Picture of the Week - Challange Number 1
beausabre
A Series Devoted to Military, Naval & Aviation Subjects
Inspired by the Tappet Bros' (of NPR's "Car Talk") Puzzler, this
week's item is a challenge.
What country adopted the weapon shown below and what was its
nomenclature in the Vocabulary of Stores?
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/PICTURE1.jpg
It looks like just another early 20-th Century field piece, right?
Well....maybe not
Here's a close up to help you out.
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/PICTURE2-2.jpg
As a hint, it was adopted by a member of the Great Powers. So you
don't have to worry about those 82.3-mm M1903 Mark 2 Model 3 gun-
howitzers that Basil Zaharoff unloaded on Ruritania just before the
Balkan Wars began.
Post your answers on this thread. The winners (if any) will be
determined by Colonel Beausabre, whose judgment, as always, will be
arbitrary, capricious and final.
Andrew Chaplin
news:330170ea-bbbd-4537...@s27g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
It looks like the U.S. Army's 75 mm gun that was built on the same upper
carriage as the U.K. 18 Pounder but with a split trail.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
Jack Linthicum
wrote:
> "beausabre" <beausa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
The second device seems to be a smaller caliber gun with a shield,
probably for close-in protection of the big gun's crew.
David E. Powell
Or a hydraulic cylinder? It also looks like a French 75mm though I
could be wrong, I always thought the 75 had a bit of a different
looking muzzle piece.
Jack Linthicum
Do you put a shield on a hydraulic cylinder, but still expose half
and have it train at least in elevation, as the hole in the shield and
the wheel on the breech (?) end suggest?
Keith Willshaw
"David E. Powell" <David_Po...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3808192d-b497-44c9...@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Its not a French 75, the barrels too short and a the layout of the 75 was
cleaner
http://www.firstworldwar.com/photos/graphics/gw_french75_01.jpg
The gun looks to me like a Mk V British 18 pounder which was
still in use during the early part of WW2 . By then many had been
fitted with split trails
Keith
Eugene Griessel
Mmmm. My knowledge of guns is limited (to put it mildly) but this one
seems to smell a bit of the Italian Canonne da 75/27 but it isn't.
Eugene L Griessel
Money Isn't Everything, But It Sure Keeps The Kids In Touch
- I usually post only from Sci.Military.Naval -
beausabre
> "Keith Willshaw" <nospamforke...@kwillshaw.nospamdemon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >"David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com> wrote in message
SNIPPAGE
I'd like to thank everyone who participated in the discussion of our
"mystery weapon". Before I divulge the answer, just a few comments.
First, the French adoption of the immortal Soixante-Quinze Modele 1897
- "The French Seventy Five" - set off a frenzy among the world's
nations. It could fire 100 rounds per minute, it had a range of fifty
kilometers, its shells had a new explosive that nothing could
withstand.... What was revolutionary about the M1897 was its hydro-
pneumatic recoil/counter-recoil system, which kept the weapon on
target despite the act of firing. All the crew had to do was throw in
the rounds - a well trained crew could pump out 20 plus per minute -
and the French adopted the "Rafale", a storm of fire, as their
artillery tactic. This was the gun of the future, the French had it
and the armies of the world scrambled to catch up.
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/Model1897_75mm_gun_1.jpg
It can always be identified by the recoil guides at the muzzle of the
tube. These engaged slots in the carriage which prevented the barrel
from becoming misaligned and damaging the recoil and counter-recoil
system. Our mystery weapon doesn't have these guides we can rule out
the M1897 as a candidate.
The rest of the world adopted similar weapons. The US adopted the
hydro-spring 3-inch M1901,
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/3INCHGUNMODELOF1902us_3inch_mdl_190.jpg
the Germans a 7.7-cm piece, the Russians the 30 line (3-inch or 76.2-
mm) Putilov - which was unique as it employed blocks of India rubber
as its shock absorbing mechanism.
Why such similarity? The strength of horses and the tactics of the
day. With millenia of experience to guide them, the armies of the day
decided that a gun of about 3-inch caliber was the heaviest that the
standard six-horse team could haul over average terrain. Tactics
influenced the fact that they were all guns and not howitzers. After
all, everyone knew that the next war would be one of rapid movement
and maneuver, so the artillery would be called on to engage targets in
the open with direct fire. Indirect fire was one of the black arts
practiced by the adepts who manned the few siege batteries, but no one
thought there would be any sieges to conduct and their numbers were
few.
Only the British adopted something a bit different. Two weapons were
under consideration, a 3-inch 13-pounder
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/800px-QF_13_pounder_CWM_Ottawa_2.jpg
and a 3.3-inch 18-pounder.
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/QF18pdrRHA.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/britis3.jpg
Eventually, in the spirit of British compromise, both were adopted. A
total of 426 13-pounders were built for the Royal Horse Artillery as
this arm, that supported the cavalry, could afford to adopt the
lighter weapon due its superior mobility (many were converted to AA
guns during the Great War, with some converted back to field pieces
afterwards. Survivors of these equip the King's Troop RHA for firing
salutes in Hyde Park on great occasions of state), but the Field
Artillery's 18-pounder was built by the thousand and became the
standard gun of the Empire. The Mark I can always be identified by the
prominent recoil cylinder above the tube - so the person who mentioned
our mystery weapon resembling the 18-pounder was correct.
By the Mid Teens, the US thought the M1902 with its hydro-spring
recoil system and pole trail was looking rather dated and decided to
build "the best light field gun in the world" a 3-inch gun with a
hydro-pneumatic system and split trail. The result was a legendary
disaster and before it was over, the "Model of 1916" was being
referred to as the "Crime of 1916". The result was that the US
adopted the M1897 as a way to get something in the hands of the
American Expeditionary Force. This led to the 3-inch caliber being
replaced by 75-mm as standard, so no M1902's were sent to France. They
were retained at home as training weapons. The change in caliber also
impacted the M1916 and led to its being even further delayed.
But the French couldn't supply enough M1897's and while the US would
build close to 1100 of them under license (143 of which made it to
France)there was a projected shortage. Bethlehem Steel, which was
building 18-pounders for the British, was given an order for about
2800 Mark II weapons rechambered for the French ammunition as the
M1917. (The Mark I had a spring recuperator which proved liable to
breakage under the extreme conditions of the Western Front so a
pneumatic recuperator was developed. Mark I's modified to incorporate
this device became the Mark I * ("Mark One Star") and new build
weapons were Mark II. My understanding is that the M1917 was a
modified Mark II). About 900 were completed prior to contracts being
curtailed due to the Armistice, although none made it to France.
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/75mmBethlehem1.jpg
(our picture is from a museum in, of all unlikely places, Helsinki.
That's a long way in space and time from the banks of the Lehigh!). As
someone pointed out, it does resemble our mystery weapon.
Just as the war ended, the M1916 FINALLY got into production back in
the Land of the Free and it didn't prove anything to write home about.
Post-war, the M1897 was adopted as standard with the M1916 and M1917
in deep freeze as war-reserve stocks. So far as I know the only time
their slumber was broken was after Dunkirk when quantities of all
three weapons were provide to Britain.
So what is this weapon and why is it unusual?
It's a US 3-inch/23 Caliber Gun Landing Gun Mark XI - which should
clue you in.
It's NOT a Land Service weapon at all, it's a piece of Naval Ordnance!
(I thought someone would clue in to its resemblance to the 3-inch/23
caliber Mark 14 used as an AA gun on Flush Decker destroyers and for
the main battery of Great War Subchasers).
http://www.navsource.org/archives/12/1215006402.jpg
Back in days of sail it was common to carry a couple of light guns
(usually caronnades in later years) that could be dropped into a
sliding mount in the eyes of a ship's launches and cutters to serve as
Boat Guns for raids and cutting out expeditions. Some enterprising
skippers had the carpenter and blacksmith run up light field carriages
that could be used by the matelots to support the bootnecks on raids
that went inland. The hard part would be the wheels. Building wheels
that could withstand travel on poor roads and the shock of firing was
a specialized trade. But armies and navies accumulate an amazing
variety of talents among their recruits and it would be a rare ship
that didn't have a runaway apprentice or journeyman wheelwright who
could do the job. Later these mounts were formalized, became issue
items and Naval Brigades became a fixture of Victorian colonial
warfare.
Here's the URL for details on USN 3-inch/23-Caliber weapons from the
Navweaps site.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_3-23_mk13.htm
Despite the fact that the Mark XI reeks of the Banana Wars and
probably fired its last rounds in anger at Vera Cruz in 1914, the
illustrations are from Bureau of Ordnance Pamphlet 1664 dated May,
1947.
http://www.eugeneleeslover.com/NAVAL-LANDING-GUN.html
It's hard to believe that it was still standard that late. Certainly,
it had not served actively in World War II. The Marines fielded the 75-
mm Pack Howitzer M1 (spoked wheels) and M8 as their light field
artillery. It's a bit strange that the USN hadn't declared the Mk XI
obsolete and adopted the 75-mm as well, the way the Royal Navy
adopted the Army's 3.7-Inch Mountain Howitzer as its landing gun.
(Wheatley notes on page 67 of "Battleships of World War II" that HMS
Warspite was issued a 3.7-inch howitzer in 1939 and expresses himself
puzzled as to why)
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/3_7Howitzer.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/qf372.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/qf371.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/300px-3-7_inch_mountain_gun.jpg
(This was a descendant of Kipling's famous "screw-gun" and could be
broken down into pieces for animal packing. Note the housing for the
"junction nut" which locked the breech and chase together.
Unfortunately, it was not possible to interlock this with the firing
mechanism, so there were occasions when an unlocked chase departed
down range after the shell - to the disgrace of the gun crew and
instant demotion of the gun captain)
I guess the USN saw the need as limited and the usual inter-service
rivalries and politics got in the way.
Andrew Chaplin
Cool. Not a piece I have met before.
Jack Linthicum
> On Jan 5, 5:38 pm, eugene@dynagen..co..za (Eugene Griessel) wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > >> > >http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/PICTURE2-2.jpg
>
> http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/Model1897_75mm_gun_1.jpg
>
> It can always be identified by the recoil guides at the muzzle of the
> tube. These engaged slots in the carriage which prevented the barrel
> from becoming misaligned and damaging the recoil and counter-recoil
> system. Our mystery weapon doesn't have these guides we can rule out
> the M1897 as a candidate.
>
> The rest of the world adopted similar weapons. The US adopted the
> hydro-spring 3-inch M1901,
>
> http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/3INCHGUNMODELOF1902us...
>
> the Germans a 7.7-cm piece, the Russians the 30 line (3-inch or 76.2-
> mm) Putilov - which was unique as it employed blocks of India rubber
> as its shock absorbing mechanism.
>
> Why such similarity? The strength of horses and the tactics of the
> day. With millenia of experience to guide them, the armies of the day
> decided that a gun of about 3-inch caliber was the heaviest that the
> standard six-horse team could haul over average terrain. Tactics
> influenced the fact that they were all guns and not howitzers. After
> all, everyone knew that the next war would be one of rapid movement
> and maneuver, so the artillery would be called on to engage targets in
> the open with direct fire. Indirect fire was one of the black arts
> practiced by the adepts who manned the few siege batteries, but no one
> thought there would be any sieges to conduct and their numbers were
> few.
>
> Only the British adopted something a bit different. Two weapons were
> under consideration, a 3-inch 13-pounder
>
> http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/800px-QF_13_pounder_C...
> probably fired ...
>
> read more »
Pardon my ignorance but is there a reason the "challenge" photos have
an extra device not shown in the "answer" photos?
beausabre
wrote:
SNIP
I'm sorry Jack, but I don't follow you on this. Could you point out
the difference? Thanks!
Jack Linthicum
Well, as I pointed out in my first post there are three cylinders
shown, you have stated that one is the barrel of the gun and another
the recoil mechanism. I see a third cylinder, with a cap on the muzzle
or a ring around the muzzle, fitted in a separate shield. In the
second picture you can see a wheel on the breech end of the cylinder,
like an elevation wheel. None of these are shown in your "answer".
beausabre
SNIP
OK, I think I get it now. That's because the weapon show in the photo
of the Isabel (PY-10) is a Mark 7 - a related (gun tube identical)
weapon to the Mark 11 Landing Gun. What is missing in the recuperator
below the gun tube (from top, it is recoil mechanism, gun tube,
recuperator or counter-recoil mechanism on the Mark 11). I used that
illustration because I couldn't find any other shots of the Mark 11
beyond those I originally posted and because it was part of an
excellent article on the subject of USN 3/23-inch guns.
Since the link to to the Mark 7 modified for SC's didn't take, here is
one to my site with the photo in question. Excellent shot of a SC-1
class 110 foot wooden sub chaser (1 X 3/23-inch, 2 X .30 cal machine
guns in the bridge wings, 1 X Y gun & depth charge racks, equipped
with hydrophones for underwater fire control, 3 shafts, gasoline
engines, over 150 crossed the Atlantic under their own power before
the armistice)
Rob Arndt
Mosul in 2005.
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/liqrman612/0_21_021507_mysteryweapon.jpg
It is a REAL weapon, not a toy and was shown on Fox tv.
If he knows that one and can prove it, he is truly a master. If not he
should post artillery someplace else IMHO.
Rob
FledgeIII
> Wonder if the OP is expert enough to name this mystery weapon found in
> Mosul in 2005.
>
>
> It is a REAL weapon, not a toy and was shown on Fox tv.
>
> If he knows that one and can prove it, he is truly a master. If not he
> should post artillery someplace else IMHO.
>
> Rob
Masterful display of hypocrisy there, Rob.
Beau - nice work on the Pic of the Week(s) - enjoyable stuff. Thanks
for your effort.
Rob Arndt
Yes, nice photos Beau... but when can we expect some aviation content?
As for FlegeIII- I do post OT, but so do others... and only
occasionally. Sometimes vindictive, but most of the time just weord
things I run into on the net :)
Rob
beausabre
> On Jan 23, 4:28�pm, FledgeIII <fledge...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 23, 6:22 pm, Rob Arndt <teuton...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > Wonder if the OP is expert enough to name this mystery weapon found in
> > > Mosul in 2005.
>
> > >http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/liqrman612/0_21_021507_mystery...
>
> > > It is a REAL weapon, not a toy and was shown on Fox tv.
>
> > > If he knows that one and can prove it, he is truly a master. If not he
> > > should post artillery someplace else IMHO.
>
> > > Rob
>
> > Masterful display of hypocrisy there, Rob.
>
> > Beau - nice work on the Pic of the Week(s) - enjoyable stuff. Thanks
> > for your effort.
>
SNIP
You got 2 this past month, a FAA Corsair and a USCG Curtiss F Boat
(you even repsonded to that one). Now don't get me going or I just
might start posting New York City subway car photos. You don't want me
talking about Low-V's, Steinways and R-44's. Trust me, you don't....
Oh, hell...which is the obsolete vehicle only to be found in a museum?
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/gboag_nyc_delay.jpg
Jack Linthicum
Jack Linthicum
Rob Arndt
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sorry, I'll pass on subway trains (especially those destined for the
NY Transit Museum); instead, I prefer Nazi trains:
http://www.germansteam.co.uk/FastestLoco/fastloco-04.jpg
http://www.germansteam.co.uk/FastestLoco/fastloco-17.jpg
http://www.worldrailfans.info/Articles/Europe/GermanSteamImages/DRG-DB/61-001.jpg
http://www.worldrailfans.info/Articles/Europe/GermanSteamImages/DRG-DB/61-002.jpg
http://www.worldrailfans.info/Articles/Europe/GermanSteamImages/Experimental/19-1001.jpg
Rob
p.s. Pst... the Nazis also came up with DRG designs for maglevs during
the war to move war material underground at high-speeds ;)
Rob Arndt
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think he thinks the Concorde sitting in the background of his subway
car link is it ;)
Rob
beausabre
> Mosul in 2005.
>
>
> It is a REAL weapon, not a toy and was shown on Fox tv.
>
SNIP
As far as this device goes, it was found a couple of years back in
Iraq and cauased a minor to-do on the Net, with claims ranging from
modified RPG to RPG trainer, Decoy/Prop, Junior Jihadist Toy and
ending up with Jihadist Spudgun. The US army technical inteliigence
boys eventually decided it was the Chechen C5K (although there are
those who dispute the nomenclature), either the genuine article or
locally made in Iraq. Given that the Chechen rebel government and
military organization is sketchy at best and the Iraqi Jihadists' even
more vestigial, it may not even have an "official" nomenclature at
all. It may just be "Ahmed's Crusader Destroying, Greater and Lesser
Satan Slaying, Infidel Eliminating, Mohammed Avenging, Grenade
Launcher Thingie" or words to that effect (in Chechen or Arabic, of
course). Honestly, I haven't kept up on it, so my info may be stale,
but until I hear something better I'll go with "C5K" as its name.
"March 4, 2007: The mystery weapon picture that's been showing up
around the net, appears to be something that began in Chechnya (where
the local Islamic terrorists built improvised weapons firing 55mm
rockets), and evolved into a new design for firing RPG rockets. The
U.S. Army has come to call the mystery weapon the C5K, and it sports a
scope. The C5K is a misnomer, and refers to another improvised weapon
(a launcher for an unguided aircraft rocket, the S-5K, a 8.8 pound,
55mm projectile). These mystery weapons are made in small quantities,
in workshops set up for that purpose. Things like this are intended to
provide an easier-to-handle launcher for RPG rockets. The Chechens
began the current round of warfare with the Russians in the 1990s, and
many of their innovations spread to other Islamic terrorist groups.
The Sunni Arabs of Iraq are a well educated lot, and know for
resourcefulness and improvisation. Saddam's secret police were known
to have links with the Chechens, and apparently exchanged ideas. The
improvised weapons are often more impressive in terms of appearance
than in performance. But that is a common failing of Islamic
terrorists."
"Easier-to-handle launcher for RPG rockets" Duh? Jeeze, a chimpanzee
could probably manage an RPG. C'mon, it was designed for the average
Russian soldier. Isn't anyone teaching the fundamentalists the
fundamentals?
Jack Linthicum
any left handed person would like something without the exhaust on the
left side.
beausabre
wrote:
> On Jan 26, 10:01 am, beausabre <beausa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> any left handed person would like something without the exhaust on the
> left side.
SNIP
Which is easy to solve, "There will be no southpaws under Communisim,
comrade."
Good friend (best man at her weddingafter introducing she and her
husband, a Marine aviator (note aviation content)) got out of
Czechosolvakia with her parents back ' 68 as a teenager. She's left-
handed and like all her left-handed classmates, was forced to learn to
write right-handed and use her right hand for everything else as a
schoolchild. And Czecholslovakia was considered to be "soft"
communism....
Jack Linthicum
I have seen videos of Osama bin Ladin firing an AK lefthanded, maybe
we could donate an RPG to his arsenal.
Vince
Same as catholic school in the 1920s
My grandmother pulled my father from a catholic school because he was
being disobedient by writing with his left hand
from wikipedia (yes I know this one is uncited)
It can be difficult for left-handed children to learn to write if the
teacher does not take the student's left-handedness into account. In
fact, even in the later 20th century, some UK schools were discouraging
children to write with their left-hand, often seriously affecting the
child's development.[citation needed] When properly done, left-handed
writing is a mirror image to that of the right-hander, making the
teaching process confusing (if right-handed) for the teacher of a
left-handed student. The result is that many left-handed children learn
to write with their hand curled around the pen so that it can meet the
paper at the same angle as the right hander, rather than simply tilt the
paper the opposite way.[citation needed] Once this habit is formed, it
is difficult to break.[citation needed] This curling of the hand results
in the heel of the palm being placed behind the writing, forcing the
writer to lift it off the paper and making the grip even more awkward.
In addition, constantly lifting and replacing the hand over fresh ink
often causes smudging, causing problems for many left-handed students,
especially in exam situations. When the left hand is held correctly, it
is below the writing, as is typical for right-handers.
Vince
William Black
I have news.
I can remember left-handed people being forced to write 'right handed' in
the UK as late as 1964.
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
FledgeIII
There was a similar effort by Penmanship Zampolits in some U.S. public
skools during the early 1960s; they infiltrated under the guise of
"The Peterson Writing Principle" gang. Subversive bunch. Only lasted a
few years, IIRC. ;)
Rob Arndt
The Chechens got the idea from the Serbs with a Zestava rocket
launcher, but simplified and able to fire the 57mm S-5K rocket
available to them.
Efforts continue in makeshift workshops to produce more Chechen
weapons like this LOM-30:
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-08/01/article04.shtml
Rob
Jack Linthicum
Like those copper discs on the explosively formed penetrator hard to
pin on anybody if there are no markings or factory origin marks.
The Horny Goat
<willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>I have news.
>
>I can remember left-handed people being forced to write 'right handed' in
>the UK as late as 1964.
Argh! That could have been me! My father was left handed as was my
late maternal grandfather (forcibly converted) which in his case
turned out to be a good thing for him as he lost three fingers in an
industrial accident in his 30s.
So is my son though neither of my daughters. (I've never heard anyone
do a study that suggests it's sex-linked but...)
Only my father has appalling handwriting though one would almost think
my eldest daughter's first language was Elvish from her handwriting!
Jack Linthicum
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 23:01:21 +0530, "William Black"
>
I watched a Military Channel program on the Lightweight M-134D. It
has an electronic firing system with a left hand trigger button and a
right hand trigger button.
beausabre
Land of the Free and the Home of the Crazed ("Filed under DIY Hacks,
Insane Equipment") ain't falling behind in the Underground Workshop
Rocket Launcher Race
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/RL_home_made_rocket_4.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/RL_home_made_rocket_7.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/RL_home_made_rocket.jpg
Not sure I'd want him as a neighbor - that guidance package needs
work, but it sure as hell would scare the shit outta the
enemy....they'd have NO idea where it was gonna hit!
Build your own!
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/RL_schematic.jpg
"Building the first stage rocket launcher was incredibly simple
1) 2″ pipe over 5′ in length to avoid getting blowback in you face
2) Rocket engines, ignitors, lauch controller or any device that puts
out about 6v
3) Balsa wood and superglue
Cut balsa wood to a fin-like shape, glue onto rocket motor, put in
ignitor, profit. This may sound oversimplified but it really isn't, we
were able to achieve a flight of over 2 city blocks with the launcher
horizontal with this exact setup. The deviation on the horizontal axis
for this flight was about 3′. The engines are about $3 a piece and
each rocket ends up costing us about $4 a piece, so you don't want to
throw them away, but it isnt outrageous. You can of course, use a
standard model rocket, however don't be prepared to get it back in any
usable condition, and be sure to take out the parachute.
We are currently trying out new varieties of fins and motor
configuration to achieve a steady flight path with regularity, it may
take us awhile to get it right, but i assure you, stable flight or
not, it's damn fun. If you have any suggestions as per the launcher or
rocket construction, post and i will most likely try it and give you a
field report."
Now about a self-propelled launcher?
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/120205N55_RocketLauncher.jpg
Another triumph of igenuity over brains
http://www.superguncinema.com/images/sidewinder.jpg
Defies description
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/1200_1_230.jpg
"There is no subtle way to say this: Brian Walker plans to shoot
himself nearly 20 miles into the air aboard a homemade rocket launched
from what could be the world's largest crossbow. (Seriously.)
This isn't Walker's first outlandish invention. He's responsible for
the "light chaser" whirly toy, a 300-gallon water-balloon launcher
(for putting out forest fires - still in prototype), and Taser gloves
(featured in "Garage Geniuses Go Prime Time," issue 14.03). But
Project RUSH - for "rapid up superhigh" - is hands down his most
preposterously dangerous effort. "I missed out on the opportunity to
be the first private citizen to fly to the edge of space in a private
rocket, so I decided to do something even more fun," Walker says."
On the serious side, the real stuff in the Middle East...Hell, from
the looks of things, everyone is building one in their garage.
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/ablof-051photo02.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/homemadeiraqirocketlauncher.jpg
Bet it will cure your migraines
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/Qassam.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/rocket_launcher.jpg
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj227/REN237/captjrl10503111148mideastisrae.jpg
Richard Casady
<beau...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Cut balsa wood to a fin-like shape, glue onto rocket motor, put in
>ignitor,
Snip
You are at the wrong newsgroup. You want Rec.Pyrotechnics. There is a
spin stabilized rocket you can build, that resembles Estes, although
some are bigger. Drilling a hole from the side is cheaper than balsa.
They call them stingers, and I think one inch diameter would be a nice
place to start.
Casady