Author Topic: Bowling ball tubage! (Read 1971 times)

Cannoneer · « **on:** July 12, 2012, 11:43:13 AM »

I'm not sure if this is a cannon, howitzer, or mortar, but it definitely needs a longer platform.

keith44 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 12, 2012, 01:01:34 PM »

I've seen that video before, I think they call it a cannon. Outriggers would help, but I like the way it jumps when fired.

gunsonwheels · « **Reply #2 on:** July 13, 2012, 09:30:41 AM »

I like the reinforcing rings welded (I think) around the breech area of the tube.

GOW

carmy53 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 13, 2012, 11:08:55 AM »

If the ATF were to ask which pre-1898 cannon would you say this is a reproduction of?

Double D · « **Reply #4 on:** July 13, 2012, 12:08:20 PM »

Antique ignition.

The Jeff · « **Reply #5 on:** July 13, 2012, 12:30:19 PM »

Quote from: Double D on July 13, 2012, 12:08:20 PM

Antique ignition.

Has it finally been nailed down that all you need is antique ignition/non fixed ammunition? The reason I ask is I know you've brought up the point before about being a replica of a pre 1897 piece.

Obviously it's best to write a letter to the ATF before building something a little more out of the ordinary.

Double D · « **Reply #6 on:** July 13, 2012, 01:29:47 PM »

Quote from: The Jeff on July 13, 2012, 12:30:19 PM

Quote from: Double D on July 13, 2012, 12:08:20 PM
Antique ignition.

Has it finally been nailed down that all you need is antique ignition/non fixed ammunition? The reason I ask is I know you've brought up the point before about being a replica of a pre 1897 piece.

Obviously it's best to write a letter to the ATF before building something a little more out of the ordinary.

Yes that question was answered by a letter from ATF. See this post for a copy of the letter http://www.gboreloaded.com/forums/index.php/topic,76866.msg1099442123.html#msg1099442123

Cannoneer · « **Reply #7 on:** July 13, 2012, 01:42:07 PM »

Quote from: gunsonwheels on July 13, 2012, 09:30:41 AM

I like the reinforcing rings welded (I think) around the breech area of the tube.

GOW

Flash Gordonesque!

Cannoneer · « **Reply #8 on:** July 13, 2012, 01:47:27 PM »

Quote from: carmy53 on July 13, 2012, 11:08:55 AM

If the ATF were to ask which pre-1998 cannon would you say this is a reproduction of?

Gerald Bull's supergun!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon

Double D · « **Reply #9 on:** July 13, 2012, 01:57:53 PM »

I would like to see more details on that build, fuse fired...but I suspect smokeless powder

Here is raw link to the discussion the ATF letter. http://www.gboreloaded.com/forums/index.php/topic,244359.msg1099406885.html#msg1099406885

Cannoneer · « **Reply #10 on:** July 13, 2012, 02:14:07 PM »

Quote from: Double D on July 13, 2012, 01:57:53 PM

I would like to see more details on that build, fuse fired...but I suspect smokeless powder

Do you think that thing would survive that many smokeless powder firings? It appeared to me like they were firing some decent loads, and that seems to be a lot of smoke for smokeless.

Double D · « **Reply #11 on:** July 13, 2012, 02:28:57 PM »

Quote from: Cannoneer on July 13, 2012, 02:14:07 PM

Quote from: Double D on July 13, 2012, 01:57:53 PM
I would like to see more details on that build, fuse fired...but I suspect smokeless powder

Do you think that thing would survive that many smokeless powder firings? It appeared to me like they were firing some decent loads, and that seems to be a lot of smoke for smokeless.

Sure with the proper chamber...

The Jeff · « **Reply #12 on:** July 13, 2012, 02:52:30 PM »

Quote from: Double D on July 13, 2012, 01:29:47 PM

Quote from: The Jeff on July 13, 2012, 12:30:19 PM
Quote from: Double D on July 13, 2012, 12:08:20 PM
Antique ignition.

Has it finally been nailed down that all you need is antique ignition/non fixed ammunition? The reason I ask is I know you've brought up the point before about being a replica of a pre 1897 piece.

Obviously it's best to write a letter to the ATF before building something a little more out of the ordinary.

Yes that question was answered by a letter from ATF. See this post for a copy of the letter http://www.gboreloaded.com/forums/index.php/topic,76866.msg1099442123.html#msg1099442123

That... opens up new possibilities for my next cannon!

GGaskill · « **Reply #13 on:** July 13, 2012, 03:30:30 PM »

You really think smokeless powder with all that smoke from the muzzle? Keep in mind I was not in the artillery so I have no experience with smokeless artillery smoke.

Double D · « **Reply #14 on:** July 13, 2012, 04:44:12 PM »

keith44 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 13, 2012, 05:58:06 PM »

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/BB61_USS_Iowa_BB61_broadside_USN.jpg/470px-BB61_USS_Iowa_BB61_broadside_USN.jpg

I'm not so sure about that. Standard loading for these guns was three bags smokeless, one bag black. Not very much smoke here, but the slow burning smokeless shows up with the fireball as still burning gasses hit the atmosphere.

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #16 on:** July 14, 2012, 07:47:06 AM »

Long tubes are very good at burning MOST of the powder - leaving very little smoke. I've seen it often with a friend's beer-can caliber mortar shooting 1/2 cans (24" tube) a LITTLE powder and 400 yard range. Also quieter.

Double D · « **Reply #17 on:** July 14, 2012, 08:48:13 AM »

Quote from: Cat Whisperer on July 14, 2012, 07:47:06 AM

Also quieter.

Well where is the fun in that?

KABAR2 · « **Reply #18 on:** July 17, 2012, 05:27:31 AM »

I tend to agree they are not using traditional black powder loadings...... is it possible they are using black powder used for blasting? I would think that stuff would be much dirtier than normal black and probably would give a darker smoke..... I am guessing at the later two as I have never used blasting powder in a cannon....

gunsonwheels · « **Reply #19 on:** July 17, 2012, 05:39:55 AM »

Having shot both... there is little difference in the sodium nitrate powder ("B" blasting) versus the potasium nitrate stuff ("A" black (Fa) or fireworks powder and sporting black (Fg)) as far as smoke and fouling are concerned. A little 4895 surplus rifle powder added to the mix tends to clean both of them up as far as the fouling is concerned but I don't recommend duplexing for any reason anymore. Age does that for/to you.

...if you are lucky/blessed enough to get that far with all your limbs, fingers and eye-sight. BE SAFE EVRYONE!!

As far as the military today is concerned, anyone know just how much they continue to duplex with black and smokeless?

GOW

Cannoneer · « **Reply #20 on:** July 17, 2012, 06:38:06 AM »

Quote from: gunsonwheels on July 17, 2012, 05:39:55 AM

As far as the military today is concerned, anyone know just how much they continue to duplex with black and smokeless?

GOW

I believe that Cat W has talked about this in some past threads, but instead of me remembering it foggily, I think we should wait for him to tell it clearly. Also Tim, in the pic that DD posted, is the flame on the shell there simply from the charge coming up the pipe, or could that be a base bleed shell (I don't know about this modern stuff)?

All I can say about this group tossing BB's into the high desert sky is that I sure hope that they weren't using smokeless. I'm kind of surprised that no one has mentioned anything about the construction of their tube.

KABAR2 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 17, 2012, 07:22:45 AM »

I have a feeling the reason not much has been said about the construction of multiple sections of tube being used is because we don't know their construction methods.... it appeares to work....... but year it's a funky way to put a cannon together...... we should note that everyone is standing WELL away from the thing when it is going off.....

Cannoneer · « **Reply #22 on:** July 17, 2012, 07:39:18 AM »

Yeah, if I was there I'd be crouching behind the sturdiest vehicle I could find too, and if they were using smokeless I'd be on one of those bikes moving full throttle in the opposite direction the barrel was pointing.

Double D · « **Reply #23 on:** July 17, 2012, 08:53:44 AM »

I don't know what they are shooting in that gun. Lacking details about the construction of the gun it is perfectly reasonable to think its construction does allow it to shoot with smokeless.

I would like to learn more about this guns construction, it looks interesting.

onegreatshot · « **Reply #24 on:** July 17, 2012, 09:15:07 AM »

Now gentlemen that was a lot of smoke and fire. Just wonder how much B/P went into the charge???

KABAR2 · « **Reply #25 on:** July 18, 2012, 05:26:09 AM »

Quote from: onegreatshot on July 17, 2012, 09:15:07 AM

Now gentlemen that was a lot of smoke and fire. Just wonder how much B/P went into the charge???

I have not seen BP smoke that dirty....... it brings into question what propellent they are using...... it has to be a pretty stout charge what ever it is..... I have a friend who is uing modern artillery powder from a 155mm in a Registered DD, I was surprised at how fine the powder is, it is about 1/2" long by 1/8" thick with a small hole in the center ... green in color looks like a bag of grass clippings..... I have not seen it fired so I can't say how dirty it is or color of smoke.... if there is any....

Cannoneer · « **Reply #26 on:** July 18, 2012, 05:48:40 AM »

Just to make sure that no newbies misunderstand anything being said on this topic. None of us would ever use smokeless powder to fire our BLACK POWDER artillery pieces, because that is a no-no of the first magnitude, and would certainly lead to disaster, mayhem, and death!

gunsonwheels · « **Reply #27 on:** July 18, 2012, 01:49:18 PM »

Cannoneer:

Quote

Just to make sure that no newbies misunderstand anything being said on this topic. None of us would ever use smokeless powder to fire our BLACK POWDER artillery pieces, because that is a no-no of the first magnitude, and would certainly lead to disaster, mayhem, and death!

The statement above CANNOT be over-emphasized. Black Powder is a safe product in our ordnance if you'll just follow load recommendations (both powder and projo mass) in a well engineered and constructed piece. Read the threads about the idiots trying to use smokeless and blowing up stuff but then DO NOT be one yourself. Please be safe... for yourself, your loved ones and the future of our sport.

GOW

keith44 · « **Reply #28 on:** July 19, 2012, 02:17:03 PM »

Quote from: gunsonwheels on July 18, 2012, 01:49:18 PM

Cannoneer:

Quote
Just to make sure that no newbies misunderstand anything being said on this topic. None of us would ever use smokeless powder to fire our BLACK POWDER artillery pieces, because that is a no-no of the first magnitude, and would certainly lead to disaster, mayhem, and death!
The statement above CANNOT be over-emphasized. Black Powder is a safe product in our ordnance if you'll just follow load recommendations (both powder and projo mass) in a well engineered and constructed piece. Read the threads about the idiots trying to use smokeless and blowing up stuff but then DO NOT be one yourself. Please be safe... for yourself, your loved ones and the future of our sport.

GOW

+1

and as said do NOT mix smokeless and Black for any reason!!!

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #29 on:** July 20, 2012, 02:23:51 PM »

Quote from: Cannoneer on July 17, 2012, 06:38:06 AM

Quote from: gunsonwheels on July 17, 2012, 05:39:55 AM

As far as the military today is concerned, anyone know just how much they continue to duplex with black and smokeless?

GOW

I believe that Cat W has talked about this in some past threads, but instead of me remembering it foggily, I think we should wait for him to tell it clearly. Also Tim, in the pic that DD posted, is the flame on the shell there simply from the charge coming up the pipe, or could that be a base bleed shell (I don't know about this modern stuff)?

All I can say about this group tossing BB's into the high desert sky is that I sure hope that they weren't using smokeless. I'm kind of surprised that no one has mentioned anything about the construction of their tube.

Military (Army) duplex. The only reason for the black powder in the separate loading ammo (i.e.: 155mm, 175mm and 8" is to catch the sparks from the primer (a thin layer in the bottom (red end) of charge 1).

The picture of the M109 155mm SP howizer firing - looks to me (oppinion) that it's the rocket assisted round - adds a bunch of distance.