|
Post by Cybermortis on Mar 21, 2014 11:12:57 GMT
{Much appreciated silver - CM}
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 22, 2014 11:26:19 GMT
[head-swell] I know I am......[cheesy grin...]
Heck, why are we still waiting?... LETS BLOW SOMETHING UP ALREADY......
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Mar 22, 2014 13:41:08 GMT
Question; In the painting with explosives myths did they always use C4?
The reason for asking is that I wonder if using a low explosive might not have better results, as the shockwave might not break the paint up quite as much.
What about looking at the Tungusta blast of 1908? They could test to see if the recorded damage is consistent with a meteor exploding in mid air. I recall seeing someone testing this on TV a few years back, using a table top model with matchsticks for the blast area and a charge slid down a wire for the meteor. MB could do that as a small scale test, but I'm wondering if they might not be able to 'supersize' that somewhat.
Blowing clothing off; During the Battle of the Nile the French Flagship, L'Orient, exploded when fire reached her powder store. One of the survivors the British pulled out of the water was a French officer, who they only knew was an officer because he'd managed to keep hold of his hat. Every other stitch of clothing had been blown off...or at least that is what 'they' say....
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 22, 2014 14:43:11 GMT
Question; In the painting with explosives myths did they always use C4? The reason for asking is that I wonder if using a low explosive might not have better results, as the shockwave might not break the paint up quite as much. What about looking at the Tungusta blast of 1908? They could test to see if the recorded damage is consistent with a meteor exploding in mid air. I recall seeing someone testing this on TV a few years back, using a table top model with matchsticks for the blast area and a charge slid down a wire for the meteor. MB could do that as a small scale test, but I'm wondering if they might not be able to 'supersize' that somewhat. Blowing clothing off; During the Battle of the Nile the French Flagship, L'Orient, exploded when fire reached her powder store. One of the survivors the British pulled out of the water was a French officer, who they only knew was an officer because he'd managed to keep hold of his hat. Every other stitch of clothing had been blown off...or at least that is what 'they' say.... I think they used a dynamite analog for the first test, and then detcord for the follow ups. I don't recall what they used for the revisit.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 23, 2014 11:07:08 GMT
Grrr !!! Damn, that site we used to use over there<<< (Old site) for watching the complete Mythbusters collection... "Disappeared?"... have I got the wrong link?...
Anyway, IIRC, they used a variety of explosives, then decided they needed to "Aerosol" the paint to get it to spread, thus needing a high speed explosion?.... IIRC, they used "Det cord" (High-speed) in sort of "Knots" for one experiment?....
I wish I could just go watch that to get it right........
|
|
|
Post by memeengine on Mar 26, 2014 23:42:31 GMT
Blowing clothing off; During the Battle of the Nile the French Flagship, L'Orient, exploded when fire reached her powder store. One of the survivors the British pulled out of the water was a French officer, who they only knew was an officer because he'd managed to keep hold of his hat. Every other stitch of clothing had been blown off...or at least that is what 'they' say.... In the versions I've read of that tale, the officer in question stripped off in order to swim and he kept his hat so that the British would recognise him as an officer and treat him accordingly. One version even has him returning to the ship to get the hat after leaving without it. In all of the versions, he left the ship once the fire was out of control but before the explosions happened. From French archaeological dives on the ship, we know that there were two explosions, the first in the forward magazine and the second in the main magazine. This second one was sufficiently powerful to blow the stern off the ship - so anyone still on board at that point was very unlikely to survive.
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Apr 1, 2014 9:40:57 GMT
Its always difficult to get accurate information from such events, and I *think* that the account I read came from someone who was on another ship.
In this case it is possible that the explosion that knocked the officer off the deck may have been the one in the forward magazine. It would certainly be unlikely that he survived the explosion in the main powder store, given that that blast sent the ships mainmast 100 feet in the air (the lower mast would weight something in the region of 3 tons) and the quarter deck started just aft of the mainmast.
Anyway.
More ideas, more more more *coughs*
I'm needy.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Apr 1, 2014 11:25:12 GMT
Magazines.... I got a time team idea here, and it sort of does and doesnt make "sense". In the plans that they have of a fort, from about that time when Lizzy was avin a spot of bover with the neighbours, that had the magazine outside the walls..... They dug tunnels under the walls from the inside, and the plan was to store the explosives underground outside the main walls?....
So how explosive is explosive. And what kind of a bang would that have made if a room, say 10ft cube, was stocked up with gunpowder......
Dragon want HUGE underground bOOm here.
They got maybe a desert they could do that in?....
To clarify Doesn't make sense... it was not that far from the walls, in fact partly under one corner of the fort... In my estimation, if it HAD goon bang, it would have taken that wall down.
|
|
|
Post by memeengine on Apr 2, 2014 6:16:42 GMT
Magazines.... So how explosive is explosive. And what kind of a bang would that have made if a room, say 10ft cube, was stocked up with gunpowder...... A 10ft cube of gunpowder would give you a fairly large explosion, but it'd be a fairly expensive one too. A solid cube would be about 48 metric tonnes of gunpowder, if it were contained in barrels, then that would reduce down to about 35~40 metric tonnes (or 77~88,000 lbs) depending on the size of the barrels and the care taken to pack them in. The cheapest (bulk) black powder seems to be around the $13 per lb mark, so even the lowest (77,000 lbs) estimate would cost over a million dollars to try. In regard of the proposed underground magazine, the exact effect would depend on what material it was dug into and how far beneath ground it was. A deep room tunnelled into solid rock is probably going to be beyond the show's capability to re-produce.
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Apr 2, 2014 6:32:45 GMT
Sounds like one of the Artillery forts build along the southern coast of England like Deal or Walmer Castle, that were not designed to hold out during a siege, but to provide a gun platform against incoming enemy ships, so a magazine under a wall might not be considered the same danger as in a earlier castle.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Apr 2, 2014 8:35:50 GMT
Thats the ones. But still, the magazine, if that had been hit by artillery?.... or a stray spark?.... accidents do happen?...
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Apr 2, 2014 9:01:14 GMT
I am not sure that incoming enemy fire was a problem at the time the design of the forts where conceived, starting in Henry VIIIs time, cannon where firing solid shot against the fort walls which may not have been considered to be able to penetrate deep enough in the ground to be a danger. In many cases the guns we see now in such places are old Georgian or Victorian guns, which are larger than those ships equivalent to The Mary Rose was carrying.
Accidents or a stray spark, the same considerations would have to be made for any design of powder store, above or below ground, dampened curtains etc similar practises to those on board ships that Cyber will Know more about.
In Medieval castles the danger would have been considered undermining in a siege, if that had happened into such an underground store then real trouble would occur.
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Apr 2, 2014 9:24:29 GMT
Yet more musings, these forts where designed to defend out wards towards the sea, the rear often having the gatehouse, at Walmer Castle it's the North side that faces inland, it has only one gun and loop holes to defend against shore raiders. If you where to place the powder store under that Northern side then you would be placing the bulk of the fort between it and where you expected incoming fire to arrive from.
Deal Castle further along the coast points out in such away that the west side is the entrance way.
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Apr 2, 2014 11:25:17 GMT
I'm not up on land-based magazine stores, but from what little I do recall they had 'fearnought' screens; basically a leather curtain over the entrance. On ships these screens were wetted before being into action, but I'd guess this might not have been done on land as the risk of fire was probably lower.
As far as hitting a magazine store goes, if you were dealing with ships then the risk of an underground magazine being hit was effectively zero. Cannon fire from ships would hit the ground at such a shallow angle it would skip off without doing more than putting a shallow dent in the topsoil. The only weapons capable of hitting the ground at anything close to 90 degrees would be mortars and rockets, neither of which was known for accuracy and had enough problems hitting cities let alone individual buildings. They also would have lacked the ability to penetrate any significant distance into the ground.
Off the top of my head the real risk to land magazines was fire, not shot.
What about playing with explosives...as in playing music?
Different explosives produce slightly different sounds when detonated, especially since you could expand this to include rockets, fireworks and firearms. So could you use this to play a recognisable tune using explosives alone?
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Apr 2, 2014 13:22:56 GMT
I know that they had ship mounted Mortars in the 18th century, but were they around in the Tudor period?
Does anyone know if rockers where a feature of Tudor warfare, I know that China, Korea etc had them by then and where using them in battle, but where they in Europe as battlefield weapons?
|
|
|
Post by memeengine on Apr 2, 2014 13:59:00 GMT
I know that they had ship mounted Mortars in the 18th century, but were they around in the Tudor period? Does anyone know if rockers where a feature of Tudor warfare, I know that China, Korea etc had them by then and where using them in battle, but where they in Europe as battlefield weapons? I believe that ship-mounted mortars were first used by the French around the end of the 17th century. I also think that the use of rockets in European warfare only happened when the British started using Congreve's designs (in the late 18th Century), following their encounters with rockets on the battlefields in India.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 2, 2014 14:17:33 GMT
I am not sure that incoming enemy fire was a problem at the time the design of the forts where conceived, starting in Henry VIIIs time, cannon where firing solid shot against the fort walls which may not have been considered to be able to penetrate deep enough in the ground to be a danger. In many cases the guns we see now in such places are old Georgian or Victorian guns, which are larger than those ships equivalent to The Mary Rose was carrying. Accidents or a stray spark, the same considerations would have to be made for any design of powder store, above or below ground, dampened curtains etc similar practises to those on board ships that Cyber will Know more about. In Medieval castles the danger would have been considered undermining in a siege, if that had happened into such an underground store then real trouble would occur. I see two immediate issues from the enemy tunneling into your powder magazine - a flood of invaders coming into your fort, and a flood of gunpowder being carried out.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 2, 2014 14:18:53 GMT
YESif you want to add further complication - make it a chain reaction.
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Apr 2, 2014 15:45:55 GMT
I am not sure that incoming enemy fire was a problem at the time the design of the forts where conceived, starting in Henry VIIIs time, cannon where firing solid shot against the fort walls which may not have been considered to be able to penetrate deep enough in the ground to be a danger. In many cases the guns we see now in such places are old Georgian or Victorian guns, which are larger than those ships equivalent to The Mary Rose was carrying. Accidents or a stray spark, the same considerations would have to be made for any design of powder store, above or below ground, dampened curtains etc similar practises to those on board ships that Cyber will Know more about. In Medieval castles the danger would have been considered undermining in a siege, if that had happened into such an underground store then real trouble would occur. I see two immediate issues from the enemy tunneling into your powder magazine - a flood of invaders coming into your fort, and a flood of gunpowder being carried out. You or I might think that, :)but a group of sappers who are in the mind set of what they do is tunnel in, undermine the wall and create a breach above ground might not think that way. Rigid thinking, can sometimes be a problem
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 2, 2014 15:53:46 GMT
I see two immediate issues from the enemy tunneling into your powder magazine - a flood of invaders coming into your fort, and a flood of gunpowder being carried out. You or I might think that, :)but a group of sappers who are in the mind set of what they do is tunnel in, undermine the wall and create a breach above ground might not think that way. Rigid thinking, can sometimes be a problem ah, the old "look at how much time they saved us" phenomenon. (taking note of the fact that the tunnel was often collapsed using explosives)
|
|