|
|
Post by chriso on Nov 13, 2012 19:59:05 GMT
Whats the definition of a cannon anyhow?
If its just something that shoots a large projectile at deadly force, and that can be aimed, who says it cannot just be a milled-out block of ice on wheels?
Can we have a precise definition?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 13, 2012 20:19:41 GMT
Whats the definition of a cannon anyhow? If its just something that shoots a large projectile at deadly force, and that can be aimed, who says it cannot just be a milled-out block of ice on wheels? Can we have a precise definition? Not really, because the classification of what is a 'cannon' has changed over the centuries. In relation to MB though, I think that we could classify a cannon as being; A smoothbore, muzzle loading firearm firing a one pound shot (minimum) and which could be moved for transportation and/or aiming. (This seems to be the minimum needed to classify something as a cannon until the 20th century). We could probably relax the weight of shot in this case. |
|
bioLarzen
Demi-Minion
"I reject your avatars and substitute my own."
Posts: 86
|
Post by bioLarzen on Nov 13, 2012 21:52:57 GMT
As far as I can see, the Mythbusters seldom take the go-round approach about the setup: if they test "ice cannon" they wouldn't try to find a kind of ice construction that can be fired, but see if a "traditional" form cannon could be fired.
bio
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Nov 14, 2012 9:13:36 GMT
And what is wrong with an Air-Cannon?....
Ok, so, taking that to extremes, can you fire a frozen chicken out of a cannon barrel made of Ice?....
If In Doubt, LUBE..... Jamie lubricating a frozen barrel with lard... that I would want to see.
Forget Convention here....
Do you have to use explosives to power a cannon to call it a cannon?... I suggest no.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 14, 2012 14:04:13 GMT
As was noted, there are three possible propellants that could be used; Gunpowder, Compressed air, Flammable Gas - AKA a Spud Gun design.
They would have to use gunpowder, since this is what most people would think of when discussing a cannon, even if that was only in the small-scale testing. If it turns out that they can't make a gunpowder IC, or maybe not one at a size that would be practical, then they could look at the 'spud-gun' design for an 'explosive' type of propellent and keep the air-cannon as the final testable design. Since an AC is likely to work this would (or should) mean that regardless of what happens with the other designs they should get a successful firing on film.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on Nov 14, 2012 14:38:12 GMT
To combat the 'what if the gunpowder gets wet' factor, why not just use foil/cardboard gunpowder cartridges that they've been using lately? The foil should keep moisture out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 14, 2012 15:23:01 GMT
Yes, that would do it. However in order to ignite the charge you'd still need to punch a hole in the cartridge and water would seep through that. As such they'd need to try and keep the time between inserting the fuse and firing the gun as short as possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Nov 14, 2012 15:30:52 GMT
Couldn't they just cover the hole with electrical tape?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 14, 2012 16:15:28 GMT
Couldn't they just cover the hole with electrical tape? How do you propose to do that when the cartridge is inside the barrel? *Puts on Mod hat* Lets try and avoid getting off topic when discussing ideas please. The shows researchers would not want to trawl through post after post of irrelevant comments. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Nov 14, 2012 16:28:00 GMT
Got one for you there, use an electronic fuse, and "seal" it in the cartridge....
As for Explosives and Ice, if they work out what explosives would give the same power as a compressed air blast, ok, so its going to be a one-shot deal, I think if the ice is substantial enough, the cannon COULD fire one shot before heat creates disintegration?...
After all, where in the rules does it say cannons must be multiple re-usable?...
I am going slightly out of the box with ideas here, but heck, if it works?.......
"Slightly" off topic, sometimes my crazy idea may just give someone else a sensible one?.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 14, 2012 16:37:07 GMT
Radio detonators have only been used on the show when they have been setting off VERY large explosions, and even then they prefer to use wire-based detonators as being considerably safer (and I'd assume cheaper). In this case if there is a misfire you are stuck with an active detonator you can't disable and no way to tell if the problem is the detonator, damp powder or something else.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on Nov 14, 2012 16:47:37 GMT
SD brings up a good point. In the context of using a powder charge: Even if the first blast did not result in complete destruction of the cannon, the resultant blast would, at least, partially melt the inside of the cannon creating a larger bore. Even if the tests were conducted in freezing temperatures, there is no way to reverse the internal effects of the powder.
Would the best solution be to have duplicate ice cannons for the test? But, then again, is one blast enough to confirm/bust the concept? Or, would it be required that a single ice cannon handle multiple blasts? (Could one successful blast warrant a 'Plausible' if not replicable with the same cannon?)
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 14, 2012 16:57:58 GMT
As I noted a page or two back, there seems no reason they couldn't make multiple cannons- and in fact every reason for them to have spares- if they are using moulds, which would seem the cheapest and simplest way for them to build IC's anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 14, 2012 17:02:58 GMT
I think plausible would be the best result they could get, and that would require being able to send a shot downrange, without it being more harmful to the cannoneers than to the enemy.
also, it would require being able to make it with cannon age resources (though proof-of-concept starting and modern era finishing would be acceptable in the interest of expediency.)
(as with the tree cannon episode)
|
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on Nov 14, 2012 18:15:43 GMT
If they were to make a solid cylinder of ice & hollow it out with the spade tool (such as the one Jamie used to hollow out the tree cannon), that would be only slightly more time consuming that devising a mold that would make the cannon. But, in the end, would probably create a more replicable end product.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Nov 14, 2012 18:42:04 GMT
Couldn't they just cover the hole with electrical tape? How do you propose to do that when the cartridge is inside the barrel? *Puts on Mod hat* Lets try and avoid getting off topic when discussing ideas please. The shows researchers would not want to trawl through post after post of irrelevant comments. I'm not sure you're understanding me here. And, assuming the "Mod hat" was put on because of something I said, I'm not sure I understand what that was for either...? {Relax, it wasn't you, it was the posts after yours which went badly off topic. They have since been removed to the Graveyard - CM}
What I'm suggesting with the electrical tape, is putting in the fuse - which will leave a hole in the cartridge, as per yuor previous post - and then covering the fuse AND the hole with the tape. Once the fuse is lit and the burn reaches the tape, it'll just burn through. At that point we're really too far along for any significant amount of moisture to enter and cause any damage. |
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on Nov 14, 2012 18:53:41 GMT
Usually, the fuse is put into the powder after it is in the cannon. So, how would get electrical tape around the fuse if the charge is already inside the cannon?
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Nov 14, 2012 19:08:00 GMT
How do you go about putting the fuse into the powder AFTER it's put in the cannon, if the powder's encased in a cartridge?
EDIT: I'm not being snippy. That's an actual question. Can't picture that process...
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 14, 2012 20:35:14 GMT
In a real cannon the charge is loaded, then the shot, then the gunner pushes a rod through that touch-hole that pierces the charge. This is the same procedure MB have used with cannon, even those they have made themselves, although I suspect that they can pierce the bag with the igniter/detonator rather than having to use a separate tool.
This remains the safest way to load muzzle-loading cannon, since there is nothing that will set the charge off while you are standing in front of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Nov 14, 2012 20:45:59 GMT
Fair enough. I see where we went in seperate directions here. While you guys are talking after the actual cannon has been built, I'm still talking about the hole-in-the-wall small scale/proof of concept testing.
I was having a hard time figuring out how you'd get the fuse/detonator in through a wall of ice (rather than through the side of a connons barrel) after the projectile was loaded.
But yes. That actually might pose a problem as far as my idea goes. How to load the hole-in-the-wall "cannon" safely...
|
|
