Shooting the 7" Treble-Banded Brooke Rifle

[intoodeep]

I can't compete with a cute puppy picture!  Go to Vegas!

 DD,

 Puppies grow up. You will always have Blue Skies & wide open spaces and cooler weather......

 

[seacoastartillery]

      intoodeep,   We understand what you mean; yes it could be riding up a little if we had the upper carriage tight in between the wood track supports, but we don't have it tight as there is space for three sheets of notebook paper in the gaps on each side, about .010" per side.  Only kidding about moving in with you folks for a few days!  Looks like you both posted some kool pictures.  As far as your new arrival goes, how about a big third grade kid exclamation,"Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwheeeeeeee'ssooooooooooocute!"

      Sorry DD, since we can't afford gas anymore, we have to call on our very limited equestrian experiences, but, as you know, the closer you get to Canada, the more things there are that will eat your horses, so we have decided to catch one of those free gambler flights to Vegas.  Mike is reading his new book on counting cards already!

Regards,

Mike and Tracy

[Double D]

Sorry, I can't compete with Free....

[Victor3]

Seacoast quote...

"As for the laser idea, I know for a fact that you need a better unit than one of the little snap shooting types for shotguns or the bore sighter type that we bought to do that at 32 yards before we shoot at our 100 yard targets.  It might just work, but the fuzzy blur that you can see on the target at 100 yards is not confidence building."

 Very true...

 One problem with laser sights (both red and green) is that they have ~2 MOA of beam divergence built into them so you are still able to see the spot with a naked eye at longer ranges. When you look at them through a scope at long range, you don't have a nice crisp dot on the target, you see a cotton-ballish blob. This can be overcome somewhat by using laser modules with more precise optics, but you won't find any green ones for cheap. Believe me, I've looked for them.

 Another problem with green lasers is the fact that the optics are more complex than red lasers. With a red laser module, all that's needed is basically a red laser diode with a focusing lens in front of it. With green lasers, there is a frequency-doubling crystal (which produces visible green light from an IR diode), an IR filter as well as a focusing lens. Some also have a beam-splitter that provides feedback to the electronics that adjusts current to the diode to keep output stable at different temperatures. All of the optical components have to be precicely assembled within the module housing to produce a precise beam, and cheap modules are not done all that well due to the cost.

 The <$200 green laser sights for sale today most all use the same basic laser modules found in ~$50 green laser pointers. While useful at close range, they are not much good at 100+ yards for much other than rough sighting on large targets.

[seacoastartillery]

      Thanks, Victor3.  We do appreciate the extra info on these lasers; it doesn't sound too promising as we are NOT willing to put much money in this effort.  We will probably figure out a reasonable way to use our 12X Weaver scope, which is very reliable, to get the job done, probably a horizontal periscope arrangement with chin rest to assure repeatability of eye position.  We can get optical bench prisms and lenses for less than a King's ransom at Edmund Scientific.  CCD video cameras are far too expensive in the sizes necessary for this work.  The cheapie "spy" cameras are a joke and produce an image so small that a bullseye at 100 yds. in a 15 ft. field-of-view would be invisible.
Nice of you to share your knowledge of this equipment.

Mike and Tracy

[Victor3]

 I know you guys will come up with workable solutions to minimize things that will be detrimental to accuracy.

 That said (and believe me, I don't mean to poop on your party here), using a periscope arrangement will probably only make any parallax problem worse. Sending light through two accurate 90 degree turns and precisely through the C/L of your scope will require a housing that would cost much more to build than you paid for your scope.

 I think a more cost-effective solution would be to obtain a quality extended eye relief adjustable objective scope that would let you stand directly behind the gun. Using a suitable scope along with the tecnique I described earlier will for the most part eliminate any measurable effect of parallax, which is caused by not centering your eye with the optics and target (note the words parallax & parallel - they're related).

 Precisely repeatable eye relief is not a major parallax concern once your eye is concentric with the optics and target. However, it can be controlled in your setup if you wish by using a simple vertical stick, attached to your gun's base to touch your chin to while sighting.

[seacoastartillery]

I know you guys will come up with workable solutions to minimize things that will be detrimental to accuracy.

 That said (and believe me, I don't mean to poop on your party here), using a periscope arrangement will probably only make any parallax problem worse. Sending light through two accurate 90 degree turns and precisely through the C/L of your scope will require a housing that would cost much more to build than you paid for your scope.

 I think a more cost-effective solution would be to obtain a quality extended eye relief adjustable objective scope that would let you stand directly behind the gun.

     Victor3,   We appreciate your carefully reasoned comments.  Our work hours are lengthening now as we approach the deadline for completion of this piece, so this will be our last posting on this thread for 3 or 4 weeks.  The periscope idea was a "trial balloon" on a slightly wacky idea. We didn't think too much of it either.  Our method during the brainstorming stage of challenge resolution is to consider ALL IDEAS regardless of our skepticism for them.  You can see why we cannot "stand directly behind the gun" in several of our photos.  There are 2 ft. 8 in. from the end of the scope, as it is now mounted, to the end of the test bed.  However, we really like the concept you mentioned, which is to use the scope we now have or something very similar with eye relief enhancement.  We will explore a re-make of our scope base to move the scope rearward about 2 ft. 5 in. with a counterweight forward for balance, of course.  Using the correct shapes for rigidity and light weight,(Mike and I worked in aircraft and aerospace factories for seven years each), we believe that this can be done by having a total weight of 3 lbs. 8 oz. including the big 12X Weaver scope.  This weight, if balanced over the trunnions, should not throw the gun's alignment out of whack when it is slowly lifted off after careful aiming.  A classic cheek spot-weld on a section of old rifle stock could be accomplished as well, using a tripod of welded angle iron firmly anchored in the ground.  We thank everyone for their suggestions and each one will be carefully considered before we build anything.

Regards,

Tracy and Mike

[Cannoneer]

   M & T, you may have seen this before but I came across this drawing while hunting for a pic of a Whitworth 2.75 cal. mounted on a genuine Whitworth designed carriage and I immediately thought of your outdoor bench rest design. Joseph Whitworth designed this rest and trigger pull mechanism to test his rifles for accuracy. In a competition against the Enfield rifle the British government chose the Enfield over the Whitworth even though the Whitworth outperformed it in almost every catagory, that is except the catagory of price; the Whitworths were a lot more expensive to manufacture. There exists a story, that Queen Victoria sauntered up to one of these rigs at a trial and gave a tug to the lanyard to fire the rifle.



PS., I tacked this post on this thread because I was too lazy to search for the original thread that discussed your bench rest's design.

[seacoastartillery]

     Boom J,   What drawing?  We don't see anything except your text.

T&M

[Cannoneer]

   T & M, is this better? That's the first time that has happened, (at least on the forum) I think I'm going to lay back down and take a little nappy.

[seacoastartillery]

     Don't worry about it!  I just double-posted an update on the Shoot in Floyd, VA.  I think I may have seen your drawing a long time ago in some long-lost book.  It is very similar to our rig; fancy that.  Imagine Whitworth's tenacity over the years, he kept trying, trying, and trying!  Eventually Armstrong and Whitworth merged in the 1880s or 1890s.

Thanks,

Tracy and Mike

[Cannoneer]

   T & M, Joseph Whitworth had already found success with other inventions by this time and right after these trials, even though the British govt. didn't want to spend the money for his superior design the French government did and made a contract to purchase his rifles for their military. Reading some of his writings there's no question that he was disheartened by his lack of success in the area of artillery and firearms in his own country especially cosidering the fact that in reading his personal views it's clear that he viewed his own rifling design as being far superior to his closest competitor. In reading reports of the incredible accuracy of his cannons and rifles it would be an easy task to agree with him. If you take a look at some of his bolt designs it's also clear to me that he should also be credited with inventing the first boat tail projectile.