Jump to content


Photo

Rodman And British Powder...


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 842 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tell City,Indiana
  • Interests:My kids,military history and women in that order...

Posted 25 July 2017 - 1107 AM

 Well someone posted this on another forum saying it shows just how superior British powder was to American powder...What are thoughts? It seems to say that 83 lbs of British powder was superior to 100lbs of American Mammoth powd

 

 

http://warships1disc...-one-third-more



#2 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 842 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tell City,Indiana
  • Interests:My kids,military history and women in that order...

Posted 25 July 2017 - 2112 PM

here is the problem I have with the linked document above......

 

 In James G. Benton's "A Course Of Instruction In Ordnanace And Gunnery Prepared For The Use Of The Cadets Of The United States Military Academy" on page 524 it shows with a 40 lb charge an initial MV of 1028 FPS(based on US tests) whereas what the British tests Tiger sources show 921 FPS on just 35 lb charge. On a 60lb charge of American powder it shows 1069 FPS IV(and just above that is shows 1121 FPS IV with 50lbs of American powder????) FPS but US tests showed 1191 FPS IV. Also Tigger's linked document if you notice doesn't even list the Initial velocity for higher charges above 50lbs of British powder. It also leaves out the IV of British charges over 50 lbs but states 83 lbs of British powder is equal to 100 lbs of American mammoth powder...

On the June 7 reading of Trigger's document it shows 3 shots at 1069 FPS IV whilst on July 24 it shows 1174,1172 and 1134 FPS IV ,all at 60lbs American powder.


Edited by ickysdad, 25 July 2017 - 2211 PM.


#3 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,956 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 26 July 2017 - 1616 PM

Did anybody else think of Hugh Rodman and cordite when reading the headline?

#4 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,133 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 26 July 2017 - 2108 PM

Denis.


#5 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 842 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tell City,Indiana
  • Interests:My kids,military history and women in that order...

Posted 26 July 2017 - 2250 PM

 

Denis.

 

:D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D 



#6 67th Tigers

67th Tigers

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 854 posts

Posted 27 July 2017 - 1501 PM

Not superior, slower burning. For a given weight of powder the resulting velocity was lower as No. 7 powder didn't reach all burnt (he says on a third thread).



#7 Argus

Argus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,878 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 28 July 2017 - 0411 AM

tigger tigger burning bright...

 

I figure you have to take ALL figures from the 19th Century with at least one pinch of salt. They may well be useful for internal comparison between a nation's weapons or testing, but anything that crosses national boundaries... nah. Even without any patriotic bias, deliberate fudging or outright lies, the testing methodology, and equipment makes WWII tank gun/peno tables a basket of perfectly matches apples and oranges. I'll trust 19th cent numbers on length and weight in general, but with the best will in the world anything derived from stop watches and ballistic pendulums can only be indicative IMHO.

 

shane 


Edited by Argus, 28 July 2017 - 0412 AM.


#8 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 28 July 2017 - 0821 AM

And even with today's quality control black powder can differ from a batch to batch due the all host of mundane reasons - was a wood for charcoal harvested from a sunny or shaded location, what part of the tree trunk was taken for use (northern or southern), was a wood taken from a main trunk or a branches etc, etc.

In small amounts (small arms) that difference is negligible to none, but load a large cannon (or a rocket) with it and difference will be quite noticeable.

 

"It is not chemistry, it is alchemy" as someone who worked on BP said.


Edited by bojan, 28 July 2017 - 0822 AM.


#9 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,816 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 1421 PM

Even modern reloading manual advise a caution of a 10% variation in batches of the same smokeless powder.



#10 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 842 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tell City,Indiana
  • Interests:My kids,military history and women in that order...

Posted 29 July 2017 - 2314 PM

In James G. Benton's "A Course Of Instruction In Ordnanace And Gunnery Prepared For The Use Of The Cadets Of The United States Military Academy" on page 524 it shows with a 40 lb charge an initial MV of 1028 FPS(based on US tests) whereas what the British tests Tiger sources show 921 FPS on just 35 lb charge. On a 60lb charge of American powder it shows 1069 FPS IV(and just above that it lists 1121 FPS IV with 50lbs of American powder????) FPS IV but US tests showed 1191 FPS. Also Tigger's linked document if you notice doesn't even list the Initial velocity for higher charges above 50lbs of British powder.

On the June 7 reading of Trigger's document it shows 3 shots at 1069 FPS IV whilst on July 24 it shows 1174,1172 and 1134 FPS IV ,all at 60lbs American powder.

 

 

and too further buttress my claim that the books might have been cooked per the British tests in a US test in Washington Naval Yard a 15" Rodman using 60lbs of powder threw a (though a 400 lb versus 453 lb one) projectile at like 1480 FPS IV. I got this info from "A Treatsie On Ordnance And Armor" by Alexander Lyman Holley.

plus read bottoms of pages 139-141 in the following link it tells of British tests showing a 15" Rodman throwing 440 lb projectile at like 1320 FPS IV and seems to say British powder really isn't any better then American powder though I maybe mis-understanding the article...

https://books.google..._other_versions

 

 

  However it seems as most of you are saying small and even large variances can occur even between tests in the same country much less between two countries testing the same weapon...


Edited by ickysdad, 29 July 2017 - 2319 PM.


#11 Argus

Argus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,878 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 30 July 2017 - 0152 AM

Ok so how were those velocities measured?

 

AFAIK there were three basic methods 

a/  firing at a visible bank a known distance away and trying to time the interval between  the bang and thud.

b/ ballistic pendulum - fire a ball of known weight into a known mass suspended from a pivot, and measure the defelction of the mass.*

c/ derive an approximation by means of a calculated rectal extraction.

 

And we're going to quibble over 100fps difference?

 

shane

 

* Note there were other apparati of similar nature 


Edited by Argus, 30 July 2017 - 0159 AM.


#12 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 842 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tell City,Indiana
  • Interests:My kids,military history and women in that order...

Posted 01 August 2017 - 1517 PM

Ok so how were those velocities measured?

 

AFAIK there were three basic methods 

a/  firing at a visible bank a known distance away and trying to time the interval between  the bang and thud.

b/ ballistic pendulum - fire a ball of known weight into a known mass suspended from a pivot, and measure the defelction of the mass.*

c/ derive an approximation by means of a calculated rectal extraction.

 

And we're going to quibble over 100fps difference?

 

shane

 

* Note there were other apparati of similar nature 

 No I'm not you guys are actually backing up my man points,i.e.  one can't actually state using means at hands in 1860's-1870's that 50lbs of British powder equals 60 lbs of US powder....OR measure velocity with any precise means of measurement. Thanks Guys !!!!!!



#13 Argus

Argus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,878 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 03 August 2017 - 0429 AM

 

 No I'm not you guys are actually backing up my man points,i.e.  one can't actually state using means at hands in 1860's-1870's that 50lbs of British powder equals 60 lbs of US powder....OR measure velocity with any precise means of measurement. Thanks Guys !!!!!!

 

 

I'm not saying 50lb of British powder doesn't equal 60lbs of American, it could have, Waltham Abby and the British powder mills were first class. Nor am I suggesting these guys couldn't do good science by the standards of the day. It just needs to a lot of salt and caution and it doesn't pay to get too invested in any conclusion one might draw. :)



#14 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 03 August 2017 - 0735 AM

And performances could vary from a batch to batch a lot.



#15 Harold Jones

Harold Jones

    Shaken but not deterred...

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,227 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Armor, History, Fishing and Beer

Posted 03 August 2017 - 1005 AM

In the end did it really matter much? Were the two countries competing for international powder sales or is it just an example of a 19th century dick measuring contest?

#16 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,591 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 08 August 2017 - 1417 PM

Are the various reports comparing the same lbs?

#17 Argus

Argus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,878 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 10 August 2017 - 2046 PM

In the end did it really matter much? Were the two countries competing for international powder sales or is it just an example of a 19th century dick measuring contest?

 

Yes :D

 

a/ it sort of does/did matter

b/ there was fierce competiton between powder mills - goverment contracts being potent advertising for civilian sales too

c/ much dick measuring/beating 

 

shane






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users