Author Topic: Seacoast Artillery to Re-Create Krupp Seacoast Gun (Read 87230 times)

seacoastartillery · « **on:** July 07, 2010, 09:56:43 PM »

We are starting a prototype of the first cannon, in what could eventually be a line of smaller and more affordable seacoast guns, this week, by making some drawings and turning a salute gun tube. We wanted a bold, powerful, gun to start things off. We think the German 1,000 pounder Krupp Seacoast Gun fits the bill perfectly. We are not sure yet whether these guns will be firecracker cannon or slightly larger salute guns. For the salute gun, we want to keep the tube length to 14" or less and the breech diameter to about 2". For the firecracker cannon, 8 or 9" long by 1.50" diameter at the breech. It will be a muzzle stuffer despite looking like a breechloader mainly to keep the cost down.

What do you guys think? Any size or type preference? 1018 or 1026 steel will be used and this gun and carriage will be all machined. Also there is the question of what looks better, a Big Brute of a "Howitzer" or a more Sophisticated Looking "Gun"? Pictures of both are included for comparison.

Thanks for helping us design this first piece; we do appreciated your input.

Mike and Tracy

14" Krupp Seacoast Gun at the 1876 Philadelphia Exposition. Note breech block details.

1,000 Pounder Krupp Howitzer at the 1867 Paris Exhibition where it won a prize. Exhibition display mount with armor piercing shell. The sliding breech block can be seen also.

Right side of the same Krupp howitzer, Model 1866 on a Seacoast Fortress Barbette Carriage showing a 1,000 pound shell and shell crane.

Spuddy · « **Reply #1 on:** July 08, 2010, 01:17:55 AM »

Quote from: seacoastartillery on July 07, 2010, 09:56:43 PM

We are starting a prototype of the first cannon, in what could eventually be a line of smaller and more affordable seacoast guns, this week, by making some drawings and turning a salute gun tube. We wanted a bold, powerful, gun to start things off. We think the German 1,000 pounder Krupp Seacoast Gun fits the bill perfectly. We are not sure yet whether these guns will be firecracker cannon or slightly larger salute guns. For the salute gun, we want to keep the tube length to 14" or less and the breech diameter to about 2". For the firecracker cannon, 8 or 9" long by 1.50" diameter at the breech. It will be a muzzle stuffer despite looking like a breechloader mainly to keep the cost down.

What do you guys think? Any size or type preference? 1018 or 1026 steel will be used and this gun and carriage will be all machined. Also there is the question of what looks better, a Big Brute of a "Howitzer" or a more Sophisticated Looking "Gun"? Pictures of both are included for comparison.

Thanks for helping us design this first piece; we do appreciated your input.

Mike and Tracy

14" Krupp Seacoast Gun at the 1876 Philadelphia Exposition. Note breech block details.

1,000 Pounder Krupp Howitzer at the 1867 Paris Exhibition where it won a prize. Exhibition display mount with armor piercing shell. The sliding breech block can be seen also.

Right side of the same Krupp howitzer, Model 1867 on a Seacoast Fortress Barbette Carriage showing a 1,000 pound shell and shell crane.

M&T
I think it is great that you are considering building a smaller line that is more affordable. Personally, it does not matter to me if it is a salute gun or a firecracker cannon, as long as I can fire a firecracker cannon without actually using a firecracker as they are llegal in our state. I like the longer bun better than the shorter one. I will be waiting for more news on this effort.
Tim
PS: BOLO for some sweetness arriving soon.

Victor3 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 08, 2010, 02:20:53 AM »

Neat.

"It will be a muzzle stuffer despite looking like a breechloader mainly to keep the cost down."

JMO, but if you were to add a 1/2" dia cross hole and a steel pin (with maybe an o-ring on one end to hold it in place) to make a simple breech-loader it would be even more neater in firecracker bore.

What do you think? That wouldn't add too much cost, would it?

seacoastartillery · « **Reply #3 on:** July 08, 2010, 05:09:45 AM »

Spuddy, Thanks for your interest, one for the long barrel. I think what we may do is offer the larger size in both versions, a 3/4" bore salute gun and a 5/16" bore cracker cannon with a 1" long, 3/4" bore muzzle section to look right, having a conical, drill point, transition. The last time I tasted the sweetness of the real thing was in candy form, as I was crossing Lake Champlain on the ferry from Burlinton, VT to Port Kent, NY in the late 60s. To make it even sweeter, I was in love at the time with the beautiful daughter of a one-armed saw mill owner. A saw mill owner's daughter in Vermont and a foxy gold miner's daughter in Colorado. Must be my love of heavy industry!

Victor3, I was thinking of doing that just for looks. How could it be made gas-tight without an extremely close fit, or are you depending on the very light pressure of 10 grains of FFg behind a light-weight cracker to not push any gas out? There is also the question of ignition, which is how? Cost, not any more as you described it, but with a sliding wedge for gas-proof lock-up, add $. Very interesting idea. Will have to think about it more today.

Tracy and Mike

Double D · « **Reply #4 on:** July 08, 2010, 06:32:18 AM »

Why so small, it only has to be 1/2 scale or smaller to shoot in Cut Bank. Where is that tongue in cheek smiley icon?

Have you consider building this in modules. First a basic gun. Then small "bolt on" upgrade features to add more and more detail. Basic gun basic inventory.

jeeper1 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 08, 2010, 08:25:21 AM »

The longer barrel looks better to me.

KABAR2 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 08, 2010, 12:04:01 PM »

Krupp turned out some fine cannon, it should be interesting to see
a wee one come about........

some where I have a turn of the century
SKODA catalog I need to find.......they made some nice guns too.....

RocklockI · « **Reply #7 on:** July 08, 2010, 02:21:55 PM »

Victor3, I was thinking of doing that just for looks. How could it be made gas-tight without an extremely close fit, or are you depending on the very light pressure of 10 grains of FFg behind a light-weight cracker to not push any gas out? There is also the question of ignition, which is how? Cost, not any more as you described it, but with a sliding wedge for gas-proof lock-up, add $. Very interesting idea. Will have to think about it more today.

Tracy and Mike

How about a #11 preccusion cap with a short throw striker as ingnition and how ever many grains of powder it takes to light the cracker realiably ...... That would be cool ! A breech loading cracker gun .

It could be very simple and cool as they come

I want one in the short barrled one but as big and heavy as practicable . What sort of carriage will come with them ?

Terry C. · « **Reply #8 on:** July 08, 2010, 04:30:26 PM »

Another vote for the gun. I think it will appeal to more people than the howitzer.

seacoastartillery · « **Reply #9 on:** July 08, 2010, 04:55:33 PM »

I'm very disappointed that nobody likes my favorite, the brutal looking howitzer. Come one guys, look at it, doesn't it say "ship smasher" or "fortress crusher"? I guess the long barrel wins. What about the breech? Is it for looks only or does it have to be functional? What method of communicating fire to the chamber would you use? Is a fixed elevation O.K.? Think lower cost! We want to keep the price closer to $200 than $300 or $400!!
An assembled steel upper carriage on a monoblock type chassis, (lower carriage) will be supplied on this gun with as much detail as the price will allow. Even if you aren't into shooting, these will make powerful-looking paperweights or desk decorations. We are estimating the total weight at 15 Lbs.

Tracy and Mike

shooter2 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 08, 2010, 05:00:37 PM »

I see your point about the Howitzer looking meaner but how about supplying it as a Gun with the length it needs to be cut for a howitzer marked in Texta?

Only need to re-crown the barrel and Bob's your uncle!

For a salute gun/firecracker I imagine a fixed elevation would suffice, maybe a few degrees above level for effect?

I love your work!

Shooter2

Zulu · « **Reply #11 on:** July 08, 2010, 05:02:31 PM »

I think the "brutal looking howitzer" makes a statement!

I like it much more. The thought crossed my mind that I would like to turn one of those barrels.

Zulu

seacoastartillery · « **Reply #12 on:** July 08, 2010, 05:41:35 PM »

Shooter2, Now if I could only get a few more cannoneers to agree with us, we wouldn't have to build the "kinder, gentler" Krupp cannon with the more sophisticated, longer tube. Wait.......make it long and mark it for cutting; now that is a capital suggestion. Why didn't I think of that? Oh, Oh, Zulu is sharpening his chisels; I better get my assets in order and start cutting some steel. Let's see, I'll be all day on the mill tomorrow making more fixtures for Brooke production, so for a change of pace I could turn some barrel steel Friday after 4:30. Sounds like a plan!

Thanks to everyone who has advice for us. We DO appreciate it. We are open to more suggestions, so please feel welcome to tell us your's.

Tracy and Mike

Frank46 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 08, 2010, 06:08:47 PM »

Big long tube. Think I have a line drawing from the same book as you. Great minds think alike. Funny how things go, think I mentioned this (CRS) when you did your humongous mortar some time back. Or how about those 10" disappearing rifles I sent pics way back when. Frank

GGaskill · « **Reply #14 on:** July 08, 2010, 06:12:55 PM »

How about a disappearing gun?

Smoothbore would be OK since the recoil action would be the center of attention anyway.

KABAR2 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 08, 2010, 06:28:39 PM »

I didn't say I didn't like it ... long or short, actually I think the stubby one looks better.

Double D · « **Reply #16 on:** July 08, 2010, 06:49:45 PM »

Howitzer.

seacoastartillery · « **Reply #17 on:** July 08, 2010, 09:18:59 PM »

Ah yes, the 6, 8, 10 and 12" Endicott Period Disappearing Rifles. We have see all 4 of them in the US, and we have volunteered to be on the crew of the only functioning one in the country, a 6" a few miles south of Fort Point under the Golden Gate Bridge in California. I believe it's at Battery Marshall. Mike did a great job on the crew while I filmed the volunteers haul it down by hand cranking, (a lot of work!) into the loading position, sponge the tube, place the next round on the shell cradle, ram it, load the powder charge, ram it, close and lock the breech block, release the lead weight into the pit beneath the gun which raises the tube into battery, and finally FIRE!!

Make one?? Even a small model would be an extreme challenge. If we can find a patron instead of a customer, maybe then. Best model we have ever found was in the little museum of Endicott Period Fortifications on Tybee Island just off the main road and a little north as you enter the town. It's near the very tall lighthouse there. You will also find a french 75 in reasonably good repair behind a shed 30 yards SSE of the lighthouse's base. The disappearing rifle model is in the lower section of the museum and don't forget to look through the periscope which operates nicely, just like one in those WWII movies. Another model in in the Casemate Museum at Fort Monroe, Hampton, Virginia. There is another 6" near Fort Pickens on Santa Rosa Island near Pensacola, Florida, but it is welded to keep it in the loading position. Then there are two static 10" rifles at Fort Stevens which, with other big rifles at Port Townsend, WA guarded Puget Sound, Everett and Seattle, Washington. Both Fort Stevens guns and their carriages show damage from Japanese bomb splinters incurred during their duty in the Philippines during WWII.

More votes for the short one! Alright........ Thanks Double D and please tell these gentlemen that no one twisted your arm to secure that vote. Wait, did Mike talk to you about That subject today when you called?? Kabar2, Aren't howitzers neat? We think so too!
Alfred Krupp used to put little personal notes on the workmen's benches at night after they went home lauding their work. Can you ever imagine a modern manager, much less the owner of the company, doing That? Ha!

Tracy and Mike

GGaskill · « **Reply #18 on:** July 08, 2010, 09:28:45 PM »

Even a small model would be an extreme challenge.

Yes, it would, even if you could find adequate plans for all the parts. I would like to build an operating model for Ft. MacArthur in San Pedro, CA, since they had some there also. But it is down the list.

Victor3 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 09, 2010, 01:33:11 AM »

Quote from: GGaskill on July 08, 2010, 09:28:45 PM

Even a small model would be an extreme challenge.

Yes, it would, even if you could find adequate plans for all the parts. I would like to build an operating model for Ft. MacArthur in San Pedro, CA, since they had some there also. But it is down the list.

Do you know if they plan to finish that sheetmetal mockup barrel they have down below?

Victor3 · « **Reply #20 on:** July 09, 2010, 02:28:06 AM »

Quote from: seacoastartillery on July 08, 2010, 05:09:45 AM

Victor3, I was thinking of doing that just for looks. How could it be made gas-tight without an extremely close fit, or are you depending on the very light pressure of 10 grains of FFg behind a light-weight cracker to not push any gas out? There is also the question of ignition, which is how? Cost, not any more as you described it, but with a sliding wedge for gas-proof lock-up, add $. Very interesting idea. Will have to think about it more today.

Tracy and Mike

Yes, I was thinking that with the miniscule charge, no great effort to seal the breech would be required. You could however use a taper pin reamer on the hole and an off the shelf taper pin (with a phony 'handwheel' machined on the end?) for the block. Tap it out to load, tap it in to seal & fire. If the possibility that the pin might come loose upon firing is a concern, you could add a clip or something to the small dia end of the pin (but I don't think it's needed).

Ignition? I like Gary's idea of a nipple. You could install it on top and a small brass hammer could be used to fire it, and also to tap the breech pin in and out.

The 'shell' could be a cracker with a teensy-weensy foil bag charge attached. Pierce the bag through the nipple hole. After firing and removing the breech block it would be a breeze to swab it straight through from the rear.

Fixed elevation? Hmmm. I don't know 'bout you, but the 1st thing I wanna do when I see a small cannon is fiddle with the barrel; I want it to move. If you decide on the howitzer, the major weight looks like it could be made to be rear of the trunnions and you could add a simple jack screw.

Just some ideers...

KABAR2 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 09, 2010, 04:25:21 AM »

Quote from: GGaskill on July 08, 2010, 09:28:45 PM

Even a small model would be an extreme challenge.

Yes, it would, even if you could find adequate plans for all the parts. I would like to build an operating model for Ft. MacArthur in San Pedro, CA, since they had some there also. But it is down the list.

Back in 1979-81 when I attended Trinidad State Jr college the college library had the Manuals in the gunsmithing section for the disappearing cannon the line drawings would be quite helpful if someone were ever to take on such an endeavor and if they are missing from there have them check the basement there were extra copies in the storage area.... I was too honest to "borrow' one..... tempted yes take no.....

RocklockI · « **Reply #22 on:** July 09, 2010, 04:37:20 AM »

you could contol elvation with capsquare tension . the barrel should move .

Alfred Krupp used to put little personal notes on the workmen's benches at night after they went home lauding their work. Can you ever imagine a modern manager, much less the owner of the company, doing That? Ha!

Other than a layoff notice ....

.

I think that action lends itself to an internal striker for the cap .

Double D · « **Reply #23 on:** July 09, 2010, 05:01:02 AM »

Quote from: seacoastartillery on July 08, 2010, 09:18:59 PM

More votes for the short one! Alright........ Thanks Double D and please tell these gentlemen that no one twisted your arm to secure that vote.
Tracy and Mike

Arm twisting? Since when is $10 and six pack of Busch considered Arm twisting. Thanks Mike!

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #24 on:** July 09, 2010, 06:37:14 AM »

Quote from: RocklockI on July 09, 2010, 04:37:20 AM

...
Alfred Krupp used to put little personal notes on the workmen's benches at night after they went home lauding their work. Can you ever imagine a modern manager, much less the owner of the company, doing That? Ha!
...

Yes, I can imagine that - where I work! Our plant manager is like none other that I've met! I'm not sure that I want to retire! (Maybe that's because I'm taking the week off and I'm in the middle of running concrete and bricks.)

GGaskill · « **Reply #25 on:** July 09, 2010, 12:44:29 PM »

Do you know if they plan to finish that sheetmetal mockup barrel they have down below?

I talked to someone about that last year but never really got a satisfactory answer. Old Fort MacArthur Days is this weekend so you might visit and try to find someone who could answer that question. I don't expect to be there this year as we haven't had any positive results from our previous high power rifle exhibits. Seems like re-enactors like running around with blanks but aren't interested in live fire.

Frank46 · « **Reply #26 on:** July 09, 2010, 08:00:19 PM »

Big humongous cannon. 1" bore with screw thread breech mechanism gets my vote. Should weigh in at about 50 lbs. Frank

GGaskill · « **Reply #27 on:** July 09, 2010, 08:17:28 PM »

Screw threads will drive up the price. Big will drive up the price.

little seacoast · « **Reply #28 on:** July 10, 2010, 03:05:20 AM »

Gotta go for the howitzer, don't really care if it really breech loads of not. A nipple on the rear of the barrel would be my preference for ignition ( have 3000 musket caps) and a one inch bore.

dominick · « **Reply #29 on:** July 10, 2010, 05:19:07 AM »

Mike and Tracy,

If you go with the mug style breech, you wouldn't have to deal the the gas leakage issue. I used this set up several times and it's no different than a black powder revolver as far as the seal is concerned. A cross pin perhaps for retension? I vote for the longer barrel but the Howitzer is a certainly a close second. Also, I been looking at building one of those dissappearing guns for a long time. Some of those were counterweight driven and it would be interesting to see how it would react in a small cannon. It's a lot of work though, even with adding just a few of the details. If I can find the time. Dom