|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 23, 2015 14:08:44 GMT
The claim that torpedoes could blow a ship out of the water dates to WW2, or at least that is the date when the expression seems to have come into general use. It may, as many saying do, have come from a slightly earlier period and I have run across the saying in relation to ships in the 1700's. However those references were written post-WW2 so it is unclear as to if 'blown out of the water' was actually a phrase added by an author when writing about those things. In WW2 the largest torpedoes carried a thousand pound warhead, those interestingly were Japanese torpedoes. Which might have been because the Japanese (unlike other nations) designed their Submarines to be part of their Battle fleets, and they were intended to attack the US Battleships directly. As such they would have needed as big a torpedo as could be carried...which as it turned out was very large as the Japanese produced some of the largest Submarines of the period. As far as warship design goes the hull was not armored all the way down. Apart from the cost, the biggest reason for not armoring all of the hull was the weight this would add. The fact is that no ship has the strength of hull or thickness of armor to survive any explosion powerful enough to lift it out of the water without being blown apart. The accounts of ships being lifted out of the water are most likely a result of an optical illusion. We'd be talking about ships considerably longer than what MB used, probably at least three times the length, but an explosion of the same size or smaller. So what people would have been seeing would be the cavity created by the blast under part of the ship, then the upward spray. This would make it seem as if the ship had been lifted up out of the water, or part of it had been, especially if the explosion broke or bent the keel upwards. As an aside. Titanium was used in the construction of some Soviet submarines, and may well have been used for surface ships as well. However this has nothing to do with strength; Titanium is not stronger than steel, its just lighter for a given volume. It would have been chosen because it is more resistant to salt water corrosion and is not magnetic (hence wouldn't set off magnetic mines or be detectable by magnetic sensors). take a 20 foot steel rebar, and two titanium bars: one the same diameter, and one the same weight. support them from the ends and see which bar bows the most. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 23, 2015 14:09:42 GMT
I still stand by my point that when they referred to "blowing it out of the water" they usually weren't concerned with whether it came down in one piece, or even came down at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jul 24, 2015 6:22:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Jul 24, 2015 13:07:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Antigone68104 on Jul 25, 2015 13:45:59 GMT
However, unless its a new type proximity mine that can "sense" a boat above it?... The myth comes from much earlier than that, and all mines and torpedo's of that ear would have been contact detonated. Magnetic mines were used for a good chunk of WWII, and those would have detonated by proximity. (I think there was a backup contact detonation method as well, but I'm not certain.) |
|
|
|
Post by breesfan on Jul 28, 2015 23:28:56 GMT
I liked the auto machine gun myth even though, I don't really get why it had to be tested. I don't watch Breaking Bad so not sure what the issue was.
The blowing the boat out of water was cool and in a way they did blow the boat out of the water even if it got blown to smithereens.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 28, 2015 23:34:33 GMT
I liked the auto machine gun myth even though, I don't really get why it had to be tested. I don't watch Breaking Bad so not sure what the issue was. The blowing the boat out of water was cool and in a way they did blow the boat out of the water even if it got blown to smithereens. I'm assuming it was just whether you could actually build such a contraption, and it would actually be effective. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jul 29, 2015 6:13:32 GMT
I liked the auto machine gun myth even though, I don't really get why it had to be tested. I don't watch Breaking Bad so not sure what the issue was. The blowing the boat out of water was cool and in a way they did blow the boat out of the water even if it got blown to smithereens. I'm assuming it was just whether you could actually build such a contraption, and it would actually be effective. Thats the main question, "Back-Yard build", with things easy to obtain at short notice late at night when the shops are shut?... |
|
|
|
Post by oscardeuce on Aug 12, 2015 3:09:39 GMT
I may be nit picking,but :
1.) the narrator kept calling the M-60 bipod a "tripod". At least I did not see a tripod. The chair mount could be considered a monopod.
2.) I would not consider the M-60 a "legendarily powerful" firearm. The Ma Deuce in .50 Bmg would be much more powerful and a similar rate of fire. More similar to the 7.62 would be the MG-42 in 7.92x57 with a rate of fire of about 1200 rounds per minute would be and is much more legendary. The M-60 is based somewhat on the MG-42.
I wonder who let them play with their $10,000 to $35,000 machine gun (depending on the way it is registered with the NFA)
Also It is illegal of individual citizens to own a machine gun in California. You have to be in the business as either a manufacturer or in the movie biz. I assume the "movie armorer" was referenced to keep them from having felony possession of a machine gun.
I would also assume the gun was a preMay dealer sample and not a fully transferable form 4 gun. That would make it a gun in the $10,000 range as only dealers could have possession.
Too bad they do not live in a state more friendly to firearms.
Not a "myth" to be seen here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Aug 12, 2015 10:15:56 GMT
2; Its a powerful weapon and legendary, being the weapon most often seen and considered as a machine gun to those who watch Hollywood films.
The SFPD would have given them permission, in fact if they didn't appear on screen there would still have been a firearms expert from the SFPD on set when the weapon was.
Mythbusters are well enough known and have contacts within California's law enforcement community (and also Federal Law enforcement) to be able to get permission to use otherwise banned weapons.
As for where they got the gun they also have contacts within Hollywood, which will include companies who own firearms for movie use. MB don't need a license for a machine gun themselves if they are renting from someone else who holds such a license and who is present on set.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 12, 2015 14:18:41 GMT
I may be nit picking,but : 1.) the narrator kept calling the M-60 bipod a "tripod". At least I did not see a tripod. The chair mount could be considered a monopod. 2.) I would not consider the M-60 a "legendarily powerful" firearm. The Ma Deuce in .50 Bmg would be much more powerful and a similar rate of fire. More similar to the 7.62 would be the MG-42 in 7.92x57 with a rate of fire of about 1200 rounds per minute would be and is much more legendary. The M-60 is based somewhat on the MG-42. I wonder who let them play with their $10,000 to $35,000 machine gun (depending on the way it is registered with the NFA) Also It is illegal of individual citizens to own a machine gun in California. You have to be in the business as either a manufacturer or in the movie biz. I assume the "movie armorer" was referenced to keep them from having felony possession of a machine gun. I would also assume the gun was a preMay dealer sample and not a fully transferable form 4 gun. That would make it a gun in the $10,000 range as only dealers could have possession. Too bad they do not live in a state more friendly to firearms. Not a "myth" to be seen here. the M-60 IS a legendarily powerful machine gun. it is the machine gun Rambo used in the First Blood movies, and if you get on any forum filled with kids who don't know what they are talking about the M-60 will have capabilities far beyond reality. THAT is why it is legendary. never mind that it is a light machine gun and any medium or heavy machine gun will send more kinetic energy downrange. and in addition to what Cyber said, when they are not filming Mythbusters, Adam and Jamie's company IS in the movie biz. |
|
|
|
Post by oscardeuce on Aug 12, 2015 17:12:58 GMT
I may be nit picking,but : 1.) the narrator kept calling the M-60 bipod a "tripod". At least I did not see a tripod. The chair mount could be considered a monopod. 2.) I would not consider the M-60 a "legendarily powerful" firearm. The Ma Deuce in .50 Bmg would be much more powerful and a similar rate of fire. More similar to the 7.62 would be the MG-42 in 7.92x57 with a rate of fire of about 1200 rounds per minute would be and is much more legendary. The M-60 is based somewhat on the MG-42. I wonder who let them play with their $10,000 to $35,000 machine gun (depending on the way it is registered with the NFA) Also It is illegal of individual citizens to own a machine gun in California. You have to be in the business as either a manufacturer or in the movie biz. I assume the "movie armorer" was referenced to keep them from having felony possession of a machine gun. I would also assume the gun was a preMay dealer sample and not a fully transferable form 4 gun. That would make it a gun in the $10,000 range as only dealers could have possession. Too bad they do not live in a state more friendly to firearms. Not a "myth" to be seen here. the M-60 IS a legendarily powerful machine gun. it is the machine gun Rambo used in the First Blood movies, and if you get on any forum filled with kids who don't know what they are talking about the M-60 will have capabilities far beyond reality. THAT is why it is legendary. never mind that it is a light machine gun and any medium or heavy machine gun will send more kinetic energy downrange. and in addition to what Cyber said, when they are not filming Mythbusters, Adam and Jamie's company IS in the movie biz. True but I would have liked them to show how hard it is to get that gun to use. We can own them in Ohio, but not in California unless you are "special". The "machine guns allowed" blurb on the screen surprised me as individual ownership of them is illegal in the state. Not sure if that gun range is public or private/law enforcement. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Aug 12, 2015 19:56:11 GMT
They've used both the SFPD's gun range and a private range. They might also have been filming on Federal land, which is where I suspect they ended up filming when they got to use the mini-gun.
A private range would make much more sense than a public one, as it would be far FAR easier to secure the area where they are conducting tests on a private range by hiring out a large chunk of available area.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 13, 2015 0:23:14 GMT
the M-60 IS a legendarily powerful machine gun. it is the machine gun Rambo used in the First Blood movies, and if you get on any forum filled with kids who don't know what they are talking about the M-60 will have capabilities far beyond reality. THAT is why it is legendary. never mind that it is a light machine gun and any medium or heavy machine gun will send more kinetic energy downrange. and in addition to what Cyber said, when they are not filming Mythbusters, Adam and Jamie's company IS in the movie biz. True but I would have liked them to show how hard it is to get that gun to use. We can own them in Ohio, but not in California unless you are "special". The "machine guns allowed" blurb on the screen surprised me as individual ownership of them is illegal in the state. Not sure if that gun range is public or private/law enforcement. the range they use is law enforcement. |
|
|
|
Post by Antigone68104 on Aug 13, 2015 23:04:02 GMT
True but I would have liked them to show how hard it is to get that gun to use. We can own them in Ohio, but not in California unless you are "special". The "machine guns allowed" blurb on the screen surprised me as individual ownership of them is illegal in the state. Not sure if that gun range is public or private/law enforcement. I believe they said in the aftershow that getting the gun to use involved calling a company that rents guns for movie/TV use. |
|
