please, not in mauve ;-)
What gun quiz? Where is it? Sounds fun...
by
Barb on April 30, 2005 10:51 AM
You know, I am a bit slow... The term "AUTOMATIC EIGHTH" has been slinging around in my head for days, but I couldn't figure out why or what it meant, then I happened to relooked at this link, and it hit me, that was the name of the Arty unit in the 25th Inf when I was there. Duh!
I always liked that name, it has a nice ring to it, very mechanical and lethal sounding, yet lyrical...
Yeah, that's it, lyrical... kaBOOM! (14 round per minute per gun at one point, according to the link).
General Brooks was the Div CG when I was there, father of the two current General Brooks', and he was an Arty guy! Use to run PT in red shorts and a crossed-cannon t-shirt if I remember correctly.
by SangerM on May 2, 2005 9:36 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
February 26, 2005
New Horizons for the BlogChylde
A blogger has truly arrived when one of his (or her--in deference to the lovely ladies who do so) peers requests his (oh, all right--or her) technical assistance. For example, frequent Castle guest Barb found herself in need of some deep background about the venerable M2 and its efficacy in domicile defense.
And to whom did she turn for this information? None other than her fellow frequent Castle contributor and newly-minted blogger in his own right, Sgt B., the Ma Deuce Maven. He not only resolved her quandary, but--wait-a-minute--
[*scamper-scamper-thhhhhwhap!*] >>hzzz. message for you...
scruple-express has just delivered the link. You have the controls, Barb.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Dang controls are frozen!
"Mayday! Mayday! She's going down..."
by
Barb on February 28, 2005 12:33 PM
Barb - Calm down--it's still sitting on the helipad.
by cw4billt on March 1, 2005 10:36 PM
Oh!
So much for calm and collected under pressure ;-)
Start the lesson, then, D*mmit!
by
Barb on March 2, 2005 10:03 AM
Okay--first of all, put the helmet on an. .... . .... . ..... .. . ........ .....
BARB! TAKE THE HELMET OFF UNTIL I CAN TURN THE oh. okay. battery on.
by cw4billt on March 2, 2005 10:27 AM
I guess I'd better start showing up for lessons on time from now on, eh?
Chief ... Ya still there??
by
Barb on March 2, 2005 6:03 PM
Yup. Blasted seat compressed and now I'm looking up at the wiring beneath the instrument panel.
Glad it didn't happen in the air. The landing would definitely leave a mark...about 40 feet long and three feet wide. Hang on a minnit...
[*clang*-k'THUNK*] There, that's better. Okay, page P-3 on the checklist, I call and you do for the front seat, and you call and I do for the back, helmets and gloves on, battery's coming on and I'll meet you up hot mike.
Hello?
by cw4billt on March 2, 2005 10:54 PM
... ... Ah... That's better!
OK, Chief - helmet on, gloves on, battery on. Ready to start checklist from P-3.
by
Barb on March 3, 2005 9:41 AM
Hmmmf. Hang on, dropped the checklist. Ooooog--ow! Got it.
[*wipes blood off on leg*]
Allll righty, here. Weapons switches--off, TOW Control Panel switch--off, Emergency Collective Hydraulic switch--off, panel lighting switches--off. Remove the cotter pin from the Canopy Removal Arming Mechanism and place it in the ashtray so you can find it agai--DON'T ARM THE SYSTEM!!!
Whooo. If you'd pulled that, it would've gotten awful plexiglassy in here. Supposed to blow the side canopy and doors out, but det cord works both ways...noisy, too.
Reminds me, if you've got your earplugs in, too, turn up the ICS a skosh until we go to Engine Start...
by cw4billt on March 3, 2005 1:23 PM
So you don't want me to arm this [*slap*] OW!
OK, fine - I'm not touching anything until you tell me to!
shakes hand to get feeling back
by
Barb on March 3, 2005 3:39 PM
*Standing outside on the pad with the fire extinguisher +dearly+ wishing there was a blast wall to stand behind and rabbit ears to observe with...*
(mutters under breath) "Glad I'm not the mechanic..."
by
John of Argghhh! on March 3, 2005 3:45 PM
You guys keep this up this slow and I'm gonna hafta leave the comments on even after it drops of the main page... sigh.
Barb - make the old fart move a little faster, woodja?
by
John of Argghhh! on March 3, 2005 3:46 PM
These distance learning classes are Really Tough, ya know?! The training schedule is suffering from doses of reality - my job keeps interfering with my avocation ;-)
by
Barb on March 3, 2005 3:48 PM
"Wow ... Who knew I could fall asleep in these seats!?"
Takes off helmet and gloves, turns off battery, places cotter pin back into Canopy Removal Arming System, jumps out onto tarmac.
"Gotta go, Chief - I'll schedule the next lesson wit ya later!"
:-)
by
Barb on March 3, 2005 6:47 PM
[*walking back from the vicinity of the wet spot beneath the tailboom*]
Grumble. Partying with the bedoodlewhoppies ruined a perfectly good set of kidneys.
[*looks around, clambers into rear seat, stashes helmet bag behind seat, fastens shoulder and waist straps, puts helmet on, plugs mike cord in, tests inertia reel, straps checklist to left leg, straps kneeboard to right leg, attaches Helmet Sight Subsystem BIT magnet to helmet, checks rail slides, adjusts helmet sight*]
Oh, hell--not again...
[**detaches HSS BIT magnet and sticks to holder, unstraps checklist, unstraps kneeboard, removes helmet, places helmet on helmet-hook, unstraps shoulder and waist harness, clambers out...*]
by cw4billt on March 4, 2005 12:04 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
by
CW4BillT
on
Feb 26, 2005
February 23, 2005
OKay, let's answer that teaser...
The consensus (with some not-so-gentle shoving by the Armorer) was moving towards a Vickers firing lock. Some people picked up on the hint that when the Armorer does this sort of thing he's using pictures which are up in the Arsenal photo album... and paid attention to what folder was what.
Of course, in preparation for this, there was also some Maxim stuff in that folder...
Here is a Vickers lock and a Maxim lock side by side - and just as importantly - they are oriented as if they were in their respective receivers.
They are in the 'locked' position - ready to fire.
Some of you twigged fairly early to a Maxim-style lock (on the right in this photo, a Russian/Finn M1910). All Maxims, all calibers, use a lock that is virtually identical. There may be slight dimensioning differences based on calibers and materials, but they all follow this pattern.
The Vickers is a Maxim-derived gun - and the difference is in the lock. The Vickers shoots more quickly, and is smaller and lighter than equivalent-caliber water-cooled Maxims. And the secret to that is in the lock. Vickers took Maxim's design and left the extractor as it was (that's the part to the right side of the locks which strip, feed, and eject the rounds) and flipped the lock upside down. This made the 'break' of the knuckle in recoil all take place within the vertical space occupied by the lock - instead of breaking below the lock, like the Maxim does. Got that?
1. Strip.
2. Feed.
3. Eject.
This action is why you cock a Maxim-style gun twice... once to strip from the belt, second time to feed the stripped round to the breech, while stripping the next round.
A safety note. In the pics above, you see what looks like a cut-out in the extractor. That's actually a modification done to make the lock safe to handle. This was a training lock used by the Finns. These weapons are VERY DANGEROUS - aside from the Usual Caveats for firearms - WHEN HANDLING THE LOCK. Why? Because the lock contains the firing pin, firing pin spring, sear, and hammer - though you wouldn't recognize the hammer as such. Technically, it's termed a *tumbler*. Point being - if you have a round in the extractor, in front of the firing pin, and you trip the sear (not hard to do) you have an unsupported round that is going to explode. Wear your goggles and Interceptor if you are planning on running with these scissors.
In this picture, you can see how a Maxim operates - loading, firing, ejecting. In most machineguns - the action is straight line - reciprocating back and forth, with the bolt twisting to lock in the breech. On Maxim's guns - the lock stays in the vertical plane, but the actual 'locking' of the weapon occurs when the arm returns to horizontal. Then, upon firing, the barrel gets an initial rearward impulse that moves the recoil plates back along the sides of the locking arm, camming it to break, at which point the lock continues rearward against the action of the fusee spring, which sends the lock forward again to start the process all over again. Complicated. Expensive - but damned reliable, which is why the Maxim still serves in China, and the Vickers served in Brit usage until 1968 or so. But all that, with pictures... is the subject of a later eye-glazing post.
Let's take a look at the locks overlaid on a full-scale poster of the Soviet Maxim. If you click the link, you'll see the Maxim lock overlaid on the poster. Take a look at how the receiver extends down below the water jacket surrounding the barrel (the right side of the picture).
Now take a look at a Vickers. Although this picture doesn't show it that well (hey, excuse to take more!) the receiver on the Vickers is not much deeper than the water jacket - and the reason for that is the weapon ejects the spent brass through a hole right under the water jacket. A tremendous savings in strategic materials, weight, production time, and an increase in firing rate. What more could you ask? The Maxim is much deeper, hence heavier and more clumsy to lug around. I wish I had an MG08/15 to show the attempt to deal with that.
That then - is the genius of the Vickers modification to Maxim's design. Flipping the lock. Just look at the space it saves.
The drawings in this post are from Dolf Goldsmith's book, The Devil's Paintbrush - though the actual drawings are Ministry of Defense drawings from the MoD Pattern Room. Anyone who is *serious* about their machineguns parts with the lucre for those two books - which aren't cheap.
Vickers - The Grand Old Lady of No Man's Land.
Maxim - The Devil's Paintbrush.
Available from the publisher, and elsewhere, I'm sure.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Mine hat doth tip on to you, Master of this Keep.
That Belgie Engineer was truly an inspired man. To devise this contraption at such an early developmental age, took great forethought.
by Boquisucio on February 23, 2005 8:14 AM
I'll stick with Wayne Mutza's pubs. He sends me freebies [*large cheese-munching grin*]...
by cw4billt on February 23, 2005 8:50 AM
And Hiram was born in Maine. Just sayin'.
So, who's Wayne Mutza and do I wanna get to know him?
by
John of Argghhh! on February 23, 2005 9:17 AM
Wayne Mutz is a photographer- I just sent you a pic on email.
by AFSister on February 23, 2005 9:32 AM
ok- make that "MutzA". Wayne Mutz is, like, a totally different dude. Ohmygaud, he is so NOT Wayne Mutza!
by AFSister on February 23, 2005 9:34 AM
INteresting to note that the .50 cal Browning also must be double pumped, again, first to strip the round from the belt, and second to insert the round into the chamber. The .50 is a closed bolt weapon, and is the ONLY machinegun that we would initiate ambushed with (the M60 and M249 were open bolt, and if the round failed to fire, the bad guys would hear the distinctive sound of the bolt slamming home...
Keep 'em comin' Papa! Thanks for the G-2!
by Sgt. B. on February 23, 2005 10:02 AM
Wayne Mutza is also a technical writer--he's done books for Squadron Pubs (among others), making the mysteries and intricacies of various aircraft palatable for the aficionados.
Dunno if you'd want to get to know him, though, John--he's kinda old, y'know? I mean, the guy's got at least six months on me...or I've got six months on him. I forget...
by cw4billt on February 23, 2005 11:21 AM
Well, Bill, you're not 55 yet are ya? if not, you ain't old.
Otherwise, oops.
:-)
by SangerM on February 23, 2005 11:40 AM
Been red shifting from the double-nickel for some time now...don'tcha remember that e-gram: "Dude--yer OLD!"
by cw4billt on February 23, 2005 1:00 PM
Sanger- Remember Twitchy Bill in the picture is a 1st Lieutenant college graduate in Vietnam...
Dude is oooooold.
Bill - I like you older guys... easier to trick you out of Margarita money!
by
John of Argghhh! on February 23, 2005 1:41 PM
And we like you guys because after the first one, you never realize that your drink gets smaller every time you turn your head...or that your change keeps disappearing a quarter at a time...or that charges for six-packs of Geritol keep showing up on your AmEx bill...
by cw4billt on February 23, 2005 2:30 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
February 21, 2005
Teaser
Here's a teaser for an upcoming series of posts I'm working on. Another multi-day fest of Gun Pr0n!
Anybody besides JMH and Neffi (c'mon guys, it's not like it's a challenge for you - this would be like having a pro player on a high school team) want to hazard a guess as to what this is? For? Etc? You two can respond email so you can still count your coup points...
I'll give you something I usually leave out - scale. This is a little larger than life size.
Update: Here's a really obtuse hint. Just cuz' SWWBO's gone and I'm feeling mean.
Otay. Here's another hint.
Yet another hint...
Final (I think) Update:
Okay - we're getting close now. CRFan - I'm jealous you've got an MG08/15!
Final hints - look at the pic, look at the pics below - and tell me which one you think is which - and why... because there is a key difference, and it is the key difference between any weapon with Maxim in it's name and a Vickers (vice a Maxim-Vickers... which, has Maxim in it's name, but sometimes you guys don't keep tips like that in mind). I dunno about you guys - this really wasn't intended as a "What is it?" post like I've done in the past - but this one has been fun for me.
Pic 1.
Pic 2.
Pic 3.
Pic 4.
Okay - one of 'em is a red herring for Phil! Wanna take a guess at what that is, Phil? It's not the obvious one...
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Hammer, Ordnance, Armourer for the use of, MK1*
too easy....
by Neffi on February 21, 2005 10:02 AM
Pintle, machinegun...
M60 series?
by Sgt. B. on February 21, 2005 10:17 AM
Belt buckle pistol from WWII?
by Mike on February 21, 2005 10:19 AM
All three are *not* correct.
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 10:22 AM
Wuz looking at that and came to the same conclusion... It'd be difficult to elevate the weapon...
by Sgt. B. on February 21, 2005 10:36 AM
Ian Hogg's favorite paperweight!
by Neffi on February 21, 2005 10:44 AM
...errrr.. that would be Ivan, natch
by Neffi on February 21, 2005 10:48 AM
Ivan?
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 11:00 AM
Hmmm, about 60% of normal weekday traffic at this point... which indicates an awful lot of readers are gov't/bankers surfing from work!
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 11:06 AM
Government Issue automatic nose picker. (For those really hard to get loogies.)
by
GEBIV on February 21, 2005 11:12 AM
Consider the topic, John! I have no idea what the first pic is, and the 'obtuse hint' was not terribly helpful ;-)
by
Barb on February 21, 2005 11:15 AM
My comment was on visitors, not commenters!
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 12:11 PM
A cannon lock. Is that round smooth part on the left where you tie the lanyard?
by Justthisguy on February 21, 2005 12:32 PM
Nope. I've provided another hint.
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 1:00 PM
Yet another piece of equipment to chuck down the TC's hatch to see if the gunner and loader are on their toes...
by Sgt. B. on February 21, 2005 1:10 PM
I'm with Barb on this one (although I do work for a financial company and am off work today- LOL!).
Looks like some fandangled (technical term, ranks up there with "whatchamacallit", "thingy" and "thingamajig") corkscrew to me.
Pass me the wine, willya, Sanger? You bottle hog!
by AFSister on February 21, 2005 2:21 PM
It's part of one of those thingamajigs. You know, the kind that go BANG really loud and wake up the neighbors? Like guns. That's it. Kinda like guns.
by spd rdr on February 21, 2005 2:22 PM
The hints are so-o-o helpful, thanks!
Could you pass the bottle over here next, AFSis? I'm at work, but I need something to drink anyway.
by
Barb on February 21, 2005 3:12 PM
Blech...I can't get either of your hints to open in either IE or MF.
But it's obviously the hatch release handle on a Panzerkampfwagen Mk IIc.
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 3:29 PM
Or a mounting attachment for a Boys Antitank Rifle?
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 3:33 PM
Barb- catch. And don't spill. No party fouls allowed at work- gets the boss really angry.
See John? I HAVE been paying attention to your lessons in weaponry. spd rdr confirmed my suspicion that this is, in fact, a thingamajig. And here you thought I'd been goofing off in Tech Terms 101!
Of course, everyone else is claiming this is a part to a gun thingy, but I'm sticking to the corkscrew theory.
Yellow Tail, anyone??? *hic*
by AFSister on February 21, 2005 3:37 PM
A Jack or some other type of hoisting equipment.
by TIM C on February 21, 2005 4:39 PM
And it turns an M-5 Stewart tank into a lowrider, right?
by
Cowboy Blob on February 21, 2005 4:45 PM
Jack... that's a good guess in some respects.
Completely wrong, but understandable.
A lotta you guys have never *seen* an armored vehicle jack up close, have you. I did say the pic was slightly larger than 1:1...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 4:52 PM
Thanks, AFSis! No breakage here, wouldn't waste a nice wine.
by
Barb on February 21, 2005 5:29 PM
Looks like a Shock Puller.
by purple raider on February 21, 2005 5:52 PM
Just so it's clear... it's a firearm component...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 6:01 PM
I'm going with the Fingerspitzengefuehl.
Degtyarev lockwork.
by Justthisguy on February 21, 2005 6:01 PM
It is the lock from a Maxim or Vickers machinegun, which are the same thing only with different names because Vikers was just the first company licensed to produce the Maim designed gun.
by Chris Denny on February 21, 2005 6:17 PM
Corkscrew. I'm tellin' ya- it's a corkscrew. Even has a cute little foilcutter and a re-corker. Very convenient.
by AFSister on February 21, 2005 6:25 PM
Chris - you are close - but they aren't the same thing. There is a significant difference between the Vickers-Maxim and the Vickers. Between any Maxim and a Vickers.
So, to keep it from being just a guess... if you think that's what it is - which is it, and why?
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 6:37 PM
It's the barrel release mechanism for a Bren gun.
Either that or a cigarette lighter.
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 6:40 PM
Hmmmm. Blob, that's so out in left field I'm tempted to trot downstairs and take a picture of the barrel release of a Bren...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 6:47 PM
Since you are a red leg and I see what I think is an optic I'd say the head assembly for a primitive (antique) aiming circle
by
Phil on February 21, 2005 6:57 PM
I wish I had about 10 of them for my 08/15--the only one I see for sale is $550 retail. The lock is the heart of the gun.
by CRFan on February 21, 2005 7:02 PM
I am indeed a Redleg, and I own about eight or nine - I'd have to go count - different aiming circles... but this ain't one of 'em!
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 7:02 PM
...ruptured case extracter for da Vickie??
by Neffi on February 21, 2005 7:20 PM
breech assembly/disassembly tools
by
Phil on February 21, 2005 7:26 PM
Dang, you have a Bren, too? I'm olive-drab with envy.
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 7:56 PM
Is it a barrel release for a Vickers/Maxim, then?
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 7:59 PM
Blob - Heh. I hate to break it to ya, son. I have a Mark I and a Mark II. Someone hasn't been paying attention on the Castle tours...
All - make sure you check the updates. There's new pics up there - and no, Blob, that ain't a barrel release. To get the barrels out of either of those guns you had to unload 'em, pull off the backplates, remove the recoil plates with the barrel secured in them by the trunnions. And then ya hadda repack your asbestos seals.
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 8:09 PM
OK I would say it is from a vickers as it has more parts and see,s to have a higher level of fit and finish than one would see on a Maxim made in russia like yours.
by Chris Denny on February 21, 2005 8:09 PM
Well, it's a Vickers part because it's in the Vickers folder...and the post's subject line is "gun pics / machine guns" but damned if I can tell what it is, perhaps the rear sight?
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 8:47 PM
Magazine release, perhaps?
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 9:01 PM
Blob - go look at the Maxim folder... or the Maxim posts in the Machine Gun/Gun Porn archives...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 9:02 PM
And Blob... since when do belt-feds have magazines?
Let's see who jumps that comment first...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 9:08 PM
No, wait...not magazine, it's not the aircraft version. My final guess, part of the trigger mechanism.
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 9:21 PM
ooh ooh MG34... used drum mags in the AA role... [pant pant]
by Neffi on February 21, 2005 9:24 PM
I'd argue that point. You could argue they were just round boxes for the belts. No springs were involved, you couldn't just load 'em with bullets sansabelt (heh) and expect 'em to fire...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 21, 2005 9:26 PM
MG Lock?
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 9:39 PM
Well, ok- but a magazine is just an enclosed box containing cartridges to be fed to the mech of the gun, independent of a seperate source (ie ammo box). The saddle drum for the MG34 is kinda a hybrid, eh? Belt feed within a magazine... hmmmmmm mebbe you could say a true belt gun has a feed pawl, while a mag gun relies on springs within the magazine to force the cartridges into play. So the MG34 (sans feed tray cover) will accept a magazine, but is still belt-fed for all that... my head hurts, I'm going beddies...
by Neffi on February 21, 2005 9:42 PM
While you're all wracking your brains, contest on my blog, no weapons involved...Sorry.
Lotsa weapons elsewhere, though!
http://cowboyblob.blogspot.com/2005/02/where-is-it.html
by
cowboy blob on February 21, 2005 10:38 PM
No wonder the scruples keep getting out--you took the trandimensional sub-quantum heavy-left router off their cage!
I will not be responsequence for the consibles to any etaoinshrdlu...
by cw4billt on February 22, 2005 5:29 AM
I see the drugs are kicking in, Bill. You've got to keep an eye on those dogs...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 22, 2005 5:47 AM
Don' need no steenkeeng drawgs.
Sorry (Darn--I always do that on tequila...).
by cw4billt on February 22, 2005 7:01 AM
pft. Bill- you broke out the tequila at 5AM!
And didn't invite me, Cass, Barb OR Cricket? I would have brought limes and salt, and Cricket has been working so hard on her Mexican menu.
hmpf. I thought we were friends.....
by AFSister on February 22, 2005 9:32 AM
AFSis - wondered where you guys were. Been waiting for you in the "HOO-AH!" post...
Ow!
by cw4billt on February 22, 2005 9:56 AM
...feedpawl?
*don't laugh too hard plz*
by YaRdApE on February 22, 2005 10:52 AM
Scratch that...it's the biocanooten valve off the Johnson Rod...
...or it's the stabilizer joint from a Belgian waffle maker...
It's a toughie.
by YaRdApE on February 22, 2005 11:55 AM
If it's not a Vickers MG lock, it's a Maxim MG lock that got misplaced in your Vickers kit.
Right?
by
cowboy blob on February 22, 2005 1:58 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
February 8, 2005
Life as a blogger is sooo much simpler...
...when readers provide content! Gives us a chance to take a break (like, maybe get those two caption contests finished!).
Since we've been in a Gatling mood of late (this one being in the National Infantry Museum), we proffer up these two gems, thoughtfully provided by readers Boquisucio and LvnCenturion.
First up, these gems from Boquisucio. Warning - the high res takes forever to load - best to save it and do other things while it's downloading. Worth the effort though, if you have the time and connectivity!
Noticing that you have been on a GAU mood lately, I don't know whether you
have come across this Movie Clip of the old GAU-2. There's a group of guys
in the SouthWest who somehow got themselves an old GAU-2 to play with.
They go by the name of Sub Gun Videos. If you haven't done so already, you
can check this clip out at:
Low Definition
High Definition
Somehow, I don't think that Louie Armstrong had a GAU in mind when he composed "What a Wonderful World"; but in a sick, twisted way, it goes perfectly well with it.
Hope that you like it,
Boquisucio
I like it - but it *does* take time to load - even on my cable connection!
I mean it - it *really* takes a long time.
Now, to finish off something from a previous thread - regarding the Phalanx gun system. One commenter somewhere in the thread talked about using Phalanx or Phalanx-like systems to do precision destruction of incoming artillery and mortar rounds. LvnCenturion, old Army buddy and fellow-contractor of mine is involved in the process the Army currently has in place to rapidly assess and procure "usable right now or very soon" tech and TTP's. And someone is already working on just that. Below is a picture of 155mm artillery rounds... shot by a Phalanx while inbound. That's pretty impressive. As the Centurion notes:
Your blog mentions the Phalanx and one of the comments refers to a little piece of work that we have been involved with namely shooting rockets, mortars, and artillery rounds out of the sky.
The attached picture is from an unclassified source, you may do with it as you will. Shooter is the Phalanx system.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Colour me ignorant, but what happens with allt hat steel that the phalanx is ripping into the air against the incoming artillery comes back to earth in concentrated showers?
Seems a little more conetrated and potentailly dense and dangerous than normal AAA fall-out.
by
Fred on February 8, 2005 8:03 AM
Caption contests? What caption contests? (insert sarcastic font)
What did those Phalanx rounds hit? The damage to the round isn't very consistant. Some look hardly damaged at all, some look like a peeled banana, and one is more like a smashed Coke can. If you can't say, I understand.
by AFSister on February 8, 2005 8:26 AM
Simple enough, Fred. Which would you prefer, a 98 pound chunk of inert metal coming down, probably at a location *other* than it was aimed at - or a fully-functioning 155mm round with 25 pounds of TNT or Composition B and a bursting radius of 50 meters, shattering into thousands of tiny shards (and some not so tiny) with the accompanying blast wave?
Or, better yet, causing a dispensing submuntion round like a Dual-Purpose Improved Conventional Munition from functioning and dispensing its bomblets?
The point here isn't a 'perfect defense' - we already *know* there's going to be damage. What we're trying to do is reduce the damage, and prevent the shooter from hitting what he was aiming at.
It's kind of like Patriot - it turns the Scud into ballistic junk - which, if you are where it lands, is going to hurt - but not as much, in military terms, as if it lands where it's aimed, and functions as intended.
Howzzat?
by
John of Argghhh! on February 8, 2005 8:29 AM
Sis - I did too say. 155mm artillery rounds. Those are a little over six inches in diameter, roughly 3 feet long, weigh 100 pounds, traveling at somewhere in the vicinity of 800-900 meters per second.
That's pretty good shooting, if you ask me.
It looks like one of them (rightmost) had a 'low order' burst, meaning that it didn't function properly, but did explode into a few large chunks, the one on the far left may also have experienced a low-order burst - it looks like it got hit in the fuze well, where the supplemental charge would be, which probably initiated the burst - but since the carcase was compromised (i.e., the round had a hole in it already) the explosion was not contained properly, failing to shatter the carcase, which then went on to a tumbling, ballistic impact (following the path of the trajectory, however deflected by the hit) and got all bent up on impact. In fact, that looks like what happened to all three of them counting from the left.
The two relatively intact ones look like fuze failure. 3rd from the right due to a hit on the fuze, second from the right, the base of the fuze appears to still be in the round - so either it was shot off (could have been knocked off on impact, too) or, the holes in the body so compromised the pressure vessel that the fuze didn't even blow out.
Again, see my discussion above.
As for "sarcastic font" I got your number, babe. Squeaky wheel gets the grease.
YOU pick what you think are the four best captions from each of those groups (no more than one of yours, please) send 'em to me and I'll post 'em for a vote. Howzzat Ms. Smarty-pants?
by
John of Argghhh! on February 8, 2005 8:41 AM
I see, said the blind girl...
I thought these were Phalanx round which shot the 155mm rounds- not the 155mm rounds themselves. Makes more sense now. Thanks for the explainations- very helpful. How big are Phalanx rounds? Nice shooting, regardless of their size, but I'm just a curious kind of girl.
OK, I'll take you up on your challenge, gun-boy.
by AFSister on February 8, 2005 9:21 AM
When on the delivering side of the equation, Low-Order Bursts are not your friend.
Our Air Farce is in the process of redesigning their Mk80 Series Nuggets. Their current design relies on a welded Back Plate. This welding is failing in statistically significant numbers. When this happens, you get a beautiful fountain of conflagrating PBX projected from abaft, and little else.
They are looking into a centrifugal forge process to develop a Mono-Block design on the bodies. Thus, solving this embarasing but coloful design weakness. But that's something between the guys in National Forge, Rock Island and China Lake to work out.
by Boquisucio on February 8, 2005 10:14 AM
Hey, gun-boy.
Check your email(well, at least I think email'd you- I was guessing at your email addy since I don't have it with me at work). I sent you my picks, but feel free to replace any of them if your fav doesn't appear.
by AFSister on February 8, 2005 11:21 AM
Hey, Zoomie-sib, negative knowledge this location.
by
John of Argghhh! on February 8, 2005 12:34 PM
Geez, John - you weren't kidding. The small one is huge, even! Glad I started the high-res version downloading at home before I left for work.
I'm still waiting for the smaller one to download, 5 minutes down, 20 to go ...
by Barb on February 8, 2005 2:47 PM
Yes Barb,
Good things come to those who wait.
Boquisucio
by Boquisucio on February 8, 2005 3:14 PM
Boquisucio - You speak truth :-) Totally worth the long download time!
The music does work well, doesn't it?
by Barb on February 8, 2005 3:28 PM
Kinda deflates the argument the anti-SDI folks make on hit-to-kill being as "impossible as hitting one bullet in the air with another."
It merely depends on the size of the bullet you're trying to hit and the number of rounds you're trying to hit it with--and it doesn't hurt to have an acquisition and tracking system like Phalanx does [*cue Louis Armstrong...*]
by cw4billt on February 8, 2005 6:53 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
February 7, 2005
Dreams...
The Castle does not yet have the resources, in both time and funding, for a display of this sophistication.
WWI German equipment at the National Infantry Museum, Fort Benning, Georgia.
But it *is* nice to know that Great Minds think along similar lines.
The "Germanic Wall" in the Arsenal at Castle Argghhh!, which includes Austrian and Swiss long iron. (Like I said, space is at a premium, so disregard the Brit sniper rifle and the Bren gun on the AA tripod...)
Hi-res version is here.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Nuttin shabby about that, John- I'll take my displays 'hands-on' rather than under glass any day. But that Maxim would look good next to the Bren, no?
by Neffi on February 7, 2005 7:17 AM
When the War of the Worlds hits, I'm heading for the Castle! You've got enough fire power for a small army of bloggers, haven't you John?
by AFSister on February 7, 2005 8:17 AM
Hands off the Bren! It is mine, mine mine I tell you!
*sobbing*
by Cricket on February 7, 2005 8:22 AM
Why the goesche der kriegsmarine as a backdrop? Shouldn't it be displayed with the 20mm mount from the Prinz Eugen?
by cw4billt on February 7, 2005 8:24 AM
Cricket - Wash your hands before you go posting again--you've still got linseed oil all over them from caressing the Bren's stock!
by cw4billt on February 7, 2005 8:27 AM
Cuz I like that flag, that's why. And they carried those rifles on the ships.
I'm not terribly naval at the Castle, but we give 'em some credit here and there.
by
John of Argghhh! on February 7, 2005 9:06 AM
I like navels. Innies, not outies.
Oh hell-navAL.
by AFSister on February 7, 2005 9:15 AM
Oh pooh. You are just being piththy.
by Cricket on February 7, 2005 9:29 AM
And what's with the dinner plate directions?
You got me all hungry for salad and I couldn't see it
in this browser.
I may have to switch browsers.
by Cricket on February 7, 2005 9:37 AM
AF Sister - you need to click on the Castle in the left sidebar. All questions are therein answered.
by
John of Argghhh! on February 7, 2005 10:28 AM
John:
Cricket = Looking for buttons
AFSister = Looking at buttons
by cw4billt on February 7, 2005 12:09 PM
John - Darned if you're not right again. I'd totally forgotten about shipboard Arms Lockers. Doubly embarassing to have to admit to forgetting the two primary functions of the Marines, too:
1. Insure the maintenance of good order and decorum aboard ship and
2. Give the sailors practice leading during the dances...
[*swiftly donning kevlar jock*]
by cw4billt on February 7, 2005 12:42 PM
Bill,
I suggest a package of frozen peas for that soreness. It worked quite well for my neighbor following his vasectomy.
John-
OK. Scrap that. You have enough to arm a SMALL COUNTRY of bloggers. Maybe even enough for all of Europe by now, with the way they seem to be lifting their petticoats while running from conflict. Jeesh! I hope you have a sprinkler system installed. That would be one hella BOOM if anything ever happened!
by AFSister on February 7, 2005 1:39 PM
Oh yeah-
John you should make the Eagle "Jihad This" into a mug or t-shirt! That was OUTSTANDING!
by AFSister on February 7, 2005 1:41 PM
Sis - what, you think I store the ammo and explosives with the weapons? Fates forfend!
Nothing in the house except the Ready Reaction Force ammo. All the rest is properly secured, stored and marked.
My neighbors might be annoyed, but the Castle would be okay...
by
John of Argghhh! on February 7, 2005 1:54 PM
AFSis - The kevlar is to prevent structural damage from fragments.
Brass doesn't get sore.
by cw4billt on February 7, 2005 3:16 PM
John-
Glad to see Beth has knocked some sense into you over the past few years. Seeing all of those grenades, guns and other weapons of mass destruction together made me shiver. Well, I think that's what gave me the goose bumps.
HEY!!!!!!!!!!
WAIT A MINUTE!!!!!!
So THAT'S where Saddam hid the WMD's! Man, oh man. They were right here under our noses this whole time, in hidden jpg's!
Bill-
Don't you need a structure to prevent from damage before the Kevlar will help?
*puts on really fast shoes and runs away*
by AFSister on February 7, 2005 3:32 PM
Don't bother running, you'll only die tired.
As for the grenades and stuff - that's all in the house.
It just ain't live.
I don't own *live* 155mm DPICM. That would be dumb, not to mention illegal.
But I do have purpose built inert dummies, or inerted ordnance...
Purpose-built inert dummies... no, I'll leave that one lie today, given 1SG Kasal.
by
John of Argghhh! on February 7, 2005 3:46 PM
"Gunner, target. Twelve o'clock, three thousand--snarkstress at desk, nose pressed against monitor, sensible shoes. TOW with SARAFIM warhead, selector AUTO."
"Searching...searching...okay, middle window. Gimme constraints."
"You're in constraints. I confirm your sight pic with pipper. Wire-cut switch identified. Shoot."
BAMF! "TOW on the wire. Tracking...tracking..."
by cw4billt on February 8, 2005 9:40 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
January 19, 2005
Assault Rifle Ammunition
JMH sends along this link to an interesting article on 6.5 Grendel.com comparing and contrasting the developmental history and choices in choosing/designing ammunition for the assault rifle genus.
Perhaps of equal interest to me (and any other ammo collectors out there) is the homepage of the author of the article, Anthony Williams - CANNON, MACHINE GUNS AND AMMUNITION... looks like my kinda guy!
by
John
on
Jan 19, 2005
�
SayUncle links with:
Les has more
January 13, 2005
Gratuitous Gun Pic
One of these would look good on the battlements of the Castle. Mebbe two.
A CIWS - not the Royal Navy sailor servicing it! Something for you sailors, today.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
I'll send you some (expended) brass and links--you can scatter them 'round the trebouchet and pretend...
by cw4billt on January 13, 2005 11:29 AM
I remember when the Canadian navy's contribution to Gulf War I left Halifax these were on each vessel, we watching from an office tower each had a moment of illogical dread that these guns responded automatically not only to incoming missles but also wharfs of flagwaving schoolkids. Nasty pieces of machinery.
by
Alan on January 13, 2005 12:10 PM
Ahhh... Those old Vulcans still stand the test of time.
That rocks. :)
by
Casey Tompkins on January 13, 2005 12:25 PM
Bill - what makes you think I don't have a belt or two? I just haven't posted a picture...
by
John of Argghhh! on January 13, 2005 1:32 PM
TP, TP-T or DU?
by cw4billt on January 13, 2005 1:48 PM
Beats launching a cow via catapult, I'll wager.
by
Ciggy on January 13, 2005 1:52 PM
Nothing beats a catapult cow!
Except APFSDS.
Cheers
JMH
by J.M. Heinrichs on January 13, 2005 2:13 PM
You can take the CIWS if I can have her.
Deal?
by Sigivald on January 13, 2005 5:54 PM
Deal, Sigi. I've got a gurl already. I don't have a CIWS!
by
John of Argghhh! on January 13, 2005 6:10 PM
Did you see in the Inside the Ring a couple of Fridays ago?:
Force protection
Tuesday's bombing of a mess tent in Iraq that killed 22 U.S. service members, American contractors and Iraqis has focused more attention in the Pentagon on the issue of force protection.
In addition to suicide bombers penetrating base security, enemy rocket and mortar attacks continue to be a major threat that the Pentagon is working to counter.
Weapons designers have started one crash program that uses the Navy's Mk15 Phalanx Close-In Weapons System, known as the CIWS and pronounced "sea wiz." The gun uses six extreme rapid-fire 20 mm cannons guided by search-and-tracking radar that has been used effectively by ships to guard against anti-ship missile attack.
The land-based system uses a fire-finding radar that can detect mortar and rocket launches, allowing the Phalanx gun to lay down a line of fire in the direction of the incoming round.
Tests at the White Sands, N.M., testing range have shown that the ground-based CIWS can hit targets up to 50 percent of the time. While not perfect, the new anti-mortar system would provide limited protection from insurgent attacks and may be rushed into service in Iraq.
by
Myron L. on January 13, 2005 7:04 PM
Better+cheaper:
1. Procure Hughes (ooops) MD-530 with pilot, with ANVIS-6, with GIB (Guy In Back) armed with M-240/M-249.
2. Fly zone recon.
3. Take out weapons, gunners and al-Jazeera camera crews while they're still setting up and fiddling with the makeup and light meter.
4. Return for fuel, ammo and coffee.
5. Repeat as necessary.
by cw4billt on January 13, 2005 7:46 PM
(Caption for the picture)
"R2, is that a gun in your chasis or are you just happy to see me?"
by Mythilt on January 14, 2005 8:20 AM
Mythilt - HA! Good 'un!
by cw4billt on January 14, 2005 9:03 AM
Thank you.
I really wish we had been allowed to see the CIWS fire when I caught a ride on the Connie from Seattle to San Francisco back in 1997. One of the smarter things the Navy used to do, the Tiger Cruises, family members allowed to ride on the ships for a few days experiencing what the crew experiences. Didn't get to see the CIWS fire, but did get to watch carrier ops, and the escorts gave us a show blowing holes in the water a few miles away.
Was much fun.
by Mythilt on January 14, 2005 12:15 PM
Mythilt - two short video clips, one with sound, are at http://tri.army.mil/LC/CS/csa/aagatlin.htm#Phalanx
if you want to see R2 in action...
by cw4billt on January 14, 2005 1:01 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
January 3, 2005
New Equipment updates.
I recently got sent an update brief on some of the new, or newly modified gear, being fielded or scheduled for fielding. I'll be posting it in chunks over the next couple of days.
First installment includes updates on the XM107, the Semi-Auto Sniper Weapon System (SA-SWS), updates to the M249, Mk46 and Mk 48 machine guns, Shotguns, grenades, non-lethals, and the TOW Bunker Buster.
Download file
October 4, 2004
Extra-Super Serious Geek Alert!
WARNING-WARNING-WARNING-WARNING!!!! If you are easily bowled over by technogeeky jargon, just skip on down one. If high school physics broke your spirit, just keep on movin' on - if you think Superman comics are packed full of useful insights into how Newton's Laws and the Laws of Thermodynamics work... just keep on keepin' on!
Still here? You'll like this. The Instapilot will like this. Anybody wanna argue the math? [N.B. - it was sent to me, I didn't work this out]
We know the formula for kinetic energy is KE = mass x velocity2 . Now let's check in with the Movie Physics Guys.
So in their example, a small .45 caliber bullet weighing 15 grams and traveling at 288 meters per second yields is 619 joules of energy.
They further explain that if a man weighing 139 lbs (63.2 kg) were to fall off of a bed, it would yield roughly the same energy as being shot by that bullet; the difference being with a fall the energy is disbursed through the entire surface area of the man's body versus a bullet where the focal point is a tiny circle.
KE = mass x velocity2
KE = (.015kg / 2) x (288 m/s x 288 m/s)
KE = 619 joules of energy
Potential energy is defined to be PE = (mass) x (g) x (height), where the height is the vertical distance of the object from the ground and g stands for gravitational acceleration or acceleration due to gravity. Near the surface of the earth, g is a constant approximately equal to 9.8 meters per second per second (m/s2). You can use these formulas to calculate the total energy of the system by just adding up the forms.
PE = mass x gravity x height
PE = 63.2kg x 9.81 m/s x 1 meter
PE = 619 joules of energy
So taking this information, let's plug in the numbers of the Apache's M230 automatic gun ammunition. We have each 30mm round weighing 350 grams and traveling at 800 meters per second.
KE = (.3505kg / 2) x (800 m/s x 800 m/s)
KE = .175 x 640,000
KE = 112,160 joules
Now that's a little hard to wrap your army around... I mean just how much energy is 112,000 joules? Well, for starters it's 180 times the energy of the .45 caliber handgun bullet. So imagine 180 people all pointing .45 caliber handguns at this guy's body and everyone pulling the trigger all at the same time. Hmmm, yes...messy.
Furthermore, we can calculate just how high up this guy would have to plunge in order to release the same amount of energy as was released when he caught one of the Apache's 30mm rounds square in the chest...
112,160 = 63.2kg x 9.81 x height
height = 112,160 / (63.2 x 9.81)
height = 112,160 / 619.99
height = 180.9 meters (or 593 feet)
Now, taking our queue (sic) from the evolution of skyscrapers, I found an average 4.26 meters (13.96 feet) per floor. Thus this terrorist you see splattered all over Main Street in downtown Baghdad? He looks the same as if someone tossed his happy ass off a 42 story building.
And the best part? The Apache's 30mm gun is really a popgun compared to the 30mm gun of an A-10 -- same diameter slugs but they're much heavier and travel much faster. So should you be unlucky enough to eat one of the Warthog's tank killing depleted uranium slugs...
KE = (.91kg / 2) x (1500 m/s x 1500 m/s) = 1,023,750 joules of smack down
1,023,750 joules / 619 joules per .45 cal bullet = 1,626 people shooting you at once
1,023,750 joules = 63.2kg x 9.81 x height
height = 1,651 meters or 5,417 feet or a 1.02 mile freefall
But at a fire rate of 3,900 rounds per minute, the A-10's bullets will be more like Lays potato chips -- nobody's gonna eat just one. All you terrorist rats in Iraq and Iran better keep that in mind when you hear the whoop-whoop-whoop of helicopter blades, eh?
Hat tip to Cary!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Wow.
I just love when science explains the effects of high-velocity/large calibre ammo on things.
Now lets do the math for that anti-personel tank round that John was talking about. (At least I think that it was talked about here...)
by
GEBIV on October 4, 2004 7:59 PM
Now, for fun (and I sho wisht I wuz good wit nummers), imagine how much energy is released at the point of impact from a few dozen 25mm rounds from an AC-130 circling at 15K feet overhead. Or how it must REALLY suck to be on the incoming end of the 40mm, and especially that ass-kicking 105!!!
The only thing I think must be more fun to watch/use are the miniguns in the MH-53 Pave Lows and the MH-60 Pave Hawks. What they may lack in size, they more than make up for in street-clearing, stump-grinding rpms!
SangerM
by SangerM on October 4, 2004 9:09 PM
... and the 120mm APFSDS long-rod penetrator fired from an Abrams has more than 10x the energy of the A-10's 30mm.
Cheers
JMH
by J.M. Heinrichs on October 4, 2004 10:03 PM
Scientific Sickness! A 10 on the ouie gooie geek meter.
by
Mark Adams on October 4, 2004 10:24 PM
Mark! Again you wander through! Well, look at it this way - if you want to have a military available for Democrat Presidents to use, we've got to take kind of a non-partisan approach to this. Ya can't just toss us out as thug Republican stooges every time the PIP (Party In Power) and have the rest study horticulture...
Just a thought!
You should hang around Police/Fire/Ambulance/Trauma Center locker rooms. Kinda goes with the territory! Trust me - if you are going to have an army, it's better to have one that has some idea of what it's doing... then you don't find yourself having to kill children with car bombs to express your displeasure with the regime change...
by
John of Argghhh! on October 4, 2004 10:40 PM
One problem. The equations here are assuming that 100% of the energy from the bullet is transfered to the body. In fact, relatively little of it will be transfered, because the body just doesn't have enough stopping power. In the initial example of a single .45 bullet, you might actually get 100% energy transfer. For instance, if the person were wearing a bullet proof vest which succeeded in stopping the bullet (or at least slowing it down enough that it didn't exit out the back) then the force of impact would be exactly like that 1m fall out of bed.
If a human body (say it was the hulk) actually stopped a bullet from an apache, then yes, it'd be accelerated backwards as though it had been dropped off a 40 story building, which, even though the bullet didn't pass through, would pretty much liquify any ordinary person. As it is, the bullet passes clean through, and only loses perhaps a few hundred Joules.
Instead, I propose an alternate system. Let's say the human body is capable of stopping one .45 bullet's worth of energy before giving up & allowing the bullet to exit through the back (in reality, it'd probably take 2 or 3 people to stop a .45, especially if it avoided big bones, but we'll just use the 1 person idea for now). In that case, you could line up 1,626 terrorists, and with a single round from an Apache, you could puncture every single one of them.
Now all we have to do is figure out how to get them to all line up!
by
Beck on October 5, 2004 2:23 AM
Good points, Beck. Of course, the .45 was developed for that purpose with that in mind, to not go through people, if possible. The example above also does not include a discussion of the attenuation curve as the bullet loses energy over range.
Still - it is an illustrative example, ain't it.
As for your falling out of bed analogy - not in my experience - if for no other reason than you've generalized the energy too much - there is a concentration of the impact energy.
Both my father and I have been shot wearing flak vests. We agree it's far more analgous to having the Hulk hit you in the chest with a baseball bat than falling out of bed. In my father's case, it did result in broken ribs and the bullet penetrated, albeit just under the skin along the ribs.
by
John of Argghhh! on October 5, 2004 5:57 AM
I once worked with someone who had, in an earlier life, participated in RAF weapons research. The conclusion reached was simple. Rate of fire is no substitute for weight of fire. You can fire enough .32 ACP from a full-auto Skorpion to total the ballistic energy of one round from an elephant gun, but it won't stop a charging elephant.
by
triticale on October 5, 2004 8:04 AM
The other thing, since we're being pedantic, is that air resisteance when falling off the taller buildings. I'm not sure that they won't have hit terminal velocity. In more ways than one.
by
Fred on October 5, 2004 8:21 AM
Wasn't the .45 designed to defeat the kind of simple armor the Moros wore? That was the line we got when I joined the Army....
by SangerM on October 5, 2004 9:56 AM
It was designed to hit 'em and stay in 'em and knock 'em down - not so much because of the armor, but because they drugged themselves and were, well, perhaps just tougher, and the .38 wasn't doing enough damage to cause them to lose interest in dropping your intestines around your ankles.
Same problem the Brits had in colonial warfare that caused them to go to the .455 round. Stopping power for non-wussy natives who were grumpy about exterior meddling in their affairs. Apparently euro-soldiers were wusses who would go, "Oh! My! I've been shot! I must sit down and rest."
The natives were more like, "Izzat the best you got? Eat assegai, asshat!"
Or, in the case of the Moros, bolo machete.
by
John of Argghhh! on October 5, 2004 10:10 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
by
John
on
Oct 04, 2004
�
There's One, Only! links with:
Big Guns!
August 26, 2004
A change of Pace
Too much politics, not enough ordnance.
Here's a picture of the British No 9 Director (aiming circle in US milspeak) used with the Vickers machine gun.
The Brits routinely massed the fires of Vickers machineguns, taking advantage of their reliability, and used them as artillery against unseen targets, to suppress and disrupt. As long as you can meet the ammo requirements and have a reliable gun that can just keep on firing (that's where the water-cooling comes in useful) you can be really annoying. Air-cooled guns have to back off on the rate of fire, or go through a lot of barrel changes.
Think about it, there you are, route-stepping your way to the front-line trenches, or your jumping-off point, or repositioning the reserve to respond to an attack - and suddenly it just starts raining bullets. Lots and lots of bullets.
Just another reason it sucks to be an infantryman.
It's all about trade-offs and your tactical environment. If you are in a highly mobile situation, you want those lighter, faster-firing (generally) air-cooled gus. If you are in a moderately static environment... that sustained fire capability starts looking pretty good.
Of course, over time, the air-cooled gun has won completely. Cheaper, lighter and faster to make, and advances in materials making them more robust and able to sustain higher rates of fire - and, the more mobile nature of warfare has placed a premium on getting the most firepower from the fewest people (smaller crews). And small mortars, the rifle-mounted grenade launcher, or the belt-fed grenade machine guns like the MK19 have completely supplanted the water-cooled gun.
But I still like 'em from an aesthetic perspective.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
I've heard of people just pouring water on the barrel of a Ma Deuce, but this was at Knob Creek type fun shoots and not in combat.
by
triticale on August 26, 2004 9:31 AM
People did it in combat, too. Urine, too.
Which works well, if you are near water. And not dehydrated.
Just not quite as effective. Not to mention smelly.
by
John of Argghhh! on August 26, 2004 10:05 AM
Ahh, you need a Carrier or 15cwt truck to carry your vickers kit around there mate!
by Montieth on August 26, 2004 12:11 PM
Montieth - amen, cobber!
This is what I aspire to, someday.
by
John of Argghhh! on August 26, 2004 12:22 PM
Thanks for the post, John. I can't recall any of my history books mentioning how the British would mass machine guns and use them as artillery as you describe.
Now I've learned two things today. The other thing was how to use comparatives in French. That may be more immediately useful to me in the short term, but it's not nearly as interesting as what you taught me.
by
Jack on August 26, 2004 1:10 PM
The OQF 25 Pounder or the Carrier? IF you get the 25 Pounder you need the Limber and FAT to go with it.
There's a Quad Polsteen for sale over on Milweb.net. There's also a demilled 25 pounder and a demilled 17 pounder.
Theres a CMP Cab13 15cwt for sale as well on milweb for $850 up in Montreal. Supposedly running so it sounds like a good deal as a basis for a restoration. Find yourself a FAT body and you're set, all you'll need is a limber and the kit for the gun. Plus 5 friends to help bring the gun into action.
I'm partial to British armor myself.
'42 Dingo
'43 Humber
'60 Ferret
What part of the country are you in?
Jack, in one battle in WWI(Somme I think), a MMG company of 10 Vickers MMGs fired just short of 1,000,000 rounds of .303 Brit (MkVIz?) in a sustained mission over 10 hours. One gun fired just over 10,000 rounds. Do the math, the 450-550 rpm average and the number of rounds fired speaks volumes to the crews that kept those guns serviced, de-coked, watered and fed .303 in cloth belts. The attack they were supporting worked too because the Huns couldn't assemble to counter attack the ground captured in time.
by Montieth on August 26, 2004 11:19 PM
I'm in Kansas... and have a kid-and-a-half in college
(long story on the half-a-kid), so I won't be adding
any vehicles soon.
As for Rods stuff - both the 25pdr and the carrier.
Rod has 4 25pdrs, two of which are traceable to
Moresheads fellows in the desert.
If you own a Dingo, Ferrert, and Humber, my penis
shrivels in your presence.
Put me in your will!
by
John of Argghhh! on August 27, 2004 5:25 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
August 4, 2004
Time for another moment of Zen
Continuing the showcasing of Da Goddess' photography skills, we have today's sample.
Nothing like a rear view of a Browning M1919A4 in a vehicle mount with a loaded belt providing a color splash. Feels like home. Those of you who know what I mean, know what I mean. Those of you who don't, well, it's a soldier thang. Ignore the obviously-fired primers. It's a display in San Diego for heaven's sake!
Click the pic for hi-res. I may have to make that a wallpaper!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
I'm glad you're enjoying the pics!
Tonight's the night. Hope the couple's there so I can hook y'all up! He was intrigued by your collection - YES I told him about it!
by
Da Goddess on August 4, 2004 12:52 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
June 15, 2004
XM307
A while back I posted some pics and data on the XM307 multi-purpose machinegun currently under development. Most of you who commented were, well, *not* impressed.
I've found some more data, all unclas and not FOUO that adds to the picture. Those of you who were not impressed, well, I suspect you still won't be.
It certainly does look like a weapon designed by engineers, for engineers, that will not simplify the parts system nor make life easier for ammo dogs - I'm undecided if it will help the soldier, the primary customer! I would note that the expected production costs are less than for a shootable Vickers MG these days.
Click the graphic to be taken to the (edited to remove personal info like emails and phone numbers, as well as the actual fielding plan - hey, ya don't hafta know everything) briefing. I just wish I had gotten the embedded videos (those slides are missing from this brief)! You may need to 'doubleclick' your browser 'back' button to escape out of Fototime. They really don't want you to escape!
High res version of the slide is here.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
I'm not equipped to comment on the utility of this weapon, but I do have a question: They have guys who have used these types of weapons and will use them again "at the pointy end" working directly with the weapon designers every day, don't they? I certianly hope so... but my realism (that is often mistaken for cynicism) warns me that the engineers are in a closed room somewhere thinking "hey, this is cool" instead of outside talking to the guys who end up using the weapon.
by
Jack on June 15, 2004 7:44 AM
Well, yes and no. We do invite users in to advise and test. The development community has enlisted soldiers (vice officers) assigned to it for just that purpose, and depending on many factors, brings in soldiers from serving/deployed units or takes the item to the soldiers for test.
They make an honest effort.
However, get the wrong guys (weak personalities who are intimidated by the 'techs for example) or, because of fear of failure during the early stages, conducting tests that are so sterile as to be worthless, can allow 'features creep' to overwhelm a project. The user community can be guilty of that too, as everybody has a 'good idea/pet rock'. Which gets you horses designed by committee - like the F-111 fighter-bomber that wasn't a fighter at all (Sorry MacNamara) and wasn't a great bomber - and found it's niche as an EW platform. Or the Crusader, or the Sgt York...
We are reluctant to put truly new technology into combat trials, given the risk of loss of a weapon.
A weapon can (seemingly) go just fine through troop trials and then have glaring problems in combat (see rifle, 5.56mm, M16). Not saying the problems don't crop up in trials - but the agendas in the development community can militate against them being highlighted.
Part of the periodic revamping of the development/procurement process reflects attempts to address those issues and keep things honest.
But, until something spends a good chunk of time in the hands of combat soldiers (average soldiers, not-handpicked testers, SOF, etc) you don't really have a good grasp on what the true MTBF (mean time between failure) rates are, the supply needs (Batteries? Another bunch of batteries?), and other issues (like the LandWarrior interface cable, etc).
This weapon is all a part of trying to push the light fighters into the Starship Troopers universe - and it will be ugly in the beginning, I suspect. It usually is.
But pretty much everyone in the process is trying hard to do the right thing - it's just that PVT Snuffy, the ultimate end-user, usually does not behave in the predicted fashion!
And then there's the 'other guy'. The enemy.
by
John of Argghhh! on June 15, 2004 8:25 AM
Thanks, John, your answer was pretty much what I suspected. I had hoped that the military had a better system than we in industry do, but apparently not. Field testing of new CPUs in Macintoshes doesn't have quite the same consequences as discovering the tendency of a rifle to jam in the middle of combat, however... If I recall what I have read and heard correctly, though, the M16 has evolved into a pretty decent weapon, is that correct?
I am getting concerned about the "Starship Troopers" aspect. As you mentioned, batteries could become a major issue (if they are not already), and battery technology is getting stuck after several years of impressive but not quite sufficient advances. Batteries are still heavy, and the power densities are near the limits of what we can achieve with electrochemical-based batteries. My work in the semiconductor industry has been split between improving performance and reducing power consumption to compensate for the lack of improvement in batteries (and being asked for the near impossible of improving performance WHILE reducing power consumption).
While I'd love to see power-armor one day, I have no idea where the "power" part of it will come from.
by
Jack on June 15, 2004 11:33 AM
Where the hell is John Browning, or Eugene Stoner when you need them?
by
Dennis on June 15, 2004 9:22 PM
Slow technoligical advances are the hallmark of the U. S. Army. We [no mouse in my pocket - I was in for 26 years] abandoned repeating rifles for almost 20 years [after winning the Battle of Gettysburg with them], failed to deploy a functioning light mqachine gun in WWI [can you say "show-show"?] and deployed the best MBT in the world in late 1941 - and kept on producing the same piece of iron [M4 Sherman] while the Germans went from the Pz-IIIH to the Panther F.
//
During my 20 ywears as a defense contractor [which overlapped 13 years in the Reserves] I saw good idea after good idea bite the dust at the hands of institutions [e.g. Ft. Knox] that could only handle one new idea per generation! Every single person in our group of 27 was ex-military - including the secretary! Do not believe for a second that we were unrealistic or less than fully committed to building war-winning systems. The stuff we developed [and demonstrated in live fire!] in '87 is just beginning to percolate into the force [e.g. armed UAVs].
//
This particular weapon system [and I do not currently work for the contractor that makes it] represents an order of magnitude increase in firepower over the venerable M2 [BTW, I am the only person I ever met in the whole damned Army that disliked that cranky, worn-out, over-weight beast of a gun]. Sure, it will have teething troubles - and they will be fixed in 5 years, before the fielding process is even completed. Battlefield resupply of batteries is a concern that is being worked from a dozen different angles [including an all-purpose battery recharger in every vehicle]
//
Every new advance in technology is met with the same set of objections from the "experts" in the Combat Developments Branch:
1) "It is too delicate and complex for the dirty battlefield" . They have never seen one, but they heard it was rough up there!
2) "It wastes precious ammo /fuel /power /manna /experience points /etc" . I was a Corps-level logistician and planned for 25,000 tons/day - we can fit it in somewhere!
3) "We would have to develop new tactics, operations and doctrine to accommodate this new weapon" You can wear powdered wigs and white pipe-clayed cross-belts and march to beat of fife and drum - we will sit behind the trees with our rifles . . . . . .
4) "It is iherently UNSAFE! ALL, I say again, ALL weapons are inherently unsafe in the eyes of total wusses - or professional safety officers.
5) "Our rude, crude unlettered troops will be baffled by the complexity of this system!" Repeating rifles, automobiles, airplanes, radios, helicopters, night vison goggles and personal computers were invented by Americans - I think we can find men that can use them on the battlefield, in fact, I think we have found them already.
//
Simple and cheap weapons always look good during peace or from a distance, but is that what YOU want to fight with?
by OldFan on June 16, 2004 2:49 AM
Now *that* was a comment.
I pretty much agree with all of it - though I'm not as sanguine about the batteries bit.
If this hog can fly, the troops will make it fly.
But, while OldFan scores some points... there are still some dogs out there that need killin'.
My own taste in personal firearms tend towards the M-14 and 1911A1. I never liked the M16 until the M4 came out (and then people who hate the M4 started picking on me...) I simply cannot stand the Beretta as a side arm, but I understand why it got adopted. But then I'm a big guy, and humping the M14 and shooting the 1911A1 were never problems for me.
I do prefer keeping my weapons simple, and, as an artilleryman, I have plenty of experience in dealing with balky electronics, but am not particularly intersted in going back to charts and darts (though I think all artillery officers should know charts and darts - you'll understand the gunnery problem much better than you do with just getting computer gunnery).
We'll have to see how it plays out - the troops will be the final arbiters of how the ammo and such plays out - but, Mr. Corps Logistician - it's the retail delivery end, not the wholesale, where my concerns arise. Especially in expeditionary warfare, the logistics of which I am currently up to my navel in analyzing... and considering we're having problems now with enough ball ammo for rifles and SAWS, what's the budget/production sked look like for this new stuff?
Yeah, the Germans went from the Panzer IIIH/IVE to the PzV, VI, and Maus - and never had enough of any of 'em, while we swamped 'em with gas-powered Ronsons, and the Russians swamped 'em with T-34s and JSIIIs.
We're trying to be the Germans here, trading quality for mass, so we gotta get it right the first time.
Of course, we're pushing the analogy pretty hard when we compare WWII to what's going on now!
I like the concept of this system - I just have my concerns about some of the bits and pieces. Which is how it's supposed to work, no? We try to break everything during development, so we've cleared the decks for when we give it to the troops who will break it ways we never thought of!
by
John of Argghhh! on June 16, 2004 6:02 AM
will this weapon come with a pack mule?
just wondering. didn't the army used to have
something called "mule skinners". guess they will need some of them too.
quess everything is hi tech now . that has it's plus and minuses but i've heard the desert conditions are really hard on hi tech weapons , extreme heat , sand etc. course you had rain , mud, heat etc. in vietnam.
extreme cold snow etc in korea and just about everything in ww2. guess i'm just too picky.duh. i guess these guys know what they are doing.
by renee on August 16, 2004 4:04 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
May 13, 2004
My "MA" just got fired.
About the only thing left that has been fighting for the US longer than the B-52 is on the short road to retirement.
The MA-Deuce. M2 .50 Cal machinegun. My mostest favoritist firearm in the whooooole world.
She's being retired in favor of the XM312. Which is, I admit, pretty cool-looking. But she'd better be as reliable as my MA! I still have my headspace and timing gauges I carried for 24 years.
More info is available here.
Purty though, ain't she? A little lighter, too.
General Dynamics Photo.
Hat tip to Strategy Page.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Maybe it's made to look cool to distract us from the incredibly low rate of fire. It smells like a POS to me.
by CitadelGrad on May 13, 2004 9:16 AM
Hmmm. Ya probably don't like the fact that it's convertible, either - meaning the crew has to carry all the bits and pieces around? Not too mention, more DODICS in the ammo requests.
by
John of Argghhh! on May 13, 2004 9:21 AM
Looks like some defense contractor has sold another M-16 to the military. If it is not as reliable, or not as accurate, or not as effective, it is a POS!
by Chuck on May 13, 2004 5:01 PM
I see (based on email, too) that the weapon is not popular with Castle visitors, by about a 5 to 1 margin. With me not being the one. I don't have an official opinion other than it looks cool, and I'd take one for the Arsenal.
But I really do like the M2. There was that BTR...
by
John of Argghhh! on May 13, 2004 7:17 PM
The new one kinda looks like something out of Star Wars.
by Boudicca on May 13, 2004 8:36 PM
I see a short barrel which with the same loading as the M2 round means a low velocity and translates in to poor accuracy at longer ranges. Yeah, Yeah I know that mgs are not supposed to be super accurate and they tend to produce a cone of fire for area targets, but still if nothing else lower velocity also means less penetration against hard targets.
The low rate of fire has got to be a down side too. I suspect it was meant to reduce overheating with that thin barrel. Once again I think this would be a minus when engaging moving vehicles.
Overall, I can't see any real need for a weapon of these characteristics. It does't weight that much less than a M2, which with a decent ammo load means that it will still have to be vehicle mounted for mobile operations. For fixed implacement weight is not of much concern. Low velocity and rate of fire means it won't be worth its pay for long range suppresion.
by Old Fogey on May 13, 2004 9:36 PM
I'm not sure why the DOD is looking at this other .50. Are they trying to make the .50 more "man portable?" If so, that's pretty stupid. The maduce is combat proven and still as effective, or more effective, than any other heavy machine gun in the world. I say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. If they do want to improve it, forget about man portability, which is not going to work out anyway, and go for a Gatling solution. The idea is to INCREASE firepower, not decrease it. I think a 2000 round per minute .50 cal Gatling mounted on a hummer or other vehicle would be a serious improvement for the capabilities of units using such a solution. If you're not going to do that, stick with what you know is going to work. On the other hand, if we can ever get our elected boneheads to reinstate the 2nd Amendment maybe we can go to the gun show and pick up an M2 for $500. I'm game for that!
by
Nick on May 15, 2004 3:49 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
by
John
on
May 13, 2004
�
There's One, Only! links with:
This is how you DONT do it
May 12, 2004
I'm still crabby and still too busy.
But there's always time for a Moment of Zen.
April 30, 2004
Now that SOA is over...
I think we could use a moment of Zen. Gun Zen, that is. So, reflect on this.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Spring Break Iraq '04
Click here
(ed note: I helped sleepers out with his html. sleepers - that's what the URL button is for on the comments, write your text, highlight it, select URL and paste in the link. You're welcome!)
wish you were here!!!
by
sleepers on April 30, 2004 10:42 AM
Yep, you're right. It looks like an ugly thing.
As I've said elsewhere, we don't shoot enough generals. Hopefully this one will be, in the metaphorical sense. And maybe more than one, if we're lucky. And not just with a forced retirement, either.
And if the military establishment doesn't go after these people with guns blazing - they will be deserving of the scorn and abuse thrown their way.
I won't defend this, if it's what it appears to be.
But one wonders what you are expecting of me? To don sackcloth and ashes? Call for the immediate withdrawal of all the soldiers? Declare that the actions of these soldiers is a stain upon the escutcheon of all other soldiers now serving and demand the disbandment of the DoD, restoration of Saddam to power, and a written apology to Bin Laden?
Sorry. I'll be happy if the courtsmartial process works, and if they are found guilty, they come here to Leavenworth and take the long tour.
There isn't a defense for what they appear to have done. I won't offer one. That's the job of their lawyers.
by
John of Argghhh! on April 30, 2004 10:53 AM
Getting back to the image at hand, I have a fondness, dating back to when I watched Mighty Mouse cartoons, for pan-fed automatic weapons. Very nice picture, and it shows clearly the design logic of the radial magazine.
by
triticale on May 1, 2004 10:54 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
February 12, 2004
Gratuitous Gun Pic
Nope - that's not me. I don't own one. But I wish I did - and I wish I had had the chance to be there. Hey, old warhorses heads toss when they hear the bugle. While I certainly wasn't Courtney Massengale - I never really had the chance to be Sam Damon, either.
November 26, 2003
Maximizing the Maxim, Part VII - 2.
Good day, boys and girls! (Special handwave to Gunner and Sasa!) Two days ago we learned that the Sokolov Pulemyot Maxima, M1910, was HONKING HEAVY! And, as anyone who has ever schlepped a ruck, ammo, water, and weapon knows, troops don't like stuff that's heavy.
At all. So, in order to achieve that nearly 100 pound load for the gun, they took the thirty pound gun (with water) and put it on a 70 pound wheeled carriage.
Flash Traffic (extended entry) Follows �
Well, if you are going to expect the troops to lug that thing around (can you imagine doing that in woods? Marsh?) you better give them something to work with. In this case - a towing lunette. Run a rope through it and the crew can share the load. It is better than this approach, perhaps.
Photo
It *is* a complicated versatile mount. The rear legs fold up underneath for easier stowage. The turntable allows left to right traverse. The whole upper mount slides forwards and backwards on the lower mount to allow a great range of movement to account for being in holes, or on high ground shooting down, or low ground having to shoot high. The original version of the mount had two more legs in front so that you could elevate is sufficiently to use it in an anti-aircraft role. More weight, more complexity, that feature was dropped during WWI. The wheels are made of wood, in the classic fashion of wagon wheel design.
Photo
Getting a little closer, we better see the details of the elevation mechanism. Unlike the british Vickers gun, which also had a graduated dial on the mount for precision firing on known targets that either couldn't be seen or to engage multiple targets in an indirect fire mode, the Maxim has only a fine adjustment for elevation, to help gunners attack targets at long range by shooting at a pre-determined elevation. The big black handle was used to level the gun. The coarse thread screw was used for fine adjustment, and the elevation was read off the silver dial. The smaller lever on the upper mount is the release for moving the upper mount forwards or backwards on the rails of the lower mount.
Photo
All right, boys and girls, that concludes our series on Max the Maxim and all his cool accessories. If you thought this was a long series, wait until I decide to tackle the Vickers!
All the parts of this series can be accessed here in the Gun Pics archives.
� Secure this line!
November 25, 2003
Maximizing the Maxim, Part IV
Okay, boys and girls. Today's installment in "Maximizing the Maxim" concerns ammo cans and the things you stuff in them. Let's start with the older stuff.
Here is a WWII era Finn ammo can. As you can see, it has a cloth belt, essentially unchanged since WWI in design. There is an outside chance it started life in the Imperial Russian Army, but that's not likely. If it started life as a sovietski, then it was early - as we shall see later in the post.
The belt has a metal starter tab, to help you get it through the feedblock. The canvas belt has brass spacers that serve to keep the belt tight enough to hold cartridges (though a stretched belt could be rehabbed by getting it wet and letting it shrink (with bullets IN it). Every fourth brass spacer is extended. This is mainly to give the person doing the loading a visual cue about how far forward to push the rounds. The belt is thickened at the leading edge, so that the leading edge is roughly the same thickness as the rear with the cartridge in it. This improves feed reliability.
Photo
Next (below) is a post-war Finn ammo can, marked with the now-familiar (if you've read all this series) SA mark.
Flash Traffic (extended entry) Follows �
Unlike the previous can, which has a canvas carrying strap, this can's strap is leather. Other than that, the cans are identical.
Photo
The contents differ, however. This can has a post-war steel belt. For those of you familiar with more modern machineguns- the Maxim style guns, including the Vickers, didn't use disintegrating link belts. The way the action works, there is a tendency to jam. It wasn't like they didn't try! I haven't come across information as to which belting system was preferred operationally. I do know from experience, even with a belt-loading machine, the steel belts are easier to load and aren't as prone to having rounds fall out.
Photo
Okay, coming up next down below is a Soviet can. You can tell because it's stamped with a star, and some stiffening ribs. There are differing accounts as to whether the Soviets discontinued this in WWII to speed up production. The records, if there, haven't been found (or translated into english, anyway).
Photo
What makes this can unique is the contents. Not a belt, but tongs and cans. Fitted to the case, to make it easier to carry (if not much lighter, being filled with fluids) and to fit in pre-built racks, etc on vehicles.
Photo
Most sources say the cans carried, in decreasing order of size, water, lubricant, and solvent. I'm frankly sceptical that the large can carried water - simply because it isn't enough to fill the water jacket. The argument goes that it functioned as a condenser and was used to refill the water jacket. That's possible, but the hose doesn't fit well in the cap opening and the can is very unstable with the hose in it. As you slew the gun left and right while firing, the can falls over pretty easily. But, who knows until some of that russian stuff gets out into english or german, which I can read! Solvent and oil makes perfect sense. The tongs are an extra pair to the ones in the gunners kit for retrieving brass casings that failed to eject and are jamming the recoil mechanism. Pretty clever, really, in terms of trying to make it easier to keep all the stuff you need to feed and care for Max with his crew.
Photo
Here's one last shot showing the cans stacked on one another to show off the fitted nature of the cans (and to highlight the stability issue I talked about earlier.
Photo
That's it for today, boys and girls. Tune in again for Maximizing the Maxim, Part VII - 1, the Sokolov mount.
� Secure this line!
November 24, 2003
Max the Maxim, Part Kolme*
I suddenly realized I've been a bad boy! I never gave you Max's stats! Of course, none of you ever asked for them, either, so I guess ya didn't care that much or choose (wisely, I might add) to do some research on your own. Here are some relevant numbers to the following discussion of spare barrels and carriers, and future posts about ammo cans, belts, water and lubrication cans and finally, Max's "wheels," his Sokolov mount.
Sokolov Pulemyot Maxima
Operation: Recoil operated, water-cooled, full auto only
Caliber: 7.62x54mm Rimmed (7.62 Russian)
Ammunition: Heavy Ball M1930; 185 gr bullet, 50 gr charge
Muzzle velocity: 2830 fps
Capacity: 250-round fabric, steel, or aluminum belt
Weight: 52.8 lbs, unloaded (Honking Heavy!)
Weight: 99.71 lbs, approx, with shield and water (Honking Heavier!)
Overall length: 43.6 in
Barrel: length 28.4 in, 4 grooves, right hand twist
Rate of fire: 520-580 rpm
Effective range: 1000m (1100 yds)
Okay, we can shoot 1000 rounds in under two minutes. In about 4 minutes we'll have boiling water, and in about 5 minutes we're gonna need to change barrels. Plus, we're pounding the heck out of his innards. How many of you put 1000 rounds through a gun, much less 5 thousand? Plus, he's HONKING HEAVY! I know, I display him up on a shelf about 4.5 feet high. I had to take him down to take pictures. Then I put him back up. He's heavy! Anyway, now do ya see why Max has all this cool kit? So, let's move on to spare barrels and the carriers that carry them.
These are Finn carriers. The Finns were willing and able to spend some time and money on their stuff. Let's turn the page and look closer.
Flash Traffic (extended entry) Follows �
The russian barrel carriers are like the gunners kits - grey canvas with leather reinforcements, slung over the shoulder. The Finn gunner's kits could be slung or mounted on your belt. The carriers were slung. The big one is made of wood. It has a hole in the bottom to aid drainage in the crappy weather conditions in which most battles are fought. It's hot and wet, hot and dry, wet, dry, cold and wet, etc. It's just never 68 with a slight breeze. God really doesn't approve of war, y'know?
Photo
Here, in an admittedly crappy shot, we see the barrel nestled in it's little wooden house, waiting for it's moment to defend the honor and integrity of Finland. Though you can't see it well (hey, I'll try to get another pic, keep yer shirt on) you can see the the grooves in the breech face to ensure alignment of the lock, and the trunnions, the bumps on the sides of the barrel that fit into the recoil plates. When you look at the fitted wood, the the lathe turned body of the carrier, you get some appreciation of the amount of effort that went into these. Not knowing how many barrels were damaged by the less-robust russian carriers, I don't have a good feel for whether or not this was a good application of wartime resources.
Photo
This is a shot of the SA property mark on the carrier.
Photo
Okay - here's a shot of the barrel removed from the carrier. Yes, it's greasy. I keep it that way, since it's stored in a concrete room. You can see on the left the thicker portion of the barrel where it emerges from the water jacket into the booster cup. At the other end, you can see the bronze trunnion bearing, and the trunnions themselves, those knobs on the side of the square part. In front of the bronze bearing you can see a cannelure, or groove. That is where you wrapped the asbestos string.
Photo
Alright, let's finish out this bit with a close-up of the leather carrier - which, frankly, probably took as much effort in terms of time and resources to make as the wood carrier. Again we see the SA property mark - I don't know what the T is, it could be an inspector or a manufacturer's mark. Or even a unit mark. Anyone?
As a final thought - the reason that the Finns may have been using leather and wood is because they had it available. I don't know of much cotton that's grown in that region, and supplies might have been scarce in ways they were'nt for the Soviets.
Coming up in Part IV - Ammo cans, belts, and other things you stick in ammo cans.
*I'm led to believe that Kolme is 'three' in Finnish.
Previous posts in this series are here. And Here. And Here.
� Secure this line!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
How long did it take to change a barrel out?
by gunner on November 24, 2003 7:36 PM
Depends on how well trained, scared, and tired you were - as well as environmental conditions.
I've never done it in these kinds of weapons - I'll see what I can dig up.
by
John of Argghhh! on November 24, 2003 7:38 PM
T could stand for manufacturer, as Maxims, Suomi smg's and spare parts, etc. were produced in the factories of Oy Tikkakoski ab.
One just wonders, why gun works would do leather accessories..
And yes, kolme is three. :)
by Sasa on November 25, 2003 7:20 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
Maxim P0rn, part Deux.
Greetings once again, Gun P0rn fans! Today we extend the discussion of Max the Maxim by showing off his accessories, the usually overlooked area of collecting firearms.
Nothing makes a bureaucrat happier than to increase the soldier's load. And boy, were Russians good at it! Loading up, I mean. Not that they have a lock on it. Take a look at US light infantry on the march.
Let's start with Max's nice leather handbag shall we?. Well, okay, it's his gunner's actually. But when it comes to things like this, we should consider the gunner to be Max's personal assistant. Isn't this just precious? This is the Finnish version. The Russians preferred a nice canvas and leather number.
That's just so special! So, what does the good personal assistant carry around with him? Well, let's go check!
Flash Traffic (extended entry) Follows �
So, he carries this stuff, obviously!
Photo
We have to have our tongs! How else can we get the damn brass that fails to go out the ejection port and gums up the works? Then, we need that list, so we can make sure we always have all our fiddly bits. Quit straining your eyes - unless you can read finnish, of course. Then, in that nice little line of fitted pockets we have the cleaning brush, ruptured cartridge extractor, the missing punch, cleaning jag (for use with a cleaning patch), and the not-missing punch.
Photo
Stepping away a bit, we see the oil can and the brass thingy is a spare nut for the water hose. Under the spout of the oil can we see the handle of the combination tool (of which more later), and what looks like a brass rod is in fact a special tool, used in conjunction with the ruptured cartridge extractor, for getting into the breech of the gun and removing cartridges that failed to extract due to the head pulling away.
In the tin laying open in the corner, you have spare firing pins, springs, washers, pins, etc. The can occupies the empty pocket in the case. The white cotton looking stuff is abestos string, which is used to wrap around the barrel and provide a waterproof seal between the water jacket and barrel. Wash your hands after playing with that stuff, children. And don't stick your fingers in your mouth, either!
Photo
Let's take a closer look (much closer) at the combo wrench. The finns have marked it as their property (that SA-in-a-square). The wrench head has been welded to the shaft. I don't know if that is a standard russian method, or if the Finns put their own together. So, let's see some of the things you can do with this puppy.
Photo
The screwdriver head is for removing the steam tube from inside the water jacket, whether for cleaning or repair.
Photo
The square hole is for removing/tightening the booster cup.
Photo
One of the pins on the side is for cleaning the holes in the booster cup while the gun is still in service (there is a lot of carbon build up in this area which affects performance and wear on the barrel, as we'll see later) or as an alternative wrench should the square lug 'round' off. The other pin is used for some interior disassembly that I just can't get a good picture of.
Photo
Here we see the booster cup removed, the well-greased muzzle of the barrel protruding. The barrel is not that thickness throughout, it's just that thick for about another half inch. The purpose of that is weight, to control recoil, heat dissipation from the booster, and to provide enought surface area for the gases to work against. The combo tool and cup are sitting on a being-restored WWI german water can, which was freely used by all who came across it since it was so well thought out.
Photo
The combo tool has one more use I haven't discussed. Reamer. This is the 'handle'. As you can see it's serrated and fairly sharp.
Photo
This end inserts into the muzzle booster to clean the carbon out and improve functional reliability. This needed to be done every couple thousand rounds, (belts are 250 rounds, so it won't take long) or anytime the barrel needs changing. These weapons were almost always used in pairs, so that one would be capable of firing while the other was swapping barrels, clearing a blockage, etc.
Okay - that's it for now. Coming soon, Part III, Spare Barrels and their Carriers!
UPDATE: Many Thanks to Sasa, who provided this translation of the list in the gunner's kit:
Here is translation of that sheet in the bag (picture 2), those lines I could read, starting under handle of pliers. It is not accurate translation though, english is not my native language, and I have no knowledge of guns. I just look at the pretty pictures.
hylsypihdit = cardridge pliers
hylsynpoistin, kannallinen = cardridge remover, with counterfoil
hajoituskara (? I don't recognise word "kara"..), 3,9 ja 5 mm = dismantling axle
peltirasia, johon kuuluu = tin container, which contains
- iskuri = hammer
- iskujousi 2 kpl = 2 hammer springs
- ylpitimen jousi = "upper holder" spring
- ylpitimen apujousi = auxiliary upper holder spring
- alapidin = lower holder
- sulkuvlin asetinlevy = "applicator plate of lock space"
- asbestilankaa 2 m = asbestos string 2 m
Sasa - your english is at least as good as my German, the only other language I will admit to speaking!
� Secure this line!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Here is translation of that sheet in the bag (picture 2), those lines I could read, starting under handle of pliers. It is not accurate translation though, english is not my native language, and I have no knowledge of guns. I just look at the pretty pictures.
hylsypihdit = cardridge pliers
hylsynpoistin, kannallinen = cardridge remover, with counterfoil
hajoituskara (? I don't recognise word "kara"..), 3,9 ja 5 mm = dismantling axle
peltirasia, johon kuuluu = tin container, which contains
- iskuri = hammer
- iskujousi 2 kpl = 2 hammer springs
- ylpitimen jousi = "upper holder" spring
- ylpitimen apujousi = auxiliary upper holder spring
- alapidin = lower holder
- sulkuvlin asetinlevy = "applicator plate of lock space"
- asbestilankaa 2 m = asbestos string 2 m
by Sasa on November 24, 2003 5:38 PM
Sasa! Kiitt!
by
John of Argghhh! on November 24, 2003 6:42 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
November 19, 2003
New! Improved! Max the Maxim Gun Porn! What's not to like?
Alrighty, get ready for an orgiastic celebration of gun ownership. No humans were filmed nude for this feature.
Those of you, like Gunner and Ghost of a Flea, who have been following me since Beth and I first got started on Blogspot, will vaguely remember having met Max the Maxim before, when I blogged about helping all my lethal implements accessorize.
Well, via that post, you know Max's history. Let's lift the curtain on the newest Chippendale Dancer! A well-traveled M1910 Maxim Machine Gun...
Here he is, peeking from out behind the curtain...
Now shoo away the faint of heart and come behind the curtain for the rest of the show!
Flash Traffic (extended entry) Follows �
Here's Max fully on stage now, wearing this nice little cotton duck number - it keeps his niblets from getting all grungy in that battlefield environment.
Photo
Max is fully accessorized, from his gunner's cute little Budyanka to his spare barrels (don't we wish we all had spare barrels!) he's fully equipped to service his target! He's even got a shield for Safe Penetration of the Enemy's Lines!
Photo
Here he is, in a full monty! Slinky hose, booster cup, water jacket to keep that barrel from overheating, shield, and all on a nice, three way adjustable, battlefield mobility enhancer. Max needs those wheels. He's a hefty feller!
Photo
Shake yer booty Max! Show 'em that empennage... the charging handle, the feed tray, the grips, so your gunner can control you. That erect sight, to help him get his rounds on target!
Photo
Ah, let's show them where it goes in! Whether it's a belt of bullets in the feed trayon the left, or water into the water jacket through that fitting where the chain is - here is where the action is!
Photo
Okay - as we covered your history in the first post back on blogspot - let's show them the evidence. The "Korj, 1944" means Max got rebuilt in 1944. The mark below that is the state arsenal mark - the people who did the rebuild. The SA in a square stands for Suuomen Armee, or Finnish Army. Remember, Max defected during the Winter War! He was born an Imperial Russian in 1917.
Photo
Here is Max's working end, as opposed to his business end! Rear sight, trigger, grips, charging handle. The item that looks like a holster, kind of is - it holds Max's spare firing lock. These guns didn't use a bolt like we think of them, they used a 'lock'. More of that fiddly-bit later.
Photo
Here is where the gunner caressed Max (not that Max is gay, really, but, well, it's complicated.) The grips are wood, checkered for gripping. The tops of the grips unscrew, and there are oil brushes inside. In sustained fire mode, Max needs oil as his mechanism gets very hot and expands. In the middle, the horizontal rectangular plate is the trigger. Above it, the much smaller squarish gizmo is the safety. You have to push that in with one thumb before you could depress the trigger with your other. Here's an example. My thumb is on the trigger. Jus a little above and to the right is the safety.
Photo
Here is a shot of Max's guts. On top, in green, is the fusee spring cover. This covers the spring that returns the gun to battery after recoil resets the action. It's adjustable, so as the spring starts to wear out, you can up the tension in combat until you have a break and can replace the spring.
In the middle is the main part of the action. The knowledgeable among you will immediately detect that Max is a dummy. His sideplates are too thick and he's missing his recoil plates, the transfer the energy of the recoiling barrel to the lock and locking arm. On the right, is the lock. Behind is the rod with a knee joint in it, kind of like the Luger pistol and it serves the same purpose - to rigidly hold the lock in place until pressure has dropped sufficiently for it to be safe to open the lock.
Photo
Speaking of the lock - here is Max's spare lock, free from the carrier on the mount. Odd looking, ain't it. As Robin Williams might say, "What a ridiculous piece of flesh!"
Photo
So, how does that lock thingy work, anyway? To cock any Maxim style machine gun from a 'cold start' you have to work the mechanism twice. On the first throw, you are pulling the lock back and sending it forward. When you do that, it looks like this.
Photo
At this point, all you've done is caught the first round from the belt. So, you pull back the charging handle again, and it looks like this.
Photo
Now, you have one round (the lower one) in the chamber, and one round ready to be stripped from the belt.
The lock is vewy vewy dangewous now - so be caweful!
Why? Because the lock is not only the bolt - it also contains the firing pin, firing pin spring AND SEAR. One of the dangers of a Maxim-style gun is that you can fire the round at the firing pin without the lock being seated against the barrel! This lock has been demilled to make it safe in that regard. The grooves which would hold the round over the firing pin hole have been ground away (the finns did that, this was an instructional bolt) and the firing pin tip has been ground away as well. Which is fine with me. The 7.62x54MM cartridge is a damn powerful one to have go off in your hand. The rounds you see are purpose-built Soviet dummy rounds, used for armorer testing and instruction.
Photo
To finish the cycle, you pull the trigger, the round fires, the action cycles, and the round that was on top is in the middle, the one in the middle is heading down the discharge tube after being fired, and a new round has been gripped, ready to be stripped from the belt. What's the whole process, you ask?
Simple, like all Maxim-style guns including the Vickers, at the muzzle end you have a 'booster' of some sort -which is really just a surface for the gasses to work against to generate pressure to start the BARREL into recoil. The US M1919-series guns work that way, as do the German MG34 and 42. This is Max's booster.
Photo
The holes let excess gas bleed out after having done its job. The barrel recoils back and two 'recoil plates' attached to the trunnions on the barrel (more on that in Part Two, Accessorizing the Maxim) act against the rod carrying the lock, causing it to start back and and then starts working against the fusee spring, which is in the fusee spring housing, outside the receiver on Max's left side.
Photo
Why is that outside? Seems, well, like risky? It's outside because you need to be able to adjust the spring (the sliding scale thing up front), replace the spring, or replace the fusee link - that bit at the back end of the spring that actually works on the rod).
Photo
This is also where Max's 'birthmark is", showing his Tsarist beginnings.
Photo
Okay, that does it for today - tomorrow (or maybe later, these things take time to do, fellas): Accessories!
� Secure this line!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Great shots. As you said it is a dummy, is it built up from a de-milled kit? Like the ones I see of assault rifles with the receivers torch cut.
by gunner on November 19, 2003 9:22 PM
Yes. All original parts except the sideplates and missing the recoil plates (that's why the sideplates are so thick).
by
John of Argghhh! on November 19, 2003 9:26 PM
Nice...thanks for the explanation of how that puppy works.
by
Sophorist on November 19, 2003 11:54 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
by
John
on
Nov 19, 2003
�
Boots and Sabers links with:
Drool
�
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler links with:
My Kind of Maxim
�
Electric Venom links with:
The Letter Of The Day Is J
�
Sophoristically Speaking links with:
blog spotlight: john of argghhh!!!
October 19, 2003
Sunday GunPorn
Okay! Today let's take a look at a sexy little number who actually hails from Poland, the Degtyarev Pechotnyi 28. This little number was the first Soviet designed (as opposed to inherited (?!?) from the Tsar. Using a modified Kjellman Frijberg locking system (hehehehehe - I love to toss that stuff around) the DP introduced a locking system still in use in russian and russian-derived machine guns. It uses a fat firing pin with recesses cut in the sides. As the pin goes forward, it cams 'flaps' out of the side of the bolt which lock the bolt in place when firing, and on recoil, the retreating pin cams them back out again. Fast, robust, simple to make, and not affected by dirt as much (too bad you can't say the same for the magazine!
Oh, you want less words, more picture? Okay. Here you go!
She's shown here with her little friend, a Polish-made TT-33 Tokarev pistol, made in 1953, that has a safety (unlike the original soviet pistol). His safety was built in from the get-go, not like the butcher-job safeties put on recent imports in order to get them past the ATFE inspectors.
Time to get funky - let's go behind the curtain....
Flash Traffic (extended entry) Follows �
Ya make it? Okay, close that thing behind you, don't want any Gun Fearing Wussies coming in and fainting or wetting their pants. I hate it when that happens.
So, noticed that big flat magazine? Right pain in the ass it is, too.
Photo
Degtyarev chose this flat, sheet metal drum magazine because he wanted to get a lot of rounds in it, but didn't want to make the gun's profile any higher than it already was. He didn't want it looking like the Bren, for example.
It's a simple magazine, but it's slow to reload, so you had to carry chests and bags of spare magazines. As with all guns of this era, she can nicely accessorize!
Photo
Here you see her with all her magazine bits exposed! And her gunner's kit, with cleaning rod, multi-tool, blank firing adaptor, spare springs, oil bottle and other fancy stuff. You can also see the length of the receiver resulting from the need to chamber and eject the relatively long 7.62x54R round. All in all, a nicely equipped babe. She is a bit hefty though - weighing 26.5 pounds loaded.
And with that bipod, she's kinda nose-heavy when walking her around.
Let's close today's show with a little spread-leg closeup!
Photo
� Secure this line!
by
John
on
Oct 19, 2003
�
AlphaPatriot links with:
Argghhh!
�
Say Uncle links with:
Uh Oh!
October 14, 2003
A picture to please BradySchumerStein...
...because the weapons represented are in what would be their favorite mode for 'red state' voters, emasculated.
Photo
On top, in the background is the receiver area for a WWII-era Browning M1919 MG instructional cut-away. Yes, much larger than life. It's functional and complete, less the baseboard and the belt w/plastic bullets. Anyone know of some big red plastic bullets laying around, lemme know!
To the right of that is the butt of the DEWAT M1908 Madsen LMG, with the monopod for sustained fire.
Next in from from that, still on the right, the DEWAT M1919A6 is peeking his head up.
Next in is the DEWAT BAR. I may still yet spring for one of Ohio Ordnance's semi's.
In the center is a cut-away SMLE No1MkIII*. This is a beautifully done job.
The long wood thing is the haft of my saxon battle axe. The steel shaft is the haft of me swedish warhammer. Both of which can be seen to better effect here, along with the pretty SMLE cut-away and an australian armorers cut away, that had to have the barrel replaced to bring it into the country. Even though it wasn't shootable as-is, ATF still classifies the receiver as functional (not me, baby!) and therefore the overall length was too short.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
In case anyone has noticed, yes, John's toys are pretty crowded together. We need lots more space for the collection.
Maybe I'll have him put in a tip jar to go towards buying an addition to the house.
by
Beth on October 14, 2003 9:21 AM
Better put it on your site dear, linked from mine. Otherwise it will just result in more clutter!
by
John of Argghhh! on October 14, 2003 11:38 AM
Why not put all the good stuff in a very cheap mobile trailer out behind your house..... ;)
by Gunner on October 14, 2003 8:15 PM
Hmmm. Gunner, I'm gonna keep an eye on you! 8^) You need to reread the Goblin Warning!
by
John of Argghhh! on October 14, 2003 8:44 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
October 10, 2003
Okay, gun pic - kinda.
I owe you guys a gun pic today. Loyal Readers of this space know that I don't just collect and shoot guns. You also know that I actually prefer soldier-used weapons to "two-tone yuppyguns," my idols at Kim du Toit and Boots and Sabers notwithstanding. Hey, there's room in the hobby for all of us. As Madison said in Federalist #13.5.6x, "In my Second Amendment there are many rooms." True, he was blitzed when he wrote it, and his coach driver edited it out, but it was there, trust me.
Anyway, not just the weapons, but all the fiddly bits that go with them. To that end today, I give you the contents of the Vickers Medium Machine Gun Gunner's case.
Photo
From the top, leather gunners case, fusee spring, oil can, spare lock, spring balance (for measuring spring strength), pull-through, driver/pliers, multi-purpose wrench, wire mesh cleaning 'gauze' (brit term), another pull-through, muzzle protector, and the leather pouch containing spare springs, pins, and whatnot. I have two of these, both pretty much complete, one is just brand-new, never issued (boo, hiss) and this one, well used (yay!). Some point down the road, after Great Kid returns the digital camera, I'll do a spread on the platoon parts chest (you may run away screaming now).
October 7, 2003
Something a little different today.
The heart of today's pic is my Barr and Stroud No. 12 Rangefinder. This was used by the platoon leaders of Vickers MMG (medium machine gun) platoons to determine ranges to targets, so the guns could fire on them in defilade, or directly if they had to. Someday I'll do a long, boring post on how to hit things you can't see. I describe what's in the picture in the extended portion of the post.
Photo
Flash Traffic (extended entry) Follows �
From the left, you can see the muzzle of the M1919A6 (grey parked), the muzzle of the M1908 Madsen (black paint) and the big thing down low is the cut-away M1919A4 classroom instructional model. Just below the left end of the rangefinder is the top of a Vickers aiming post with light. Jumping over the center of the display case, we come to the covered muzzle of the Carl Gustav reckless rifle and the business end of the PIAT. The OD cloth behind the rangefinder tripod is the tripod carrying case. Gotta head to work, see ya tonight! Or maybe at lunch, if I get the time and have anything to say.
� Secure this line!
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Interesting to see the PIAT in there. George MacDonald Fraser (best known as the author of the "Flashman" series) has a very entertaining account of using a PIAT against a boatload of Japanese troops in Burma in his WWII memoir "Quartered Safe Out Here." It is a book I highly recommend.
by John F. MacMichael on October 7, 2003 8:16 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
October 3, 2003
Giving Anti-Gunners the Willies
Which is something I just love ta do! This is a shot of The Imperial Arsenal of Doom (tm). Nota Bene the Interior Guard Force (the ones with the glowing eyes on the steps - vicious killers, all - especially note Lucifer's Handmaiden, the Dark One, Barney of Glowing Eyes)
You are staring past the Balkan/Slav wall at the Vickers medium machine gun. Above the Vickers are the platoon spare parts chest on the left, the indirect firing accoutrements on the right, and the platoon rangefinder center high. You can't make 'em out that well, but behind the box on the left is a Browning M1919A6 machine gun, Madsen M1908 light machine gun, and a BAR. On the right is a Carl Gustav M1 84mm reckless rifle, and a PIAT.
This photo was taken after cleaning up from the sewer back-up. Fortunately, because I display the Vickers in a faux trench mode, it's actually sitting on a pallet reworked to look like duckboards in a trench, and wasn't immersed in goo. And, because I'm crippled and lazy, the sandbags (vietnam era, I missed out on getting some nice WWII ones) are filled with woodshavings, not sand - just in case some anti is concerned I'm building a bunker here. Not that I haven't thought about making an addition to the house, and adding a whole new concrete gun room, that would look like, well, a bunker!
Photo
The Standard Disclaimer (c) applies.
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
With all of the toys you have, would you happen to have a Lewis. I always thought they had the best "look" to them with the flat drum on top and the stove pipe barrel shroud.
by Gunner on October 3, 2003 8:42 PM
Sadly, Gunner - I hate to disappoint, but no, I don't. Not for lack of trying - but for lack of affordable DEWATs people are willing to part with. Not that it matters if I could own shootables, the cheapest I've seen a live Lewis was $18,000!
I hold out hope of someday building/acquiring a dummy or a DEWAT, but not in the near future.
by
John of Arghhh! on October 3, 2003 10:13 PM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
September 14, 2003
Helping my buddies accessorize...
Below you can read the tale of Max, my M1910 Maxim Gun. What I left out of the original tale is that along the way, Max lost his shield. Max and I were surfing eBay one day and saw one. Max got very excited, and since people (and guns) who need shields are really pretty rare, the market is actually somewhat depressed, there being more shields than guns lacking them. So, Max made me bid. We won it, cheap.
A naked Max.
After it arrived, I learned something new about Max - info he had hidden from me, lest I decide to *not* get him his new shield. B*st*rd commonists actually made guns without shields, and so there were *two* different pins. And the pin on Max's chassis wasn't the correct one. Max assures me that his Finn gunners did it - because like many of us soldiers, the shield was heavy, made the gun position harder to camouflage, and, well, it was heavy, wheels or no wheels. So they ditched it.
Max, waxing nostalgic for his shield, suckered me. Arrggghhh!!! Okay. What to do?
What to do? Using the milling/drilling/lathing machine Wonder Wife (TM) v3.x got me...
Photo
I made him one, of course.
Photo
Using an original pin borrowed from Good Guy (TM) Bob Naess of Black River Militaria, I made a new one out of stainless steel. Simpler, to be sure, less polished, and I needed help - but I made one.
It fit nicely. Max was very pleased. So was I.
Photo
So there ends the story of how Max Got His Shield Back (Apologies to Stella).
Photo
Reporting As Ordered, Sir! �
Basically, this post sums up why the United States of American kicks ass.
(Original comment posted at blogspot on 09/21/2003 14:07)
by
Ghost of a Flea on November 20, 2003 6:31 AM
� Dismissed, Soldier!
© Pamela Bobik
