Cascabel

As I mentioned earlier, I am more interested in the lower picture. This does not appear to be a grenade launcher but more a hand held cannon/howitzer.

From what movie comes that picture? Are you sure you're not asking for documentation of a fantasy piece?

Not that I can offer any historical documentation for this, but I suppose a stock could be made for a swivel gun; I suppose the 4 bore elephant gun had to start somewhere...

The pictures are from 'Cutthroat Island'. A great many of the props in that movie are non-functional items. Most were for sale a few years ago, and I had a chance to look them over. Many of the "firing" effects were simulated. You can't always rely on what you see in movies.....

Just a thought........ Do you suppose it's nothing more mysterious than poor spelling on the part of the person that made the log book entry, and he meant "caulker" ?

Further reading of the log may reveal other "unusual" spelling variations. There seems to be lots of spelling variations in some of the old writings, which can cause confusion among modern readers that are used to "standard" spellings of words.

>>>>> Cascabel

I'd be interested in Cascabel's take on this.

Well...... since you asked. I was the neighborhood "mad scientist" when I was a kid. I had one of those six-inch thick library edition dictionarys for my recreational reading. I looked up "gunpowder", and got the formula from there. (remember, this was in the early 1950's, before there was such a thing as the internet with easily available info). I did a bit more reading in encyclopedias at the library, and found a lot about proper procedures, like finely grinding your ingredients, and properly blending with a bit of dampness, and then drying and screening the results.

Mine worked quite nicely, to the point of the local law enforcement types scouring the town looking for the perpetrator of random explosions. Mostly harmless, but attention getting. Anyhow, soon all the drug stores in town were told by the police to NOT sell certain chemicals to young boys, even if they had a note from their mothers !! They never did find out who was at fault, but that effectively put a stop to things.

Other kids that I was acquainted with tried it with less spectacular results, being that they just mixed the ingredients dry. Their experiments worked, but not really well. I don't remember anyone getting hurt beyond singed eyebrows from being too close to the action. Most home made powder that I was aware of back then (other than mine) was rather weak in performance.

I remember hearing of kids getting badly injured from experimenting with home made bombs occasionally, but this was usually reported as being pipe bombs using a whole lot of match heads as the explosive. Most of the newspaper reports at the time stated that the explosions occurred during assembly.

I do remember reading somewhere about buildings at powder mills being lightly constructed to keep damage to a minimum in case of accident.

>>>> Cascabel

No shit. Thanks for the update.

Well said, Shipmate !! Such eloquence amazes me....

Then perhaps we should change the name of the thread to "Fort Zachary Taylor Pirate Fest" and let

Julie do her own promotion

There is actually a cooperatve rather than an adversarial relationship going on. They work very well together. The Ft, Zach event is a spin-off from the original PiP, which is still very much alive. Sort of a symbiotic and mutually supportive relationship.

>>>> Cascabel

Bravo, Suh !!! A most interesting article...

>>>> Cascabel

I was perusing an 18th century Royal Navy/Marine site this afternoon and happened upon a gent who goes by the name Michael the Tailor. I have no idea of the quality of his work, perhaps someone here knows of him and can render an opinion.

He does provide raw diagrams of his goods and he does custom work as well. Perhaps he could construct your jacket for you. Prices seem reasonable. You can give it a look here: http://www.angelfire.com/va/sutler/sps.html

I checked this site out today, as I'm looking for Royal Navy stuff. Apparently, Michael the Tailor has passed away. So sad. His work looks to be of a very high quality.

Indeed, Michael has passed away, and a great loss to us all !! He produced an excellent quality product, and had the most reasonable prices on the web.

>>>> Cascabel

You need to understand that swords are not much of a problem, and do not need to be declared, as long as they are in your checked baggage. Hard cases and locking are not required, (at this time). Firearms are another story entirely !!

To be honest, the locking case was to protect my stuff from the baggage handlers!

Protection is needed from the baggage handlers for certain, but I was speaking of LEGALITIES.....

>>>> Cascabel

Some great traveling stories !! I hate to throw a wet blanket on the situation, but the very real facts are that the rules are interpreted differently at different airports, and by different gate agents and TSA officers. What you might get away with in Chicago, for instance, you may not get away with on your return trip through Miami, or Atlanta.

You need to understand that swords are not much of a problem, and do not need to be declared, as long as they are in your checked baggage. Hard cases and locking are not required, (at this time). Firearms are another story entirely !!

You could run up on an agent that decides to get real "anal", and pull out the rule book. So then you ask to speak to his supervisor, and try to explain that you got away with whatever non-compliant container hundreds of times at such and such airport. The supervisor will look in the rule book, and no doubt back up his underling, unless he is blatantly wrong. So then....... You miss your flight, and then have to find another way to get your weapons shipped.

Hmmmmmm..... "Aha !!! I can take a cab across town to a UPS store, and ship from there !!", but it's 9pm... I guess I will have to spend the night, and ship my stuff in the morning.....

Refer to my pinned posting above to avoid problems. "Properly warned sez I"

>>>> Cascabel

Ok, enough hijacking, continue with the thread..........

Animal

Indeed, Shipmates.... This is an important enough subject that we need to stay on topic !!! A lot of folks need this info....

>>>> Cascabel

At the top of the Lock, Stock, and Barrel forum, I pinned a post that pretty well covers all contingencies. (as of the time of posting). I fly with weapons fairly regularly.

>>>> Cascabel

(Duplicate of my posting in the Crow's Nest)

I have always wondered just exactly WHO made the decision on when the GAOP was, and by what authority did they make that decision ??? Seems kinda odd to me that there are sometimes EXACT cut-off dates that people abide by. And when somebody actually asks, it is always a rather a vague answer. (well, sorta kinda, thereabouts..... etc.)

Foxe ?..... Blackjohn ?.... Any genuine or self-appointed historians care to enlighten us ? ...... Anybody ??

>>>> Cascabel

We can quibble about this.... but the Periods... (Kinda sorta)

Elizabeathean Sea Dogs.... Early 1600

The Buccaneers 1650 to about 1699

The Golden Age of Pyracy is basically 1700 to about 1720(ish) (maybe up th 1730's.... but those were that last of the scallywags...)

Yeah... there are variations... and we can argue this forever..... but as a basic rule of thumb.... that's kinda-sorta close enoughish....

Hey Silas... don't just start with the cheap ((inexpensive) stuff... but if yer working on it fer the three kids... start with the middle one... if it comes out too small... pass it down.. too large pass it up... eventually you'll figure it all out and then can make stuff to size.....

Ye don't just larn this stuff from the internet.... you gotta play with it... mess with it, and figure it all out....

But once ye gots it figgured out... dang... ye can make just about anything........

OH yeah.... after poking yer finger th' first time.....ye kinda figured out not to do that too much any more.....

See.... that be wot we call experience.......

I have always wondered just exactly WHO made the decision on when the GAOP was, and by what authority did they make that decision ??? Seems kinda odd to me that there are sometimes EXACT cut-off dates that people abide by. And when somebody actually asks, it is always a rather a vague answer. (well, sorta kinda, thereabouts..... etc.)

Foxe ?..... Blackjohn ?.... Any genuine or self-appointed historians care to enlighten us ? ...... Anybody ??

>>>> Cascabel

Ya know.....

The whole problem with using these old woodcuts and period illustrations for reference is that they are generally terrible for judging size and proportion. I think we can be reasonably sure that the chest depicted in the picture was not really waist high, with drawers big enough to put an entire man's leg into, as the picture would suggest judging by the character resting his hand on the open lid. I also strongly suspect it was not actually built in the cock-eyed fashion shown in the woodcut.

You then have to fall back on using the old illustrations as a vague guide to general appearance. It becomes a judgement call on what would actually work and be practical. I think we can reasonably surmise that these surgeon's chests were custom built to the individual surgeon's needs, rather than to an "official" pattern.

>>>>> Cascabel

Yep, it was a term used throughout the 17th century... It has been used to indicate any lock type that wasn't a "match lock"... So it was used to refer to Snaphaunces, Doglocks, English Locks, "true" flintlocks, etc. etc.... I've not seen the term "firelock" used in reference to wheel locks, but that doesn't mean it wasn't used as such.... There is a LOT I don't know.

In His Majesty's Regulations of 1768, they are referred to as "firelocks". They are definitely true flintlocks by that time. I suspect the term was in use for quite some time.....

>>>> Cascabel

Using more than 80 grains in a pistol is usually just wasting powder for blanks

Whoa Nelly! 80 grains in a pistol! What sort of barrels are you packing?

What do you do without wadding? Do you pack the powder or just pour it in?

Do you have to keep your weapon vertical and shoot into the sky?

If not, doesn't the powder lay out along the barrel? Hmmm...maybe I'll have to try this now.

On another note, I've heard using steel wool for wadding makes quite a sight when shooting at night!*

*DISCLAIMER: I assume this is done over water, or another fire safe environment. DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME!

For firing without a wad, you simply pour the powder down the barrel. It is entirely un-necessary to "pack" it. You simply remember not to point it below the horizontal, and the powder remains nicely back against the breech. (unless, of course if you quickly "flick" it down to the horizontal position, and I don't know why you would do that ! ) You don't need to point it up into the sky, just don't point it below horizontal.

Fine steel wool fired at night is fun, but use CAUTION !! It burns brightly, and can ignite whatever it falls on or into. Do it over water only !! If any remains in the bore, it is certain to ignite the next powder charge to be poured in, so give PLENTY of time between shots. Be ABSOLUTELY certain it is all the way down on top of the powder, or you risk a burst barrel, just like with a ball not properly rammed. This is NOT for amateurs, and is not to be taken lightly !!!

>>>> Cascabel

What sort of loads do you use when shooting blanks?

Same as had you loaded ball? More? Less?

For shooting round ball, I've been considering working up a 3f load for the musket, just to see if there's any noticeable difference in ignition and/or accuracy from the 2f load.

I've primed the musket with 3f, but find the 4f noticeably faster. With the pistol, I usually just use the 3f in the barrel and the pan for the aforementioned convenience.

I use considerably less powder for a live load than I do for blanks. Without a ball to cause a buildup of pressure, a blank load can sound rather weak, so more powder is necessary. For blank loads, the correct amount is a function of both bore diameter and barrel length. As a starting point, I usually reccommend one grain per caliber, for instance, .50 caliber=50 grains. (For those reading this that are unfamiliar with black powder weapons, a "grain" is a unit of weight, which is usually measured out as a unit of volume in powder measures, rather than weighed with a scale.)

From this starting point, the load can be increased gradually until it "sounds right", which is purely a judgement call on the part of the shooter. You need to stop short of a noise loud enough to cause ringing of people's ears, which will make you very un-welcome in most venues, and is wasteful of powder. I also am a very outspoken advocate of NOT using wadding of any kind, for various reasons.

>>>>> Cascabel

Goex is all I use. 3f works in muskets too, and often you don't need to prime as the 3f will spill through the vent and prime from the inside. Less to carry too. Also, invest in a .50 cal. ammo can to keep it stored in. safe, waterprooof, and spark resisitant. Holds four or five one-pound cans.

Bo

Quite true !!! A lot of the "generally accepted wisdom" about black powder shooting is geared toward the firing of live loads with ball, and competition shooting, rather than firing blank loads.

I use 3f in ALL calibers for blank loads, except for cannons. Works just fine, and is fairly clean burning. In the larger calibers, (above .50), tests have shown 3f generates higher pressures than coarser powders when using ball, but for our purposes with blank loads, it's not an issue.

For priming, use of 4f is entirely unnecessary. 3f works just fine, so you only need to carry one grade of powder. For competition shooting, where milliseconds in ignition time count, 4f is a good idea. It has a marginally faster burn time than 3f, and ignites slightly easier. For shooting blanks, it won't hurt anything to use it, but it's really not needed.

>>>> Cascabel

We used to keep powder for the cannon in a water tight, oak keg, bound with brass hoops and brass brads. 1f Goex.

You know after 2 years, there was a goodly amount of smaller grain and also some dust. We no longer use it.

I think if you use the horn only once in a while and it just hangs up on a peg most of the time , the degredation of the grain would be at a minimum. We are on the move come Apl 1 thru Nov and the keg was getting bounced around in our van quite a bit, apparently. We store all powder now in the Goex cans, in a wood lined metal box, until the day of an event , when the horns are charged.

For our purposes (blank loads), the smaller grains and dust created by powder moving around in a container are rather irrelevant. If being used for competition shooting, variations in grain sizes can create differences in velocity, leading to changes in point of impact.

>>>> Cascabel

I usually shoot paper cartridges, but sometimes PRB too.

For those times, I have a powder horn, but it can be a few weeks between shoots.

So, I'm wondering what disadvantages there may be to keeping powder in the horn?

Other than accidental ignition, the only enemy to powder is moisture. If your horn has a well fitting plug, the powder will keep pretty much forever.

>>>> Cascabel

I have to say I like the rats. Never thought I would say that but they are really smart. my wee one bought the class rats home a while back and we totaly enjoyed them. Cannot wait till they come home with her again.

Reminds me of when one of my kids brought the class rat home at the end of the school year. He lived a nice long life (for a rat), and was a lot of fun. Rats are cool !!!

>>>> Cascabel

One of my favorites !! Great characters, great costumes. Far better than the current offerings.....

>>>> Cascabel

I've used Pyrodex in my flintlock, simply pour in a ten grain black powder charge, followed by a measured charge of Pyrodex (followed by ball or wad). The pan obviously has to be primed with black powder.

Better stock up on powder and lead while ye can...

Yours, Mike

If you have black powder available, why bother with fooling around with Pyrodex ? Real black powder is also considerably cheaper !!

>>>> Cascabel

So, to stand behind my belief that there are no dumb questions: How the heck do you get the hammer off the pivot?

I removed the screw and the hammer is still stuck on the square pin. Do ya just pry it off? Or is it secured by a second method that does not present itself so obviously? I am of the school where 'metal pats are not just stuck, but being retained by something - brute force never a good idea'.

Prying is never a good idea !! You may scar up the edge of it, and also the face of the lockplate. The correct method of removal is to completely dis-assemble the lock, and then support the lockplate across the jaws of your vise so that the tumbler is loose between the jaws, and using a BRASS punch, tap the square shaft down and out of the hammer. Removing the cock (hammer) is unfortunately the last step to taking apart a lock.

Sometimes they are not really tight, and can be gently wiggled a bit and will come off without complete dis-assembly, or they can be taken off with VERY careful prying, if they are not too tight. The tumbler shaft usually has a very slight taper to it so that the cock stays tight. If you try removal without complete dis-assembly, keep in mind that when in the fired position, the shoulder of the cock rests on the top edge of the lockplate, and in some locks, this is all that keeps the mainspring from falling off the toe of the tumbler. For that reason, if you remove the cock without dis-assembling the lock, you need to do it at half-cock.

>>>>> Cascabel

Would Sky Captain qualify? I know it's more of a thirty's style, rather than 1800s, but it does have airships, strange robots, and ray guns. Oh, and a mad scientist.....ummm, who's actually dead.

I'd classify it as Dieselpunk, which is outside of Steampunk's timeline(?) but still considered a sub-genre of Steampunk. So, yeah it counts.

I hardly think we need to be concerned about timeline here !! I sorta consider it what Jules Verne would have come up with had he lived in the 20th century, instead of the 19th. I also think it counts.....

>>>> Cascabel