Faceted bore gun

Faceted bore gun
1st artillery battery. Fort Richardson. Calculation of a 20-pound Parrot gun with a pentagonal bore. This is the 1861 model gun, it was made of cast iron and had a barrel reinforced with a wrought iron ribbon. Despite the good performance, she earned a dubious reputation as an explosive weapon. There were places of rupture of the barrel with the death or injury of gunners, which did not happen with Whitworth guns. The Confederate States of America also made copies of this gun.


No wonder Cyres Smith was an expert in artillery. He immediately determined that the guns are made to fame. The best steel went for their manufacture, they were charged from the breech, fired with large-caliber cores and, therefore, were hit at a considerable distance.
Jules Verne. Mysterious Island


Weapon from museums. In one of the articles published on "VO", a photograph flashed of an old gun with a hexagonal hole in the barrel channel. Not a circle, but a hexagon! Unusually, of course, but it is obvious that such tools existed. But what kind of gun was it, who created it and where was it used? This is what our story will be about today.


What types of artillery were not used during the Civil War in the USA. For example, the 10-pound Parrot gun also had a faceted barrel, but it was only muzzle-charged

The Englishman Joseph Whitworth (1803-1887), a well-known engineer who invented the image of Cyres Smith for Jules Verne's novel “The Mysterious Island”, invented such a weapon. He was so versatile and gifted. However, his first military invention was still not a gun, but a rifle. It was he who was authorized by the War Department of the British Government to design a rifle to replace the Anfield rifle of the 1853 model, which had a caliber of 0,577 inches (14,66 mm). The fact is that at that time the Crimean War had just ended and it turned out that this rifle, firing the Mignier expansion bullet, had a number of shortcomings. First of all, the military was not happy with its accuracy, since the Mignier bullet did not always cut into the rifling as it should, and therefore flew into the target in a very arbitrary way. It took a bullet that would not change its shape inside the barrel and would have greater persistence. And Whitworth just came up with such a bullet and a rifle for her!


Sir Joseph Whitworth (1803-1887). Photo from the studio of Nadar

His rifle had a caliber much smaller than the previous one, only 0,451 inches (11 mm), and the barrel inside was not round, but hexagonal. That is, his rifle shot a hex bullet. Accordingly, the rotation speed of such a bullet was much higher than that of all other samples. It was estimated that during the flight the bullet made one revolution for every twenty inches of the distance traveled. The rifle was tested in 1859, and it surpassed the old "Anfield" in all respects. First of all, the bullet easily entered the barrel, which was important for any muzzle-loading weapon. But the accuracy of the shooting was still significantly higher, and it was the military who sought it. Already on April 23, 1859, the Times reported the test results of the new rifle as a great success for British weapons. But there are spots in the sun! The barrel of the new rifle, as before, was quickly contaminated with lead, while the Whitworth rifle was exactly four times more expensive than the Anfield rifle. Therefore, when it came to its industrial production, the British government abandoned it. True, these rifles began to be produced for the commercial market. During the American Civil War between the North and the South, a certain number of them were in the hands of the Confederate army, where they armed part of the well-aimed marksmen, called the “Whitworth Snipers”.


20 pound Parrot gun. Charged from the barrel

And this is his TTX:

Weight: 1.750 lbs (794 kg).
Barrel length: 84 feet (2,13 m).
Projectile weight: 20 pounds (9,1 kg).
Powder Charge Weight: 2 lbs. (0,9 kg).
Caliber: 3,67 inches (93 mm).
Projectile speed: 1.250 ft / s (381 m / s).
Effective range: 1.900 yards (1,700 m) at an elevation angle of 5 °.

However, Whitworth himself even liked the idea of ​​a hexagonal barrel, and he decided to make a gun with such a barrel! And he did: a 2,75-inch (70 mm) caliber rifled cannon loading from the breech, firing shells weighing 12 pounds 11 ounces (5,75 kg) and with a firing range of about six miles (10 km). An elongated spiral-grooved projectile was patented by him in 1855. Once again, the British army rejected his cannon in favor of the gun of W.J. Armstrong, but several of his guns again hit the United States, where it was used most actively during the Civil War. Moreover, it should be noted that for that time it was an absolutely incredible technological breakthrough, because in both armies both northerners and southerners at that time, 12-pound smooth-bore guns of the Napoleon type were still used from the barrel, and even then nobody it never occurred to them that they had outlived their age a long time ago!


But this is Whitworth’s weapon, loaded from the breech. The handles used to turn the piston lock are clearly visible.


Shutter close-up. Gettysburg


The gun, as you see, is still firing, it’s clear that idle ...

At the same time, Whitworth tried to increase the tensile strength of his gun barrels and eventually patented the process of casting and pressing steel under pressure, which he called "liquid-compressed steel", and then also built a new metallurgical plant in the Manchester area, where this technology began to be applied! Its castings were shown at the World Exhibition in Paris in 1883 and were highly appreciated by specialists.


A photograph of Whitworth’s gun of that distant era ...

The Whitworth gun was considered an excellent field weapon, primarily due to unprecedented accuracy. Only at that time she could hit stationary targets at a distance of 1600 yards (4800 feet), which at that time was just an excellent indicator. The first gun had a caliber of 2,75 inches (12 pounds), but in everything else it was no different from all the guns that existed at that time, that is, it had a single-beam carriage and two wheels with spokes. The cannon was towed by a horse harness, but the team of artillerymen over short distances could easily roll it manually over the field. Another version of the gun had a caliber of 2,17 inches (6 pounds).


12 pound 60mm Mk I gun in Nova Scotia Park, Halifax, Canada

The gun fired a 13-pound shell, which had the shape of a pointed hexagon, which corresponded exactly to the barrel channel during movement, along which it began to rotate. Perhaps the main disadvantage of the Whitworth gun was the brittleness of the bolt, which is why many calculations, shutting off the bolt tightly, began to shoot from its guns like ordinary muzzle-loading guns, since the design allowed this. This reduced the rate of fire, but was not reflected in accuracy. And since Whitworth’s guns were usually fired at long distances, in principle, the not very high rate of fire of such “alterations” did not play a special role!


75 mm Whitworth M1873 gun supplied to Spain


Marking its trunk with an indication of the manufacturer


And this is a section of her trunk channel!

In an article dated August 10, 1861 in the Harper's Weekly, Whitworth's gun was described as follows:

“The Whitworth rifled cannon has remarkable power and accuracy through the use of a polygonal spiral bore, more convenient than a barrel with a large number of small rifling. The barrel of a 12-pound gun with a channel diameter of 3,2 inches has one revolution per sixty inches; this gives a barrel length of eight feet, not counting the breech block. The projectile is oblong, made of cast iron and made in such a way as to match the profile of the barrel. The breech of the barrel is closed by a piston, which is screwed into the barrel, and when removed, it rotates on a hinge and leans to the side; then the shell is inserted into the open breech, followed by a tin shell containing gunpowder and coated with a layer of wax or other lubricating substance. Then the bolt is rotated and screwed up by the handles, so that the gun is completely ready for the shot, which is carried out by the ignition tube. A lubricant is also applied to the projectile and cleans the barrel well. Due to the presence of the sleeve there is no breakthrough of gases back. They say that the range of this weapon is greater than that of the Armstrong gun, and its accuracy is much higher. The cost of this gun in England is 300 pounds. "



Whitworth Standard Cannon Shell

All Whitworth guns were delivered to the northerners, but some of them as trophies fell into the hands of the southerners, who rated this acquisition as a real gift of fate.


Whitworth's 2-pound 1867 Mountain Cannon, Fort Granville, South Australia. Battery A, South Australian Voluntary Artillery

The northerners used them in the defense of Washington, as well as in the Battle of Gettysburg. Southerners used them at the Battle of Oak Ridge, where they shot with impunity the position of the northerners at the cemetery and on the hill of Kalp.


Whitworth's Wholly Monstrous 70-Pound Cannon from Princess Fort, Willard Park, Washington Navy Shipyards


Whitworth's 18-pound 1860 naval gun. Royal Danish Naval Museum, Copenhagen

Very soon, the "branded" oblong shells for these guns at the southerners ended and they were left without ammunition. But the need for invention is cunning. Southerners came up with the idea of ​​turning round cores under a hexagonal profile and shooting them. The work was, of course, not for the faint of heart, round shells did not have the accuracy that oblong had, they had less gunpowder, if any, but even such ersatz hit targets much better than the Napoleon’s kernels .


Joseph Whitworth in old age

TTX gun Whitworth, received in the United States:

Caliber: 2,75 inches (70 mm).
Barrel material: iron and steel.
Barrel length: 104 inches (264 cm).
Barrel weight 1.092 pounds (495 kg).
Gunpowder Charge: 1,75 lbs (0,79 kg).
Projectile weight: 13 pounds (5,2 kg).
Firing range at an elevation angle of 5 °: 2800 m (2560 m).

At the Battle of Gettysburg, two such guns were used.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy 6 June 2020 05: 28 New
    • 7
    • 16
    -9
    Oh no no no. hi Friend Arkady, do not speak beautifully. Speak Russian. He put on his hat. repeat
    Had place rupture of the barrel with the death or injury of gunners,
    I propose: There was a rupture of the trunk with the death or injury of artillerymen.
    Girls need to check repeat The exam has not yet been canceled.
    In one of the articles published on "VO", a photograph flashed of an old gun with a hexagonal hole in the barrel channel. Not a circle, but a hexagon! Unusually, of course, but it is obvious that such tools existed. But what kind of gun was it, who created it and where was it used?
    Captures and leads away. I recognize the hands of Jules with Venus. repeat hi
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 6 June 2020 06: 29 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      Vyacheslav Olegovich, thanks !!! Polyogan guns is a song !!! Even in the 20s of the last century, under the young Soviet republic, our specialists tried to give something out with a bang. Alas, the stars did not agree!
      Good day to all!
      1. Dr. Frankenstucker 6 June 2020 13: 05 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Our experts tried to give out something with a bang.


        in the sense - "on the mountain"?
        Well, and what is the “song” about? 10 years, a bunch of dough and the expected impasse, which the French had come up against before. And the logical landing involved in the "polygonal bluff."
        1. ser56 6 June 2020 19: 14 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Dr. Frankenstucker
          And the logical landing involved in the "polygonal bluff."

          Shirokorad described in great detail all this epic ... request
    2. kalibr 6 June 2020 07: 45 New
      • 10
      • 4
      +6
      Small people, small injections ... And Jules BeNrom is such a strange sarcasm, as I understand it?
      1. 3x3zsave 6 June 2020 07: 54 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        The character of blood did not finish under the article on the Russian language and came here to "catch up."
        Thank you, Vyacheslav Olegovich!
        1. Insurgent 6 June 2020 09: 51 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Faceted bore gun

          How not to recall the howitzer, although not rifled, but also with a very remarkable shape of the bore. At least it’s like an attempt to search for the “golden mean” by trial and error ...

          In 1753, Field-General-General P. I. Shuvalov (cousin of I. I. Shuvalov, favorite of Empress Elizabeth Petrovna) put forward the idea of ​​a new type of howitzer designed to combat infantry and cavalry. Its development was entrusted to Major Musin-Pushkin and master Stepanov, and already in 1754, these guns began to arrive in the regiments. At first, they were kept a great secret, and outside the camps the servants had to cover the muzzle with covers so that unnecessarily curious foreigners did not spend the secrets of their device. The gunners had something to hide - the bore to the barrel expanded horizontally to three calibers. It was assumed that when fired, the buckshot would fly like a fan, hitting the tightly closed battalions and squadrons of the enemy.

          In total, about 70 secret howitzers were made.

          But still this type of guns did not receive further development. The inventor believed that this type of channel would contribute to the expansion of buckshot, but experience did not justify it, since the expansion depends on the pressure of the bullets on one another, and not on the cross-section of the channel. The secret howitzer, not giving advantages when firing shotguns, worse than ordinary howitzers fired a grenade, so the military leaders were against it. But to cancel the use of howitzers was possible only after the death of Shuvalov in 1762.
    3. Nikolaevich I 7 June 2020 00: 10 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      There were rupture of the trunk with the death or injury of gunners,
      I propose: There was a rupture of the trunk with the death or injury of artillerymen.

      Horseradish radish is not sweeter, threesomes! Both phrases are built on the principle: "Passing a railway station, a hat flew off his head ..."! negative
  2. Free wind 6 June 2020 05: 49 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    You have to come up with such a barrel. And now to make a barrel with polygonal cutting is quite an expensive pleasure, and more than 150 years ago, it was beyond reason.
    1. maksbazhin 6 June 2020 09: 50 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      In those days, most likely casting received both barrels and shells for such guns.
    2. Dr. Frankenstucker 6 June 2020 13: 09 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      Quote: Free Wind
      and more than 150 years ago, so it was beyond reason.


      not even 150 - in the USSR this hopeless thing was procrastinated in the 20-30s. From divisions to ship calibers. They ditched a bunch of funds into the void. Correctly shot Tukha.
      1. Free wind 6 June 2020 13: 24 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        Well, then such a weapon was produced, with polygonal trunks, the same MG-42, a German machine gun, and is still being produced. I read "Captain Tear off the head." There some Bur-Burenok shot an enemy from Mauser, and he survived. Then he found a rifle with a hexagonal barrel, roer ,? Royer ,? I don’t remember, but there were no more wounded animals. With modern technology, such trunks are easier to make than before, there are some kind of advantages.
        1. Operator 6 June 2020 13: 40 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Polygonal cutting is a polygon (usually 8-angled) with rounded corners, obtained by rotational forging of the barrel on the mandrel. Currently mainly used in pistol trunks.

          Comparison of rifled and polygonal trunk

          In the limit, the polygonal cut turns into an oval-helical - the so-called Lancaster drilling, which is now used in quasi-smoothbore weapons: AK-366 "Lancaster", SKS-366 "Lancaster" and KO-44 "Lancaster".
        2. Dr. Frankenstucker 6 June 2020 15: 26 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Free Wind
          with polygonal trunks, the same MG-42, German machine gun


          is it?
          1. Nikolaevich I 7 June 2020 00: 39 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Dr. Frankenstucker
            with polygonal trunks, the same MG-42, German machine gun


            is it?

      2. iouris 8 June 2020 01: 37 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        But they came up with a faceted glass!
    3. beeper 7 June 2020 18: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      hi Such a polygonal shape of the Whitworth trunk channel, by the way, itself begs the thought of an artillery designer, who also knows the history of his type of weapon, with all its dead ends, squiggles and breakthroughs in development! yes
      Polygonal cutting, made by pulling, is very technologically advanced for mass production (IMHO, even more technologically advanced than burnishing and EDM cutting of the bore.) And is good in operation.
      And, similar in concept, the Lancaster oval drill is only slightly inferior to it in manufacturability, modern design, at the very core, obtaining a screw profile of the bore, rests on the selection of rotation modes and feed-reverses of the two-sided special drill ... for modern programmed machines it is not a problem to produce.
      And 150 years ago, the art of casting guns was at its best, and for a relatively large caliber, it was easy to get a ready-made polygonal hole profile using a profiled casting rod, and cast the whole gun (with minimal allowances for finishing) according to the lost wax pattern.
  3. Bormanxnumx 6 June 2020 06: 39 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9

    Good video with shooting from the original Whitford rifle.
    1. Catfish 6 June 2020 06: 57 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Thank you Boris. hi Really interesting, the device of the front sight just struck on the spot. smile
  4. KVU-NSVD 6 June 2020 06: 53 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Thank you Vyacheslav Olegovich for fulfilling my request for an article about an unusual cut of Whitworth. Very interesting examples of artillery engineering. The guns were striking in efficiency. But the roads were probably still not because of the required high-quality materials, but because of the difficulty of manufacturing. Although, judging by the photos from the USA, Denmark, Spain ... the inventor found his consumer and did not live in poverty, he again built and built metallurgical technologies .. A talented man with an out-of-the-box thinking, what to say PS About rifles with such a method in the American Civil War I did not hear the spinning of the bullet and the “Whitworth snipers” and generally believed that the snipers appeared later - in the Boer War ..
    1. kalibr 6 June 2020 07: 48 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Glad you liked it. It is always nice to make a pleasant thing for a very specific person.
  5. Undecim 6 June 2020 08: 03 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    It was estimated that during the flight the bullet made one revolution for every twenty inches of the distance traveled.
    Brief educational program.
    One revolution per twenty inches of the distance traveled is the rifling pitch - twist rifling, denoted 1:20.
    And to determine the angular velocity of rotation of a flying bullet in rev / s, you need the formula
    w = V / (T * 0,0254),
    where
    w is the angular velocity of the bullet, r / s;
    V is the initial velocity of the bullet, m / s;
    T - pitch rifling in inches
    Knowing that the initial velocity of the bullet in the Whitworth rifle is 396 m / s, we consider
    396 / (20 * 0,0254) = 779,5 rpm
    According to modern concepts, such an angular velocity is insufficient to give the pool stability. It should be at least 2833 rpm. Therefore, the optimal rifling pitch for the Whitworth rifle would be 1: 6.
    1. Undecim 6 June 2020 08: 13 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      However, Whitworth himself even liked the idea of ​​a hexagonal barrel, and he decided to make a gun with such a barrel!
      Actually the opposite. Whitworth first developed a gun, then a rifle.
      1. Nikolaevich I 7 June 2020 01: 19 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Undecim
        Whitworth first developed a cannon,

    2. Bormanxnumx 6 June 2020 19: 59 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      For a brief educational program, you google badly) Googled to the Greenhill formula and count again. The calculations require a bullet length, the original bullet has a length of 1.38 ". At the time the rifle was created, there was no developed method for calculating the incline of rifling, but no one canceled the natural tests. The calculated rifling pitch for this rifle is 23 with a trifle of an inch, the actual 20" is even slightly re-stabilized. In the video that I posted, the shooting is conducted at 400m - the engineers coped with the task perfectly.
      1. Undecim 8 June 2020 16: 27 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Of course, I was mistaken, since the rifling step was proposed without calculations. But if you are a fan of “google”, then “google” it to the Sierra Bullets formula, and even better, to the rule of the steepness of Miller's grooves.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. Undecim 8 June 2020 18: 38 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            This formula is the Greenhill formula.
            No, not there. There are nuances that significantly affect the result.
            1. Bormanxnumx 8 June 2020 20: 12 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Sierra Bullets. T = 0,06 * V * D2 / L.
              Take for example the parameters of the PM bullet and calculate the pitch of the rifling. The length of the bullet is 11.1mm 0.437 ", diameter 9.22mm 0.36", speed 315 m / s and get pitch rifling 5.66 “144mm, and in life 260 +/- 20.
              We do not doubt the adequacy of PM developers, so there is something with the formula winked And with the formula, everything is very simple - if you take a speed of 2400 f / s (Miller’s rule is adapted to that speed) and multiply by 0.06 we get 144, the Greenhill formula for rifle high-speed bullets displays a coefficient of 150. It turns out Sierra Bullets is not suitable for calculating trunks working with bullets at low and medium speeds.
              1. Undecim 8 June 2020 21: 05 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Take for example the parameters of the PM bullet and calculate the pitch of the rifling.
                We consider.
                Greenhill formula.
                T = (K * D2) / L
                T = (125 (for pistols) * 0,36 * 0,36) / 0,437 = 37 (inches) or 940 mm. In fact - 11 inches or 280 mm
                Formula Sierra Bullets.
                T = 0,06 * V * D2 / L
                T = 0,06 * 1033 (315 m / s = 1033 ft / s) * (0,36 * 0,36) / 0,437 = 18 inches or 457 mm. Much closer.
                1. Bormanxnumx 8 June 2020 21: 53 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Now i have gone hi
                2. Undecim 8 June 2020 22: 24 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  You can also try the rule of steepness of the Miller grooves. There, by the way, not 2400 ft / s, but 2800. But if the speed is different, a correction factor is introduced - the cubic root of the result of dividing the actual speed by 2800. For PM this will be 0,717.
                  The pitch of the rifling in calibers is 11 / 0,437 = 25. The mass of the bullet in grains is 89,5. The length of the bullet in calibers is 1,23. I get 20,7. And the optimal value is 1,2 - 1,5. What is the problem?
        2. Bormanxnumx 8 June 2020 18: 36 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Undecim
          Sierra Bullets formulas

          This formula is the Greenhill formula
          Quote: Undecim
          Miller's steepness rule

          This is a slightly "doped" Greenhill formula) with a slope on the bullets of a "modern" design and initial speeds of 800m / s
          1. Undecim 8 June 2020 19: 32 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Answer - see previous comment.
  6. Operator 6 June 2020 08: 49 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A barrel with a polygonal channel has lower tensile strength than the same barrel with a round rifled or oval-screw channel.

    Because hexagonal and did not take off.
    1. Free wind 6 June 2020 10: 20 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Trunks with polygonal slicing are quite used, they are more expensive, therefore they are less common.
      1. Operator 6 June 2020 11: 10 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Polygonal slicing and a faceted bore are two different things.
      2. Dmitry 80 6 June 2020 18: 33 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        In match pneumatics, LW and CZ manufacturers.
  7. andrewkor 6 June 2020 14: 49 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    In the beautiful Far Away in L. Boussenard’s novel “Captain Tear-Head”, he read that one of the characters had a deadly killer rifle with a hexagonal barrel channel.
  8. KSVK 6 June 2020 16: 46 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Now, as far as I know, Sabatti uses polygonal cutting in the manufacture of rifle rifled barrels. And it seems that everything is in order with accuracy. And as a resource ... time will tell here. Although the rifled barrel "dies" from the height of the pool entrance. Those. the part where the pressure of the powder gases is maximum. But trunks with polygonal cutting are easier to clean. They do not have sharp (straight) angles between the fields and rifling. Accordingly, it is much easier to clean copper and carbon from the obtuse angles of polygonal rifling, which is likely to reduce barrel wear. On the other hand, the pressure in the “bullet” inlet will be the same, all other things being equal. And how the height of the barrel will develop in this place ... Well, the speed of a bullet in polygonal trunks, all other things being equal, will most likely be higher. Although not a fact, as well as the survivability of rifling. Since the "high-precision" trunks are now cut, which eliminates the occurrence of stresses in the metal. And besides, the regimes of “tempering" of trunks during production by rotational forging and durning have already been found. Whether polygonal cutting will become a new word in the production of “rough” trunks will be shown by time.
  9. KSVK 6 June 2020 16: 55 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: Undecim

    Short educational program

    How did you calculate the angular velocity necessary to stabilize the projectile (bullet) without knowing its length (projectile)? There is still a caliber needed, but it is just indicated. But the weight can be a problem.
    For the correct calculation of FGS (gyroscopic stability factor), you need to know the diameter and length of the projectile (bullet), and not its weight at all.
    1. Undecim 9 June 2020 15: 09 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Horses mixed in a bunch, people ...
  10. mmaxx 6 June 2020 20: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I remember Clint Eastwood from such a sandal in Tuko with the help of a bull in the movie "Bad, Good, Evil." wink
    In general, the American Civil War is a storehouse of all sorts of engineering solutions.
  11. Hydrogen 6 June 2020 22: 43 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And what were our achievements in those years?
    1. Simargl 7 June 2020 06: 37 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Hydrogen
      And what were our achievements in those years?
      The guns were cleaned with bricks. Flint.
      I exaggerate, of course, but they were far behind.
      How Mosinka managed to break out into equals for a short time - I have no idea.
      1. mmaxx 7 June 2020 06: 58 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Knowing what the Americans invented there during that war, I marvel at their then industrial power. Here before the war, they began to appear real vase substitution in weapons. That is, it was possible not only to assemble, but then it also worked wink
  12. Hydrogen 6 June 2020 23: 04 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    They have small nuclear weapons charges, without causing global destruction, they specifically destroy a specific target, energy objects (nuclear power plants, hydroelectric power stations, thermal power plants), control headquarters. As a result, the country is not destroyed, and the control is disarmed. And our anti-aircraft defense doesn’t take into account all the “stuff” weak, on a national scale.
    1. mmaxx 7 June 2020 07: 00 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Our nuclear projectiles are able to stick a nuclear charge no worse than amers.
    2. D16
      D16 7 June 2020 10: 02 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      They have small nuclear weapons charges, such without causing global destruction, they specifically destroy a specific target, energy objects (nuclear power plants, hydroelectric power stations, thermal power plants), control headquarters.

      Developed a faceted mine for Trident to improve the CVO? fellow
  13. Operator 7 June 2020 20: 24 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: pishchak
    Lancaster’s oval drill is only slightly inferior to it in manufacturability, modern design, at the very core, obtaining a screw profile of the bore, rests on the selection of rotation modes and feed-reverses of the two-sided special drill

    Now they use rotational forging on a mandrel, therefore the name "oval-screw drilling" is a purely historical term.
  14. Saxahorse 8 June 2020 00: 44 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    It is unfortunate that the article cannot be put a minus in view of the complete wretchedness of the alleged ideas presented in this article: ((

    All polygon systems failed miserably for the same reason. Enormous friction of a shell on a barrel of complex shape .. It’s enough to recall the ill-fated guns of Lancaster, almost all of them simply exploded when shelling the forts of Sveaborg in the Crimean War ..

    What is typical, we see smooth-bore guns today, in the tank guns, which are extreme in terms of performance characteristics. But polygonal .. God save us from this rubbish ..
    1. kalibr 9 June 2020 15: 58 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      And the article has no ideas. Where did you see them? It has a story about what was and how it was. And that’s all ...
      1. Saxahorse 11 June 2020 21: 11 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        A story without an author’s assessment, this is naked journalism.
        1. kalibr 11 June 2020 21: 39 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Saxahorse
          naked journalism.

          Quite a decent thing!
          1. Saxahorse 11 June 2020 21: 46 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Naked but decent? Well, yes .. This is not pornography, just a hint laughing

            But in general it would be interesting from you to see the ratings. Your level seems to already allow this. :)

            It seems understandable how it ended, but a bunch of illiterate habitually admire foreign origin and the names themselves. Like the "Lancaster gun!" Wow !!

            But the fact that the British themselves were interested in what mediocrity they accepted almost without weapons tests, with the most shameful result, is not easy to find in our country.
            1. kalibr 12 June 2020 07: 37 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              In this case, there are quite a lot of former military (and not former) and simply educated people, so that they just have enough information provided. Moreover, history has drawn conclusions. Cannon-guns "did not go"