217 replies to this topic

[truthergw]

geraint, on 28 February 2011 - 11:04 AM, said:

The Bangalore Torpedo used as an aboveground weapon seemed to me to be almost Chaplinesque as described by Richards in Old Soldiers Never Die. Pages 144-153 N&M Press. He describes how 2RWF attempts to clear wire with it, fails, then attempt to retrieve it. Good laugh!

The Bangalore torpedo was still in use in WW2. It was used on D-Day.

[centurion]

Getting our feet back on the ground, for some odd reason I find the only Medium B Male built a nice tank. Unfortunately there are only drawings survive and they are distorted as someone got the orthogonal projection incorrect so the side elevation came out slanted. Having been trained in engineering drawing in my youth I produced a corrected version.
 Fig 5 Medium B male 1.jpg   87.12K   0 downloads

[centurion]

truthergw, on 28 February 2011 - 04:28 PM, said:

The Bangalore torpedo was still in use in WW2. It was used on D-Day.

Indeed and before, some Carriers were converted to push especially long versions, this was based on pioneering work with Mk V**s back in 1919

[GRUMPY]

we should never forget Major Bloodnok's chariot of fire, the conversion of Little Willie to armoured bath and thunderbox standard. Only one photo. is thought to survive.

Attached Files

•  IMG tankxxx.jpg   60.14K   2 downloads

[Ianander]

centurion, on 28 February 2011 - 04:08 PM, said:

But not as weird as :
Linke Hoffeman.jpg

From the same stable - this RI actually flew during WW1 wereas the RII did not fly until after the armistice

Hello Centurion,      Now that's what I call a great picture, I really appreciated your reply and Information

many thank's again Centurion      

Ian

[Ianander]

truthergw, on 28 February 2011 - 04:26 PM, said:

4 wing mounted 6" guns on that and you'd have a Tsar tank buster.

Hello Truthergw  many thanks for the input, Tsar tank buster ( with 4 wing mounted 6" guns blindfolded you couldn't miss)

Cheer's Truthergw  

Ian

[Ianander]

centurion, on 28 February 2011 - 04:33 PM, said:

Getting our feet back on the ground, for some odd reason I find the only Medium B Male built a nice tank. Unfortunately there are only drawings survive and they are distorted as someone got the orthogonal projection incorrect so the side elevation came out slanted. Having been trained in engineering drawing in my youth I produced a corrected version.
Fig 5 Medium B male 1.jpg

Hello Centurion  , many thanks for the Medium B Male Tank drawing by your own hand, great picture

Best regards
Ian

[Ianander]

GRUMPY, on 28 February 2011 - 04:46 PM, said:

we should never forget Major Bloodnok's chariot of fire, the conversion of Little Willie to armoured bath and thunderbox standard. Only one photo. is thought to survive.

Hello GRUMPY ,  Great picture and many thanks for your information it is really appreciated .

Cheer's
Ian

[centurion]

Ianander, on 28 February 2011 - 03:57 PM, said:

Hello Centurion ,  Thank you for the information I didn't know Mitchell was a junior member of the design team.

many thanks again Centurion

Ian

Might be interested in my account (in an unpublished work) of the Nighthawk (also known by the test crew as the Sh*tehawk)

The last, and most outré, attempt to produce a Davis gun armed anti airship fighter was made by the newly formed Supermarine company (formerly Pemberton Billings and Co).  This was the Supermarine P.B.31.E Nighthawk, a very large twin engined quadruplane. The fuselage, which was mounted between the middle wings, was surmounted by a enclosed cockpit, somewhat reminiscent of a small conservatory, on top of which was built a gunner’s position for the Davis gun and a rearward firing Lewis gun position with a Scarff gun ring. This was level with the top wing. The Davis gun would have a clear field of fire all around the horizon (but the counterweight would decapitate the rear gunner if he was in his cockpit when the main weapon was fired forwards). A second Lewis gun position was stationed in the nose of the main fuselage together with a small searchlight and a 5hp petrol engine to drive a generator for the light and provide heating for the main cockpit that contained sleeping facilities for spare crew members. The pilot was positioned at the rear of the enclosed cockpit doubtless to reduce the possibility that he might actually be able to see an enemy airship whilst at the same time adding extra interest to the process of taking off and landing on ill lit night time air strips. The whole contraption was powered by two 100hp rotary engines. It is worth noting that the total power available to the Nighthawk was less than that used by the majority of light two seater aircraft today and with this it was expected to haul a crew of between three and five, two machine guns and a Davis gun (all with ammunition) and up to 18 hours worth of fuel around the night sky. In fact the Nighthawk could take off and climb very very slowly to its cruising altitude, it could then amble slowly (almost gliding) on its patrol. Its top speed of 60 mph was not that much greater than that of the later Zeppelins and its best chance of intercepting one of these was by collision if one accidentally flew into its path. By the time the Nighthawk was undergoing flight trials in mid 1917 conventional aircraft were shooting down Zeppelins using ordinary machine guns loaded with an ordinary round/tracer round combination of ammunition and there was no need for other approaches. The Nighthawk did make one useful contribution to British defence – one of the junior members of the design team was a Reginald J Mitchell and this was his first experience of aircraft design. He later went on to design the Supermarine Spitfire.

I enclose the drawing I did

 Shitehawk.jpg   49.32K   1 downloads

[Ianander]

centurion, on 28 February 2011 - 06:30 PM, said:

Might be interested in my account (in an unpublished work) of the Nighthawk (also known by the test crew as the Sh*tehawk)

The last, and most outré, attempt to produce a Davis gun armed anti airship fighter was made by the newly formed Supermarine company (formerly Pemberton Billings and Co).  This was the Supermarine P.B.31.E Nighthawk, a very large twin engined quadruplane. The fuselage, which was mounted between the middle wings, was surmounted by a enclosed cockpit, somewhat reminiscent of a small conservatory, on top of which was built a gunner's position for the Davis gun and a rearward firing Lewis gun position with a Scarff gun ring. This was level with the top wing. The Davis gun would have a clear field of fire all around the horizon (but the counterweight would decapitate the rear gunner if he was in his cockpit when the main weapon was fired forwards). A second Lewis gun position was stationed in the nose of the main fuselage together with a small searchlight and a 5hp petrol engine to drive a generator for the light and provide heating for the main cockpit that contained sleeping facilities for spare crew members. The pilot was positioned at the rear of the enclosed cockpit doubtless to reduce the possibility that he might actually be able to see an enemy airship whilst at the same time adding extra interest to the process of taking off and landing on ill lit night time air strips. The whole contraption was powered by two 100hp rotary engines. It is worth noting that the total power available to the Nighthawk was less than that used by the majority of light two seater aircraft today and with this it was expected to haul a crew of between three and five, two machine guns and a Davis gun (all with ammunition) and up to 18 hours worth of fuel around the night sky. In fact the Nighthawk could take off and climb very very slowly to its cruising altitude, it could then amble slowly (almost gliding) on its patrol. Its top speed of 60 mph was not that much greater than that of the later Zeppelins and its best chance of intercepting one of these was by collision if one accidentally flew into its path. By the time the Nighthawk was undergoing flight trials in mid 1917 conventional aircraft were shooting down Zeppelins using ordinary machine guns loaded with an ordinary round/tracer round combination of ammunition and there was no need for other approaches. The Nighthawk did make one useful contribution to British defence – one of the junior members of the design team was a Reginald J Mitchell and this was his first experience of aircraft design. He later went on to design the Supermarine Spitfire.

I enclose the drawing I did

Shitehawk.jpg

Well what can I say Centurion, you have great little talent and I bet its drawn to scale !!. I will really appreciate the drawings you have submitted on this post.

cheer's
Ian

[Ianander]

Hello  All Here is one for the rifle for  firing a grenade

Cheer's Ian

Attached Files

•  ScreenHunter_01 Feb. 28 20.45.gif   75.86K   0 downloads

[CarylW]

I don't know why and I wouldn't call them my favourite invention but there is something about armoured cars that appeals to me
They always look very fragile to me. did they actually withstand very much?



Another one that makes me smile because this chap looks so cheerful. Not so much an invention, more of an adaptation but certainly inventive
The fiddle looks as though it has been made out of an entrenching tool



Caryl

[59165]

I can't remember whose photo this is.
I don't think it was mine.

[Ianander]

Caryl, on 28 February 2011 - 10:21 PM, said:

I don't know why and I wouldn't call them my favourite invention but there is something about armoured cars that appeals to me
They always look very fragile to me. did they actually withstand very much?



Another one that makes me smile because this chap looks so cheerful. Not so much an invention, more of an adaptation but certainly inventive
The fiddle looks as though it has been made out of an entrenching tool



Caryl

Hi Caryl , yes I agree they do look a bit fragile, they look like a go-cart with boxes just how we made when we were kids??but I wonder who pushing them. But I think we will go with trenching tool-made fiddle

thanks for the pictures and the information Caryl
( p.s I will agree with you about  AFV's there something  I like about them and from the other war!!)

Cheer's
Ian

[Ianander]

59165, on 28 February 2011 - 10:31 PM, said:

I can't remember whose photo this is.
I don't think it was mine.

Hello 59165  , Hey!!! that's a great picture, But I don't think it's a mine       just joking!!!,  I hope that grenade is not LIVE    
many thanks again 59165  
cheer's
Ian

[centurion]

Caryl, on 28 February 2011 - 10:21 PM, said:

I don't know why and I wouldn't call them my favourite invention but there is something about armoured cars that appeals to me
They always look very fragile to me. did they actually withstand very much?

The Indian Army (or at least the army in India) made a lot of use of armoured cars as a means of making up for manpower transferred to other theatres. Primarily they'd have to stand up to small arms fire, mainly from rifles and not heavy weapons. If you want a substantial armoured car try this French one. I made the drawing based on a rather fuzzy photo dated 1918 and I can find no further detail. It seems rather underarmed for such a substantial beast.
 6 wheel.jpg   68.81K   0 downloads

[Ianander]

Hello Centurion,   How long does it take to make these drawings ,with great details!!!, I wish I could do my Joinery drawings to your Specification. Thanks for being my main source in my post !!!!

Cheer's Centurion

Ian

[Ianander]

Hello Guys,  here is a Clip from you-tube of an US Ford M1918 Tank , and this what you get for showing OFF!!!


best regards
Ian

[centurion]

Take a look at this clip Two man Ford Note how easy it was for the little tankettes to become ditched. They were ordered off the drawing board despite the US Army Tank Board's instructions that no orders be made before trials in France (I suspect some Pork Barrel Politics).

[truthergw]

Armoured cars were used to great effect in the Middle East. In Palestine and famously, with Lawrence in Arabia. I don't have a photo but the various trench mortars were a major weapon during the static period of the war.

[centurion]

Ianander, on 01 March 2011 - 06:20 AM, said:

Hello Centurion,   How long does it take to make these drawings ,with great details!!!, I wish I could do my Joinery drawings to your Specification. Thanks for being my main source in my post !!!!

Cheer's Centurion

Ian

All my drawings are made using a vector based drawing package (I find a pre 2000 version of PowerPoint easiest) and I make use of the edit points facility to produce smoothed curves etc. Using a vector system means that I can produce some sections in very large scale and then shrink them down to the overall scale of the drawing without incurring pixelation and other distortions. I also keep a lot of clip items that I can reuse (such as various types of machine gun, rivet heads etc). I only convert to JPG for purposes of posting to the forum etc. I used to keep some of my drawings on one of those  photo/picture sites so I could post the vector drawings (which are much better quality than the JPGs) but I found some people nicking them and passing them off as their own work so I stopped doing this.

If I have some good photos and sketches etc to work off I can produce a decent drawing in hours rather than days.

[Ianander]

centurion, on 01 March 2011 - 11:03 AM, said:

Take a look at this clip Two man Ford Note how easy it was for the little tankettes to become ditched. They were ordered off the drawing board despite the US Army Tank Board's instructions that no orders be made before trials in France (I suspect some Pork Barrel Politics).

Hello Centurion , yes a nice little clip, I did watch those tankettes, but  I did notice they have very narrow tracks. surely this must have been a serious problem!!!
cheer's
Ian

[Ianander]

truthergw, on 01 March 2011 - 11:18 AM, said:

Armoured cars were used to great effect in the Middle East. In Palestine and famously, with Lawrence in Arabia. I don't have a photo but the various trench mortars were a major weapon during the static period of the war.

Hello Truthergw , I am guessing here but my Great granfather  must have seen these Armoured cars in Mesopotamia. I found this on trench morters

Cheer's
Ian

Attached Files

•  ScreenHunter_04 Mar. 01 11.41.gif   60.32K   0 downloads

[Ianander]

Hello Truthergw ,   and here is the second one I found

Cheer's

Ian

Attached Files

•  ScreenHunter_06 Mar. 01 11.42.gif   50.97K   0 downloads

[Ianander]

centurion, on 01 March 2011 - 11:23 AM, said:

All my drawings are made using a vector based drawing package (I find a pre 2000 version of PowerPoint easiest) and I make use of the edit points facility to produce smoothed curves etc. Using a vector system means that I can produce some sections in very large scale and then shrink them down to the overall scale of the drawing without incurring pixelation and other distortions. I also keep a lot of clip items that I can reuse (such as various types of machine gun, rivet heads etc). I only convert to JPG for purposes of posting to the forum etc. I used to keep some of my drawings on one of those  photo/picture sites so I could post the vector drawings (which are much better quality than the JPGs) but I found some people nicking them and passing them off as their own work so I stopped doing this.

If I have some good photos and sketches etc to work off I can produce a decent drawing in hours rather than days.

Centurion , I will try your advice on my joinery projects !!!  Thank you

cheer's Ian