Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SCA-Siege] Re: Cannon Thoughts why (4)

Expand Messages
  • Robert W Curtice
    I did not mean to imply that you had to use a winch. You dont. Just keep in mind the consideration I have posted to the List conserning cannon and uses. Your
    Message 1 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      I did not mean to imply that you had to use a winch. You dont. Just keep
      in mind the consideration I have posted to the List conserning cannon and
      uses. Your rate of fire is not going to be a problem even at your
      fastest. Cannon could not fire very fast or it would explode as soon as
      the next load of powder was rammed down. (heat and glowing ash in the
      barrel sets off the next loading.) Several of the Sultans best gunners
      died as a result of fast firing during the seige of Constaniople, they
      got sloppy cleaning the gun after a shot. <grins>
      The winch discussion was only in response to the comments by Marcello,
      not a "rules" policy. Please, if you dont have a copy of the SCA Siege
      rules, I can send them to you. Read them and it will be less confusing.
      There is no mention of winches anywhere, particularly for cannon. It it a
      convention we have made by the engineers on this list to have winches on
      heavy siege engines and most balistas, just because it makes operating
      them much easier. It actually increases the rate of fire on most engines,
      simply because the operator does not fatigue as quickly, and can keep it
      at speed longer. So what if you have killed the same guy 10 times before
      he could fall down! <grins> (a waste of good ammo..)

      Keep up the good engineering,

      Master Robert of Vinhold
      SCA Siege Marshal

      On Wed, 27 Sep 2000 06:31:19 -0000 jbaglini@... writes:
      > To the list,
      > Well we're really into it up to our elbows now! I'm not
      > saying that
      > putting a winch on a Cannon is impossible, what I want is to avoid
      > it
      > altogether. My firing rate is about 1 round every 2-2 1/2 minutes
      > now. This is with a practiced crew who knows what their doing and
      > have done it for a week or more. When I get to War, they are not
      > coming, I'll have to train a new crew. My ROF will drop way down
      > to
      > most likely 1 round every 5-10 minutes. This is not a mini-gun at
      > all. If I wanted to shoot fast I'd just use my balistas
      > "Duck"
      > and "Dodge" and rake the field with bolts. I'm building a
      > canon to
      > have fun with.
      > I've asked before and I'll ask again: Why should I redesign
      > and
      > rebuild something that is safe, works well, and has no need for a
      > mechanical crank on it? Don't start on that "It's in the
      > rules" line.
      > If it takes a change in the rules then fine, let's do it. There
      > are
      > special rules for certain things allready so why not cannon?
      >
      > Captain Jonny Bluehawk
      > Myrkfaelinn Free Artillery Corp
      > "All cats have the same name, it is pronounced exactly like the
      > sound
      > of a can opener"
      >
      > --- In SCA-Siege@egroups.com, Robert W Curtice <rwcurtice@j...>
      > wrote:
      > >
      > > Oh, All Right! Just when something is stated as a significant
      > difficulty,
      > > somebody figures some way to get around it! You could do a form of
      >
      > winch,
      > > if your design is something like the Cannon #1 design, where there
      >
      > is
      > > barrel support most of its length. It could be possible to use a
      > system
      > > like the Dionysis balista, perhaps having a detachable crank
      > handle
      > that
      > > would be at the rear of the cannon carrage. The catches could be
      > in
      > > pairs, drawing back the plunger, then releasing it when full draw
      > is
      > > reached, then a second pair would just be comming available to
      > catch the
      > > plunger again after firing. Oops, ah, I think this could lead to a
      > > machine gun... Hmm.. would work for a deck gun on my ship...
      > > Now look what you have gotten us into! <grins> Now see if there
      > is
      > a way
      > > to make it operate like a period device, wich usually required ram
      > > rodding OR breach loading. I have downloaded several paintings of
      > wars in
      > > the 1300's where there were several styles of early cannon shown,
      > and
      > > some were breach loading with several "breaches" ready for loading
      >
      > and
      > > firing.
      > >
      > > Master Robert of Vinhold
      > >
      > > On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 08:55:15 -0600 "Ken and Mindy" <mindy@p...>
      > > writes:
      > > >
      > > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > > From: Robert W Curtice <rwcurtice@j...>
      > > > > a winch is simply not going to work. Some form of ram rod is
      > the only
      > > option
      > > > > Master Robert of Vinhold
      > > >
      > > > I disagree with this sentiment, as we have discussed. I believe
      > a
      > winch
      > > or
      > > > other mechanical system (I'm thinking somthing along the lines
      > of
      > the
      > > system
      > > > used on a repeating ballista) could be used and could be
      > concealed so
      > > as to
      > > > maintain the period appearance of the cannon.
      > > >
      > > > -Marcello

      ________________________________________________________________
      YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
      Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
      Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
      http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
    • Robert W Curtice
      Greetings Therasia, I understand what you are suggesting, this route of working a cannon is possible, but it would take a lot of careful machining to get
      Message 2 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Greetings Therasia,
        I understand what you are suggesting, this route of working a cannon is
        possible, but it would take a lot of careful machining to get working,
        and there is no guarantee that you would get much range after all that
        work. Most dont have the machine shop required to attempt this. There is
        a certain amount of efficiency lost when converting between different
        forms of power. Using a fixed spring to drive a piston to quickly
        compress a fixed volume of air to shoot a missile, is the basic design of
        the spitwad shooters I used to make out of ball point pens in grade
        school mumblemumble years ago. It takes one heck of a spring to get it to
        work right on the scale of an SCA Siege Engine. It would better to just
        use the spring.

        Master Robert of Vinhold
        SCA Siege Marshal

        On Wed, 27 Sep 2000 00:19:31 -0700 Therasia <no1home@...>
        writes:
        > Took the words out of my mouth, Robert. I was getting ready
        > to post some info on period breech loading cannons, but you
        > beat me to it. One of the small cannons discussed in Norman
        > and Pottinger used a "drop-in" breech chamber that for the life
        > of me, reminded me of the shape of CO2 gas or compressed air
        > charges. Now if you made a small cannon like that, with a
        > line-up of CO2 or compressed air "drop-in" breech chambers
        > at the ready, you could really crank out the ammo.
        >
        > Oh damn, there's that rate of fire thing again... ;-)
        >
        > Seriously, I've been contemplating a compressed air piston as the
        > firing mechanism on a cannon. Compressing the air in order to
        > fire would take a bit of time and effort, thus getting around the
        > rate of fire issue. The trick would be getting a good seal between
        > the walls of the cannon and the piston head. Just a thought.
        >
        > ttfn, Therasia

        ________________________________________________________________
        YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
        Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
        Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
        http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
      • Danny Miller
        I disagree strongly. The spring has a limited speed of expansion, and I believe even if the mass of the projectile was very small (like a 1 oz lead ball), the
        Message 3 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          I disagree strongly. The spring has a limited speed of expansion, and I
          believe even if the mass of the projectile was very small (like a 1 oz lead
          ball), the final speed is still barely useful. Adding more springs either in
          parallel or series does not help. The only help would be in getting a spring
          with a lighter mass and more stiffness. Maybe titanium.

          If you could build in a threshold by making the bottom 3 in of the tube
          substantially narrower so the tennis ball jams in there, and the rest of the
          tube a fairly tight fit, and the spring driving a lightweight piston, then it
          might work. The air will develop high pressure behind the tennis ball, then
          the tennis ball will finally burst out of its resting place and be
          accelerated out of the tube by high pressure compressed air. It would
          probably not be good to actually have the tennis ball travel more than 2 feet
          or so in the tube, the compressed air will run out of pressure before then
          and the extra length of tube will instead slow down instead of speed up the
          ball. Most of the tube should be full of the spring to make it viable.

          Oznog

          Robert W Curtice wrote:

          > Greetings Therasia,
          > I understand what you are suggesting, this route of working a cannon is
          > possible, but it would take a lot of careful machining to get working,
          > and there is no guarantee that you would get much range after all that
          > work. Most dont have the machine shop required to attempt this. There is
          > a certain amount of efficiency lost when converting between different
          > forms of power. Using a fixed spring to drive a piston to quickly
          > compress a fixed volume of air to shoot a missile, is the basic design of
          > the spitwad shooters I used to make out of ball point pens in grade
          > school mumblemumble years ago. It takes one heck of a spring to get it to
          > work right on the scale of an SCA Siege Engine. It would better to just
          > use the spring.
          >
          > Master Robert of Vinhold
          > SCA Siege Marshal
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.