Gunnery

After much consideration, I belive your friend has inserted his head front to back.

If the riflings didnt match up at the joint, this could cause an issue.

If some obstruction in the barrell caused premature detonation, The pressure from that detonation would be forced out through the breach.

Pressure is like electricty, it follows the path of least resistance. the weakest point being the action of the rifle.

Any obstruction....no matter how small, will disable it, to a certain degree,

is it still usable, possible.

Will it eventualkly fail, yes

I think their are better ways to disable that to dismanal it and reassemble.

The projectile will not "reverse" it's spin. A RH twist is the same, barrel turned or not. The worst that would happen is; the projectile would be cut with new grooves as it passes into the reversed section of barrel. The accuracy would be lost and the muzzle velocity would be less. Even if the section of barrel were LH twist (highly unlikely), the force of the explosion would prevent the projectile from reversing.

Do you mean I don't have to throw away half my 1/4-20 screws cause they're left hand if I use them on the other side? Now you tell me.

"He said the barrels, rifled of course, are made in several sections, and they would take out an intermediate section and re-insert it back to front."

I'm still trying to get my head around this bit of information. While I have not seen every piece of artillery ever made, I have never seen a sectional rifled barrel. On ANYTHING.

Can anyone illuminate this?

Regarding the rifling: a right-hand twist is a right-hand twist is a right-hand twist.

Yes Doorman, you're right, I was a bit sceptical about that too, should have said.

On barrel construction, I believe big naval guns were wire wound round a fairly thin tube, with an outer sheath, rather than solid. Can you confirm?

Codey

Hey there Codey.

Boy, the CUP (Copper Units of Pressure) of an artillery or naval piece would be a VERY large number. I would be surprised if a barrel not constructed of solid metal lasted more than a few shots. I would not be surprised if the end of life for the barrel was quite a show!

But, again, I really do not have a definitive answer.

I believe large naval guns fire a projectile that has a frangible sabot that engages the rifling in the barrel and separates from the projectile upon exiting the muzzle. This is to protect the rifling from damage from the hardened steel.

I have seen old open-hammer (rabbit ear) double barrel shotguns manufactured this way called Damascus twist.

It was said that they were designed for black powder cartridges and would unwind if used with modern rounds.

The USN got in trouble for boosting the charge on some 5' guns when the breaches failed, killing the gun crew. So there must be some serious pressure involved as the rotary lock breaches were massive.

You mentioned:-

I have seen old open-hammer (rabbit ear) double barrel shotguns manufactured this way called Damascus twist.

There is still no rifling, the twist is in the way the barrel was made using different steels (mixed together) and after polishing the "grain" of the metal is displayed by treating with acids.....its still a smooth bore weapon.

It was said that they were designed for black powder cartridges and would unwind if used with modern rounds.

The speed of burning of of modern nitro powders against the slow burning black powder of yesteryear is the problem, nothing more nothing less. They can simply (and dangerously!) fly apart usually near the breech. Though some have been re-proofed for nitro powders and are still in (daily) use.....

Though some have been re-proofed for nitro powders and are still in (daily) use.....

To put Hassenpfeffer on the table no doubt!

Eh? USS Iowa BB-61 or pirate deterrence...

I know where the lathe that turned those barrels is! I used to work there.

You then are long in tooth?

Eh, no. I wasn't there when they were machined, I came along after the fact...and the roll lathe wasn't where it was when they were machined either. It had been brought down from it's original location at MESTA Machine in Pennsylvania to it's subsidiary Forsyth Engineering in Houston when MESTA went belly up to service the USS Baytown facility. They had to cut down the bed of the lathe to fit it on the rail car and to fit it in the building.

A Navy repair ship I worked in had machinery designed to repair/rework those barrels at sea, lathes and horizontal presses etc.. It was a wonderful education in the methods of manufacture of the old equipment which I do prefer today. Some of the large horizontal lathes could swing six feet in the gap and turn 20 inches with a hollow spindle.

I had the pleasure of cutting a new valve seat in a 60" globe valve swinging the valve body and cutting the tapered face with a boring bar .

Yep this one could swing 72" (it was upgraded from a 60" swing when it was brought down to Houston), I don't recall the spindle bore (or even if it had one, don't ever recall anyone trying to make it swallow a workpiece, but the bed was so long why would you need to?) but the bed of the lathe was about 80' and it had four independent tool posts. biggest dang manual lathe I have ever seen.

Great photos. Thanks.

I also feel the fotos are great.

You can see that the whole ship has been suddenly shifted a few yards to port as the guns fire over the starboard side.....

It also gives the electricians a job or two in replacing lamps and tubes damaged at each shot/Broadside.....

Reminds me of an RFQ a company I worked for received from the US Navy. They wanted us to design a computer rack and computer for them that could survive 500G's of shock. The rack would be required to dissipate 400G's worth and the computer had to handle the remainder. They wanted the computer to be able to survive a nuclear torpedo going off under the keel. We no-bid the job, we didn't think it was possible with the components we had access to. It probably coulda been done if we redesigned everything from scratch and had lots of time and development money but not with the off-the shelf stuff we normally worked with.

They might want a hull that could survive that first.

Where was your sense of adventure? You shoulda bid US$3E10. That and a few $600 toilet seats, and you would be really rich! A Columbus-and-egg proof-of-concept stunt might have been hard to dream up, but the budget would have enabled some off-the-graph (rather than off-the-shelf) components.

As I understand it, really long range artillery barrels are sectional (the one Dr. Bull designed for Saddam Hussein being perhaps the most extreme case).

If a WWII barrel were made like that, wouldn't the ends have been threaded, so that one section screwed into the previous section? Turning the barrel around would have resulted in a male-to-male or female-to-female connection, which would have prevented proper mating.

Sounds like someone was being duped.

Good one!

I know, having been up close and personal, that neither 105 mm, 155 mm, 175 mm "Long Tom" nor 8-inch howitzers have sectional barrels. The 105's have been around long enough for my father -- he commanded a WW II ordnance battalion -- to have seen, and the "Long Tom" of his era was 155, as opposed to the 175's that covered my, um, well, we sure were glad they were on the other end of that radio.

I've forgotten the range of those things. More than 10 and less than 20 miles. Barrels held together by screw threads? I don't think so. If the noise doesn't get cha, one look at how far they recoil will.

We're talking some mighty tall tales here.

Talking about "up close and personal" I happened to be aft port side on a flight deck watching the 5" target practice at a towed target.

As the starboard side aft mount reached vertical, I thought the show was over.

When I turned to walk away, I noticed the muzzle of the port side mount projecting above the edge of the flight deck about ten feet away.

The nitro "doughnut" muzzle flash knocked me down.

Although I had my mouse ears on, it took a week to get my hearing back.

You're lucky to be even alive! Holy ballistics Batman!

I forgot to include the word "aerial" in towed target. These mounts were multi purpose, the reason the barrel was vertical.

Also being "knocked down" meant a ride on the non-skid.

The exact same thing happened to me aboard the USS Midway. I was just walking by when I saw a bunch of sailors looking out at sea with their hands cuffed over their brows. Wondering what they were looking at, I did the same. That's when the 5"-54 gun went off. I didn't have mouse ears on and I was a bit further away from the gun than you, but the concussion of the blast, left me deaf for a few hours. I'm glad I wasn't on a battleship.

Pure BS. Artillery tubes are one piece castings. US barrels are cast at the Watervliet Arsenal in New York. Even if this weren't the case I doubt that an artillery crew about to be overrun would have the necessary tools, time and manpower to take a barrel apart and reassemble it. The usual method to disable a field gun would be to remove the breechblock and disable it with a thermite grenade.

MY HERO! God you saved me a lot of typing. TGs work great on breech blocks, jeep engines and assorted radio equipment. You can even haul a#s to a safer place while they are burning through the blocks. Somebody had a few too many beers to start this thread.

Yup, Destroy the breech is the best and fasted way to spike a big gun.

Just think of the energy required to reverse the direction of a shell so it would travel back down the barrel and blow-up the breech. You will realize this just cannot happen. But it does make a great story to tell the non-thinking masses.

Have no clue about these guns. Never got to play with anything larger than a 5o cal.

But could they have manually inserted a round inside the barrel some way and thus plugged the barrel so when the captured gun was fired it would make contact with the plug thus exploding?

The American civil war was probably the last engagement that used black powder. Since then, military weapons use smokeless or cordite. These materials burn much faster than black powder and produce much higher breech pressure. This is why all large guns have re-enforcing sleeves that are shrink fitted onto the barrels at the breech end. The bores, however, are normally a single piece of rifled steel tube. Even if one could interrupt the rifling (which would be detected by looking through the open breech), I doubt one would destroy the weapon upon firing. On the other hand, plugging the barrel would do the trick.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"back down the barrel" - Priceless!

I was of the opinion that the Watervliet Arsenal had also turned out the 16-inch guns for the Iowa class battleships back in the 80's when they were put back into the active Navy under Regan's term, correct?

I believe that the 105mm rifled gun tubes and the smooth-bore 120mm gun tubes for the M-1 Abrams Main Battle Tank were and still are manufactured at the Watervliet Arsenal, and that both tubes are "sectional"......two sections that are cast and turned in two complete and separate sections that are eventually "heat-shrunk" together if I'm not mistaken.....I used to have a Classified Security Clearance w/ the US Army's Material Command there back in the 80's and early 90's. BTW, this gun tube info that I'm providing here is public domain knowledge....so please don't arrest my sorry arse! LOL

Signed,

CaptMoosie (former USA/USAR)

I was referring of course to the original barrels circa WWII.

Total BS from beginning to end, it sounds like someone had his fun with him and he swallowed the tale "hook, line and sinker"!!

As someone already mentioned, the way you take a gun out of action is to remove or damage the breech block......

Gun barrels are sometimes made in two pieces, one piece is heated, the other cooled and the hot bit shrinks over the cold bit with the rifling as you need two different types of steel, the outer one is very strong, the inner one is very hard and takes wear better.

As far as I am aware, they can never be separated again, they are "married" for life!!

They use an interesting system to make the barrels "lighter", the ends are welded shut and oil under enormous pressure is pumped in, this is just enough to expand the inner part to just beyond its elastic limit, so it stays there, but not the outer part, so this is always putting pressure on the inner part as it is always trying to return to its original size.......this is called "Autofretage". The name sounds German, so it could be something from Krupps maybe (originally!)

This is done before rifling is cut or the barrel is "turned" to its final shape.....

There is a good website explaining it far better than I have here:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofrettage

They are not screwed in any way shape or form together except to the "Interrupted thread" type breech block of very large guns....mostly out of fashion nowadays....

There are many informative websites around like here:-

http://riv.co.nz/rnza/hist/ord/breech.htm

or here:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupted_screw

We had to learn all this in the RN, the idea being that if needed, we could make new barrels. On my first ship HMS Triumph, we had all the lathes etc., but as far as I am ware, nobody ever actually got to make one.....sadly!! At least not on the two times I was actually part of her crew.....

The liners can be replaced and sometimes are done so the a smaller caliber is the result but is not necessary to make smaller.

Larger barrels are often produced having several layers or hoops added outside the liner tube with tapering towards the business end. These also (large naval guns) can be relined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Built-up_gun

The shell is only spun by the rifling which would have little effect on the force that is produced by the firing action, I would go back to Newton's law of equal and opposite reaction and would believe that the speed that the shell would pass that area would only be a second.

I have ask a gunsmith this question before and was told that you would not be able to reverse the travel of a bullet

There would be too much pressure behind the artillery shell to allow it to travel backwards even if you could reverse a "section" of the barrel. His late father was pulling his leg. He may still have a hold of it from the "beyond".

A section of reversed rifling could result in a torque that might roll the barrel out of its mountings, but no way would it reverse the linear travel of the projectile.

Interrupted rifling may however cause the pressure to spike due to the resistance of the projectile and that pressure spike may rupture the gun barrel, not unlike how excessive lead fouling in a handgun or rifle from shooting cast lead bullets instead of copper jacketed ones can eventually burst a barrel if the fouling is not removed periodically.

That could be true, but it wouldn't be the same as the projectile reversing linear direction.

Absolutely correct, just trying to propose a mechanism that would come somewhat close to the effects described without violating the laws of physics.

For everyone thinking about this post:-

The ones here that believe that the rifling would be reversed if it was possible to take a barrel apart and put it back together "backwards" (that must have a very bad bottle of hooch!), are obviously unfamiliar with a thread on a bolt, screw or in a nut!

The thread still revolves in the same way no matter which end is screwed on (not that this is possible anyway!).

For example. just turning a piece of threaded rod end to end DOES NOT CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF THE THREAD ROTATION......otherwise you would need different nuts depending upon which end of the rod you were screwing onto......!!!

And internal threads (rifling!) follow the same simple physical laws.......they are the ones you also find in "nuts" !!!

Or were you referring maybe to "Nut cases"? Now there you may have a valid point that I had not as yet considered properly!!

agreed with your assessment, I'm thinking that if part of the rifling didn't line up and were clocked such that the grooves and lands didn't line up then you could generate an internal pressure spike and that is the only way I can possibly see that firing a round could result in a burst barrel.

My fault for unclarity. I should have said that switching a barrel section end-for-end does not reverse the rifling rotation; it would have to be a section manufactured left vs. right hand. Someone had pointed this out before, and in context I should have referred to that. Yeah, there was some leg-pulling going on.

I had heard that large poles were inserted into the bores so that when fired, the pole would project from the muzzle and a large banner with the word "BOOM" would unfurl.

If a rifled slug were loaded into the hull backwards would it backfire?

I think one needs to read between the lines...what I see reads like so..._{son I know you want to understand what your dad did in the war but I'm not going to tell you.}

I think we mostly agree that it violates laws of physics to believe that the direction of projectile could be reversed, once the weapon has been fired. But, it is reasonable to believe the weapon could be destroyed by modifying the fuze to explode the shell upon firing. The net effect would be total destruction of the weapon and personnel in the vicinity. So, the sabotage story could easily be true with some detail changes. There is interesting history of cannons exploding upon firing because of improper fuze operation.

Guys, even if a section of reversed twist could be inserted - who knows how - all it would do is cost you muzzle velocity and/or some sheared projectile skin or driving band and a big gas leak.

This may also serve to illustrate the torque is 'minuscule' in the scheme of forces.

The whole thing is right up there with apprentice games like "a long weight".

But best leg pull I've heard for a long time - good one Codemaster.

Codemaster,

I meant to ask you one thing before in my only posting here. In the opening sentence of your Opening Posting, you mention that "Talking to a friend yesterday evening over a curry, and...."

I realize that this word "curry" that you've used must be English slang or something, so, what is a "curry"?

Thanks!

Must be some kind of neurotoxin. How else could the IQ level reach so low?

Its a popular dish from India.

Due to the fact that it was part of the commonwealth for many years, the Brits have taken to many things Indian (no not Redskins!!), some say "Char" for Tea for example......there are many other word adopted in GB from India....

A few more here:-

yoga, swastika (Sanskrit), khaki, sari, and sati. nirvana, kedgeree, Jodhpur dungaree (Hindi), cheroot (Tamil) palanquin & indigo.

You will find a far far longer list with explanations near the bottom of this web site:-

http://www.wmich.edu/dialogues/themes/indianwords.htm

I hope this answer helps further......

Andy,

Thanks for the Indian-to-UK slang info, but "Curry" is what type of dish from India? I mean, what exactly is in it (ie, ingredients)?

Oh My God!!!!

There are many different types of Curry, some use meat like chicken or Beef. There are also curries that are only vegetable based.

Here is a place for recipes:-

http://www.indiacurryrecipes.com/

Start there and look around!!!

Usually hot, but there are many different levels of "Hot", a bit like chicken wings in the USA from "Hooters"......

(Please checkout this website with a few of the GREAT Hooters Girls:- but nothing to do with curry really!)

http://www.hooters.com/home.aspx

If you have further questions just ask, but UK Brits will have far better infos than I have (Come on lads, chime in please!!)

CURRY = Cooking Unidentified Recycled Remnants Yellowish.

Has been eaten frack to bont and has killed or maimed more Armies than any bullets if not prepared with care (food poisoning, diarrhea etc.) I only eat it when I prepare it my self.

Have a go, too easy, Ky.

Curry, due to it's intense flavor and ability to mask spoiled meats, is used by unscrupulous cooks in restaurants. That's why I don't partake of curry dishes. Vinegar is another favorite for masking bad smells as in sweet and sour fish dishes. It was more common 50+ years ago. I don't think it happens too much today, but in third world countries, who knows.

That is/was the whole point of curry, to allow people to eat meat etc., that was "past it's sell by date" when fridges had not been even invented!!!

Thats why in almost all hot countries the dishes are often "HOT"!

For the same reasons, pork is not allowed in the religions of such countries as it goes off even faster than other meat types. It managed to get itself put into the religion as being the best way to keep the followers "clean"!

Not exactly, but close. Pigs can catch many of the same diseases humans can and undercooked pork can pass those diseases on to humans. (much the same problem cannibals have actually...). Our immune systems and the immune systems of pigs are very close which is why pork heart valves are used to replace human heart valves.

I do not feel that 5,000 years ago, Jews or Indians said something like:-

"Hey, these pigs heart valves are so much like ours, we might use them when Isiah gets old and his valves are shot, so lets keep all the pigs alive that we can till then!"

Believe me, its just the fact that Pork meat goes off quicker in warm climates than many other meat types, people still ate it, got sick, some died and the pig was labelled as being unclean and unhealthy for human consumption.....

Religion was in its infancy and such things like meat poisoning, catching diseases (I could find no reference other than an animal that is unconscious might be ill!) and the like could be misconstrued by simple folk as "Bad Magic" as well.......

Whatever, for many religions Pork meat is still considered as being "unclean". The word says it all...........

You may find some of thse videos helpful as well:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glBSWLLKUcI

and here:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashrut

I found some better explanations and reading of the complete website is encouraged. (See below)

Though there are some other good websites worth reading with regard to other religions where Pork is forbidden.....

Health reasons

Certain of the rules of Kashrut may appear to be designed to protect human health. Prohibitions upon consuming carrion eaters (Leviticus 11:31) or the use of bowls and vessels in which animals have died (Leviticus 11:31–32) can be seen as preventing disease. Likewise, rules for processing meat, such as glatt, the requirement that lungs be checked to be free of adhesions, would help prevent consumption of animals that had been infected with tuberculosis. Similarly, the ban on slaughtering unconscious animals would prevent certain sick and possibly infectious animals from being consumed. Other rules cannot be so easily explained as health measures: e.g. certain rules, such as permission to eat locusts and "beetles" (KJV) (Leviticus 11:22), or the prohibition against eating the harvests of the first three years and the seventh year (Leviticus 19:23-25; 25:3-5).

Kashrut is not set forth solely as a guide to healthy diet. The people are to be different from the other nations: "I am the LORD your God, who have separated you from the peoples." (Leviticus 20:24-26; Deuteronomy 14:2-21) There have been various attempts to provide empirical support for the view that the Israelite food laws have an over-arching health benefit or purpose, one of the earliest being from Maimonides in his Guide for the Perplexed. More recently, in 1953, Dr. David I. Macht, an Orthodox Jew who is one of the primary proponents of the theory of biblical scientific foresight, conducted toxicity experiments on many different kinds of animals and fish.^[32] His experiment involved lupin seedlings being supplied with extracts from the meat of various animals; Macht reported that in 100% of cases, extracts from ritually unclean meat inhibited the seedling's growth more than that from ritually clean meats.^[33] In addition, Dr. Macht's research indicated that mixtures of meat and milk, and meat that was not ritually slaughtered, appeared to be more toxic to lupin seeds than meat from other sources.^[34] Macht's claim that his methodology,^[35][36] known as phytopharmacology, could have any conclusions in relation to human consumption, has never^[37] been scientifically corroborated by independent researchers, and is regarded by the scientific community as not being mainstream science; at the request of a Seventh-day Adventist Church publication, Macht's study was explicitly challenged by a series of senior biologists.^[38]

Andy I understand what you are saying, and we aren't really disagreeing. I'm just giving a bit more context. No they had no concept of the germ theory or any understanding of immune systems, but they DID understand the effects, even if they didn't understand the mechanisms. "old wives tales" often had a nugget of truth in them somewhere along the way. They saw people eating pork and getting sick so the naturally assumed that pork is somehow unhealthy/unclean. They did not understand that the meat hadn't been properly cooked or prepared/preserved. All they knew was someone puked up their guts or worse. We now understand that pork is perfectly safe and healthy IF prepared properly and stored properly. We also understand the mechanisms behind the danger. Continuing to shun pork out of superstitious reasons dooms people to death in some cases because they refuse lifesaving heart valves and other tissue transplants. They must make do with mechanical valves which are prone to failure and other problems.

I was just pulling your leg a bit as well!!

We as a family almost never eat pork, at least not at home. If we are invited somewhere no problem. The reason being that a) in Germany FAR too much port is eaten and b) I personally feel that due to the simalarity with our bodies, the body "takes onboard" differently to beef or chicken for example. I believe this makes people overweight/unhealthy.....

Its just my belief only, I have no facts to back it up with (other than several world religions of course!!! Though we are not banned by our religion in any way....

Religion wise I am "COFE" and my wife and children were Catholic, saw the light and belong to an Evangelist church here where we live!!!

So you figure you are about to be captured by the enemy. In you final last minutes of freedom you go get the tool kit (which is never where you left it) work out and get the right tool (which is never the first one you get) remove multiple bolts and nuts (which never come off as simple as stated) reverse said barrel (which I'm guessing is one big mofo and so will struggle slightly) re apply the bolts (which you would probably be panicing about now so would cross thread a few times) then lob the tools away so not to be suspicious and start whistling (added the whistle for effect)?!?!?........... I don't think so, you would probably be bricking your pants thinking about your family and praying, i think your mate was talking a load of a$$ gravy.

Well put zxdavies and thanks everybody for responses, consensus is it's nonsense. Been away from computer for a few days, so glad to see the query from CaptMoosie about curry was answered.

I think bwire in #40 summed it up. It sounds like the army equivalent of the Green Paint section of the navy. I'm sure everybody out there knows how they worked, so I won't give details, but if anybody doesn't just say.

Cheers..........Codey

Green Paint Section of the Navy?????

I can only imagine.....don't know what that statement means, so hit me with it, okay?

(I may soon regret this.....LOL)

methinks he is speaking of the "brown water navy" from the vietnam era. AKA Swift Boats.

Or perhaps he is speaking of the USMC which until recently, much to the USMC's chagrin was considered a part of the US Navy... Now that I think about it, this is probably what he means.

But I am not clear how the two are related.

Pale Green 5-PG
Light Green 5-LG
Haze Green 5-HG
Ocean Green 5-OG
Navy Green 5-NG
Deck Green 20-G

These colors can also be found in the Floquil Line of Marine Paints. The greens were interchangable with the blues in the measures, but were mostly used on amphibious force units and coastal forces.

Ok, what is this "Green Paint Section" you mention?

I think sickbay might have been green, can't remember.

Hello Unredundant and CaptMoosie

The green paint section is an anti-submarine unit. When enemy subs are suspected they pour green paint on the water. Then when the sub surfaces it coats the periscope so the crew don't know they've reached the surface and carry on rising. When the sub is a couple of 100 feet in the air they shoot it down with anti-aircraft fire.

Slightly less plausible than the barrel reversal thing, but not much, after more thought and posters' comments.

Cheers........Codey

#2 Priceless - I'm loving it!!!

Dam!

The countless hours and thousands of sonobouys and all we needed was GREEN PAINT!

SON of a B......!

Thanks alot.

Did you hear about the periscope spotted off Hollywood Beach In Florida?

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/broward/hollywood/fl-submarine-periscope-hollywood-20100616,0,2190188.story

There are SO many jokes waiting to be told about this one.....

Like: "Found out it was just some guy floating along, "High" on Viagra"

I agree fully......

Sorry guys - maybe a bit harsh - but the dupe ratio made my day.