Model Boat Mayhem
The Shipyard ( Dry Dock ): Builds & Questions => Submarines => Topic started by: Martin (Admin) on March 03, 2008, 04:45:49 pm
-
Via PM to Mayhem....
Where can i find info on building working torpedoes please...
-
Try
http://www.pt-boat.com/torpedo/torpedo.html
Fredy
-
There was an excellent article or two in "Marine Modelling International" about a year ago by an American chap and his father who did a great deal of research, design and execution on this subject.
This subject has also been covered quite fully within this Forum before and so a search should provide plenty of information.
However, my main point in replying to you is to suggest you think this through carefully as most insurance (yours; your club's; the owner of the water etc.) will probably be void if any form of projectile, however powered, is used.
Roger in France.
-
Try the Association of Model Sub Mariners, I seem to remember a sub firing torpedoes at a show that used to be held at Stoke Mandeville Hospital in the 1970's. They used the indoor swimming pool at the show and there was a balcony for the spectators so that they could look down onto water which made it great for subs.
-
Dave Merriman in the USA is working on a set of launchers/torpedoes for subs and they should be for sale shortly from the Caswell Store
http://www.caswellplating.com/models/
-
I posted a nice little video clip that I ran across today over at SP in Mike Caswell's thread regarding the new system Dave is working.
Here's the link for "Got Torpedos? http://www.subpirates.com/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=3344 (http://www.subpirates.com/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=3344)
Am certain there's more than a few waiting with baited breath on this one.
Chuck
-
Capricorn, (who is active in mayhem) has a thread at
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=810895
with his experiments.
Possibly the turbine out of a dental drill would be suitable to power the little fellas in a scale way!
Now if we filament wound the body in CF and pumped it up to say, 7000 psi, we could hear the protests on safety for miles. :)
andrew
-
Thats the same method from pt boat.com there is a fill description on the mods
Fredy
-
Pretty tough to beat the work done by the fellow at ptboat.com, excellent workmanship etc. The one's I experimented with have never actually moved through water on their own, but it's certainly possible, they churn up a storm with the props underwater. What scale are you looking at there Martin?
I heard some talk about compressed air torpedos being the way to go, but I haven't tried it myself (yet), a bit of curve on the fins and it will spin and go straight?
If you do go with electric I'd avoid the bevel gear type, very noisy, rough, lot's of drag.
I've avoided looking in to the submarine posts, I'm liable to really get distracted all ready a cronic problem for me. But you caught me peeking. Cap
(As far as safety, your likely to get more verbal flak than anything, I never planned to put a charge in mine but the subject came up and nearly caused a minor civil war.)
-
Model working torpedoes are covered by the Firearms Act in Britain.
They are classed as projectiles and the vessel firing them has to conform to very strict laws (Too complicated to go into here), but under many circumstances, Licences have to be applied for and not likely to be given.....This is a Fact. people operating them do break the law so be careful...You have been warned...
-
Model working torpedoes are covered by the Firearms Act in Britain.
They are classed as projectiles and the vessel firing them has to conform to very strict laws (Too complicated to go into here), but under many circumstances, Licences have to be applied for and not likely to be given.....This is a Fact. people operating them do break the law so be careful...You have been warned...
so what is the difference between a 1/8 scale electric torpedo and a model sub at 1/64 scale.?
Fredy
-
Don't quite follow you Fredy. Ths simple fact is that any object capable of firing a projectile is covered under the Firearms Act. If the model sub has firing capabilities then it could and I stress could be classed as a firearm and as such liable to the strict controls laid out in the legislation. A model torpedo, controlled via electric radio control is not capable of firing anything, so unless it is loaded with gunpowder or some other explosive, cannot be constued as a firearm. Hope this clears it up a little.
Barry
-
A lot of torpedoes on the likes of pt boats just roll of the racks. :-\ so what happens with water Cannons on fire boats. :D
Fredy
-
I find it an interesting question too Proteus, where/how to draw the line, I forget over their in Great Britain how tight things are space-wise (comparatively with US), and much more cooperation, rules are needed and that make senses. I notice the boating rules and licenses taken very seriously, which is good.
Footski, I take it that Firearms Act is regardless of whether it has a small explosive in it (I don't advocate that anyway), but then how does one define "firing" and "projectile", like Proteus says what if it rolls off and then is self propelled. Cap
-
Point 1.
Water cannons are exempt for many reasons, one being that water is not a projectile, capable of being fired in the legal sense. I had a feeling this was going to be difficult and it has been some years since I dealt with firearms so am not able to quote act and section. Basically if a projectile is fired from a barreled unit at above 12 foot pounds velocity then it comes under the auspecis of being a section one firearm. It matters not whether the barrell is attached to a sub and is underwater. If any explosive charge is used then it is also covered under other legislation, all aimed at preventing their use in the UK.
If you have a torpedo that rolls off a boat and then self propells itself, without any firing mechanism or explosive being used, that I would consider perfectly legal, as it does not fall into the definition of a firearm or explosive, having said that the British Government are banning things that look like firearms but are incapable of firing, also covered under the Firearms Act. A childs toy cowboy gun will be illegal if in public.........As I said just be careful..
Proteus.
In GB there is no line to draw....The government is tightening up on all kinds of antique, immitation and eventoy guns.
-
In GB there is no line to draw....The government is tightening up on all kinds of antique, immitation and eventoy guns.
Except they don't seem to have much success in applying these laws judging by the amount of Firearm related incidents in the Uk.
-
You have to remember that most of these laws are aimed at honest upright citizens because they are an easier catch than nefarious criminals and help boost crime detection figures.
British Government are banning things that look like firearms but are incapable of firing
Which makes me start to wonder about your model Bismarck which, seen at a distance on the pond, looks "just like the real thing"! :D
-
Well, we've got similar issues here (US), certainly school shootings have become "common", a bullied kid (or troubled, or poorly raised) takes his gun to school and shoots the place up and kills the bully's then himself. Horrid stuff. Enough violence and hypocracy coming out of the tube to make anyone go bonkers.
I'm no gun toting NRA northwoods guy, the opposite really, I think if there were fewer guns around we'd probably all be better off, but similar to what Colin says, the laws here seem to be more effective "xxxxx" off the right wing then stopping any violence, there's just so many guns here it's practically hopeless. We have a law that requires trigger locks on guns, great idea for sure but it's common sense, any responsible gun owner would use them especially if they have children around, but criminals, I rather doubt they pay much attention to that one. Anyway, I didn't mean to cause the whole thing to digress, thanks footski, that answers the question for me. (except 12 ft lbs velocity, is that 12 ft/sec?)
-
Capricorn.
No it is not 12 feet per second. That would not be worth firing. 12 foot lbs is the maximum air pressure allowed to fire a projectile. I cannot remember the feet per second rating for that...Sorry. :embarrassed:
-
Capricorn.
No it is not 12 feet per second. That would not be worth firing. 12 foot lbs is the maximum air pressure allowed to fire a projectile. I cannot remember the feet per second rating for that...Sorry. :embarrassed:
???
So what is that in PSI?
12 foot lbs is a measure of torque, not pressure.
Confussed!!!!!
AlexC
-
Is it 12 ft lbs of kinetic energy per Collin in this post: http://www.modelboatmayhem.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=3401.0
Ha, 12 ft per second would be a rolling launch all right.
16.3 J, .188" BB weighs something like .25 grams maybe? So .00025 kg. KE=.5 x m x vel^2
sqrt of 16.3x2/.00025 = 360 m/s or 1180 ft/sec, that sounds too high, that could do some damage. Someone please check the math here, we still use imperial units but I recall some of the metric units from physics. Did I get gravity out etc?
At any rate sounds like you get a little leeway. I wonder where the 12 ft-lbs comes from, tests on a pigs eye (poor chap) or something like that maybe? Cap
-
Alexc,
I bow to your greater knowledge..however believe me when I say that 12 foot lbs is the unit of measurement beyond which an airgun is considered to be a section one firearm and would need a licence, although it would almost certainly not be granted one.
CAPRICORN......Quite right.....I think........No I dont cos I haven't a clue what it all means ha ha :D
-
O0 :)
I bow to your greater knowledge..however believe me when I say that 12 foot lbs is the unit of measurement beyond which an airgun is considered to be a section one firearm and would need a licence, although it would almost certainly not be granted one.
Hi Footski,
No question of 'greater knowledge' my friend, I was genuinely confused by your use of 'foot lbs' as a measure of pressure.
Your own 'Correct' knowledge of the UK firearms act is the greater.
I now know that you really were referring to 'force' which I have always understood to be referred to as 'foot lbf', in order to distinguish it from torque which is 'foot lbs'
Of course, nowadays, the METRIC bunch seem to have won the day, and the use of Newton metres and/or Joules is the more common.... not that I agree... He He.
Capricorn,
Thanks for correcting my confussion...by the added reference you pointed me to, that immediately sorted my thinking out, and all became clear.
Any way chaps, I did a bit of searching on the net to see if I could glean anything directly from the firearms act..... not a very helpful document...
I give some relevant extracts, which exactly tie in with Footski's figures....(wish I could remember things like this)
The Firearms (Dangerous Air Weapons) Rules 1969 require that certain air weapons can only be held legally on a firearm certificate. It is possible to measure the velocity of pellets, discharged from an air weapon, by the use of an electronic chronograph. From these measurements the kinetic energy of the pellet at the muzzle can be calculated. Air weapons deemed specially dangerous have a muzzle energy in excess of:
In the case of an air pistol: 6 ft/lbs
In the case of an air weapon other than an air pistol: 12 ft/lbs
Such weapons are classified as Section 1 firearms and are required to be held on a firearm certificate. These weapons are subject to all the controls and regulations pertaining to Section 1 firearms, although the "ammunition" (pellets) are not.
These rules do not apply to an air weapon designed for use only when submerged in water, e.g. harpoon gun.
The last line of the above may hold a key to model torpedoes...!!
I note also the same confusing use of foot lbs rather than foot lbf, but this is clarified somewhat by the 'Muzzle Energy' statement.
New legislation
(3) Prohibition of certain Air Weapons
The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 Sec 39 creates an additional category of prohibited firearm, to be added to Sec 5 of The Firearms Act 1968.
The new subsection is Sec 5 (1) (af) and reads as follows…
Any air rifle, airgun or air pistol which uses, or is designed or adapted for use with, a self-contained gas cartridge system.
From 20 th January 2004 it will be an offence to manufacture, sell, purchase, transfer or acquire any air weapon using a self-contained gas cartridge system.
Anyone who already owns one of these weapons on that date will be able to keep it legally, only if they obtain a firearm certificate from the police. Applications for firearm certificates must be made before 1 st May 2004.
Alternatively, existing owners can hand their weapons into police for disposal. Again, this must be done before 1 st May 2004.
From 1 st May 2004 it will be an offence, punishable by a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 10 years imprisonment, to possess a self-contained gas cartridge weapon without the necessary firearm certificate.
"References to the date of 1st May 2004 in the passage above were copied from publicity issued by central government. Unfortunately the date is incorrect by one day, i.e. certificate applications were required to be submitted to police on or before 29th April 2004 and holders who failed to do so would have committed the offence of unlawful possession with effect from 30th April 2004. The MPS administered applications in accordance with the correct dates, but regrets the oversight which appeared in this web page."
What is being banned:
The ban applies to any air rifle, air gun or air pistol that uses, or is designed or adapted for use with, a self-contained gas cartridge system.
From 20 th January 2004 it will be an offence to manufacture, sell, purchase, transfer or acquire such a weapon.
From 1 st May 2004 it will be an offence to possess one, unless it is held on a firearm certificate.
What is NOT being banned:
The ban does NOT apply to weapons that use CO2 bulb systems because CO2 bulbs do not contain a projectile and are not therefore completely self-contained.
I could find no meaningful reference to 'Torpedoes' other than in direct connection with arms trading.
So what about model torpedoes....
Just for fun, I did some rough calculations to see how close they came to the figures under the firearms act....... I think the results could be of some interest.
Model torpedoes
A typical full size torpedo would be of the order of 20ft – 24ft in length and with a speed of 50kts.(25m/s or 84.48ft/s)
Consider a model torpedo @ 1/8th scale…. This would be approx 2.5ft – 3 ft long.
If this was travelling at SCALE speed (velocity (v)) of 6.25kts (3.2187m/s or 10.56ft/s)
If the model weight (mass (m)) was kept down to say e.g. 16oz (1lb or 0.45359kg)
Then kinetic energy (KE) would be: -
KE = 0.5 x m x v^2 = 0.5 x 0.45359 x 3.2187^2 = 2.352Nm (Joules)
Which is = 0.52875ft/lbf
Well within the 6ft/lbf limits for an air pistol let alone the 12ft/lbf for an air rifle.
Even at twice scale speed i.e. 12.5kts (6.4008m/s or 21ft/s)
This would only increase to 9.292Nm or 2.08892ft/lbf
Which is still well inside the limits.
Given the above, it would be interesting to see (find out) just how this stood up under the terms of the latest UK firearms act amendments.
And remember, we are not necessarily talking about an air driven torpedo, although I assume the velocity factor would remain the same, even for an electrically driven one.
By the way, according to the UK act, air weapons with a muzzle velocity force of less than 1ft/lbf are exempt from the firearms laws so in the first case (Scale Speed) no possible problem can exist. :-\
Even the Twice Scale speed scenario is well under the 6ft/lbf limit so it is arguable if this would be acceptable or not….. common sense, and the firearm act, say’s it should be exempt… however… even though the firearms act itself may not provide a means of prevention, there are probably several other NEW PC nanny state laws that can be called upon…..solution…..!!!! ASK THE LAW. :police: :police:
So much for a free country !!! {-) {-) O0
Hope you find this of some interest.
Best regards to all.
AlexC
-
Alexc,
An excellent piece of research. You have put the meat on the bones for us.
One point though: Quote:
[font=Verdana]Given the above, it would be interesting to see (find out) just how this stood up under the terms of the latest UK firearms act amendments.
And remember, we are not necessarily talking about an air driven torpedo, although I assume the velocity factor would remain the same, even for an electrically driven one.[/font]
The velocity factor would NOT apply to electrically propelled torpedoes as they will be travelling under their own power and will not therefore be 'fired'.
Any torpedo fired using any form of explosive charge IE gunpowder, would be illegal under current firearm legislation.
Thanks amigo. I have enjoyed the debate..
Barry (Now wiser than before)
-
Well thanks you all for the info, which, by the way, I have absolutely no use for ::) seeing as I'm here not there. Alex that is as clear as it's going to get for me, excellent job. Sounds like unarmed model torpedo's aren't going to get you put in jail or loose you your right to use the lake or river. Now a speargun, that's another interesting question, do they define how sharp it has to be to be considered a spear? (you can ignore this question) Good night. Cap
-
I think you are missing the point I was originally making about insurance.
Regardless of the application of the law I would expect most insurance cover to be invalidated by the use of any form of projectile. Even if you are hard pressed to find a specific clause denying cover I would anticipate some catch all clause would be used by an insurance company presented with a claim.
The position of a self propelled torpedo is fascinating as it is not a projectile and could be argued to be no different from the self propelled submarine whence it emanates (note the very precise language I use here).
When I posted my original warning about the invalidation of insurance I was not intending to be a killjoy but hoping to make any experimenter aware of their probable position. I would say "Go ahead" but make absolutely sure nobody and nothing could be damaged by your experimentation. Also, keep an eye open for the Club Grouse or some member of the public who decides to complain, there is always one or more of these about.
I can think of several model boating activities far more likely to present danger; high speed boating including refuelling; untested boilers, for example.
I have witnessed a very, very, very fast tethered hydro break its tether, demolish the safety net surrounding the pool and embed itself in the exhibition hall wall. This happened last Easter at the Paris Model Show. How anyone could be so foolish as to run such a demonstration indoors I do not know! Fortunately no one was injured but a display stand and other models were damaged and then a fight took place between those sailing and those who sustained damage. If this had not been an above ground pool from which the boat (missile) took off, upwards, I dread to think what would have happened to the legs of those standing around a pool at ankle level.
Roger in France.
-
Ahoy Roger,
I see your point. I'm not familiar with insurance for model boats or clubs but I'm sure it tends to be restrictive. Cap
-
Beware with playing about with working torpedoes...Bernie Wood and myself did just that a few years back. Bernie set my jumper alight, I killed one of the [then] wife's goldfish and a certain Ron Perrot had to explain to his good woman why there was a rather large hole in the end of their bath. Another one of Bernie's mates did some damage to his hand and his lawn as well, so think hard about using high powered torpedoes...they hurt!
Mine that ended up in U-117 were over a foot long, and were made from ultra lightweight aluminium tubing and were driven by rubber bands...they didn't go roaring off across the lake and they floated once the rubber band had unwound itself, so they could be easily retrieved. They did look good which was the main thing without being dangerous.
-
"Bernie Wood" a certain "Ron Perrot" Good to hear those name again after such a long time.
Bernie was a regular feature in the Marine Modelling magazine with his cap and jacket covered in badges
and Ron used to make hull and all sort of 'gubbins' for subs, I had one of his "Salcon" units, pendulum based
sub leveler. Does Ron still do submarines?
-
I haven't heard from Ron in years, his SALCON units were the bees knees back then. The Patrick Henry had one of the first I believe, amazing things they were.
Poor old Bernie...I have a video clip of him falling out of the bar at the AMS show we did at HMS Alliance, the word 'wrecked' springs to mind! We spent a happy evening over a bottle of scotch talking submarines, such a shame he was taken from us so early. The infamous jacket was his trademark, try as I might I could never quite get mine to look quite the same. There will never be another like himself and that's for sure.
-
I think the 12 ft lbs may relate to the value/rating/strength/power of the spring fitted in the air-rifle.
Above that figure and you need a firearms certificate to own the rifle.
I don't think it can be related to muzzle velocity. So many other factors including wear, friction, worn out bore etc. But one thing the armourer can easily establish is the rating of the spring, so this is perhaps why this measure was chosen for legal purposes.
-
I think the 12 ft lbs may relate to the value/rating/strength/power of the spring fitted in the air-rifle.
Above that figure and you need a firearms certificate to own the rifle.
I don't think it can be related to muzzle velocity. So many other factors including wear, friction, worn out bore etc. But one thing the armourer can easily establish is the rating of the spring, so this is perhaps why this measure was chosen for legal purposes.
tigertiger,
It certainly is related to muzzle velocity. The way we used to test the foot poundage was by firing the weapon through a little machine that records the muzzle velocity and from that gives the foot pounds for the weapon. Don't ask me for the equation as cannot remember...You could find an air weapon would vary in muzzle velociy from shot to shot, depending on temperature, type of pellet fired and even any oily residue left over from cleaning. In law all it takes is one shot to be over and the weapon requires a licence.
Hope this clears things up a little.
Barry
-
Does Ron still do submarines?
No.
He sold-up. Some of his moulds went to Matt Thor in the States, and some to Dave Keogh who runs Pandan Model Boats (or at least did). The SALCON has long been surpassed by modern units using solid state accelerometers.
Andy
-
I think the 12 ft lbs may relate to the value/rating/strength/power of the spring fitted in the air-rifle.
Above that figure and you need a firearms certificate to own the rifle.
I don't think it can be related to muzzle velocity. So many other factors including wear, friction, worn out bore etc. But one thing the armourer can easily establish is the rating of the spring, so this is perhaps why this measure was chosen for legal purposes.
tigertiger,
It certainly is related to muzzle velocity. The way we used to test the foot poundage was by firing the weapon through a little machine that records the muzzle velocity and from that gives the foot pounds for the weapon. Don't ask me for the equation as cannot remember...You could find an air weapon would vary in muzzle velociy from shot to shot, depending on temperature, type of pellet fired and even any oily residue left over from cleaning. In law all it takes is one shot to be over and the weapon requires a licence.
Hope this clears things up a little.
Barry
Hi Footski
I stand corrected, so where did the ft lbs rating come into it. Or was it that Ft lbs is a metric that was superceeded by muzzle velocity? and there is a conversion equation.
-
tigertiger,
The ft/lbs rating was introduced many years ago and actually represents the enegy dispelled in firing the weapon, wheras muzzle velocity measures the speed of an individual projectile. The muzzle velocity measures the speed of the pellet as it leaves the barrel in feet per second (770 being good for those near the 12 ft/lb limit).
This muzzle velocity is flawed in so much as the important speed is generally that uopn reaching the target, which varies considerably on may factors, including wind and distance.
One foot pound is equivalent to dropping a 1ilb hammer weight from 1 foot, hence 12 ft/lbs is like dropping a 12 lb weight from 12 feet. It would bloody hurt if landing on your head.
I have managed to dig up some conversion factors for you..
To convert from foot-pounds to:
Btu, multiply by .001286.
ergs, multiply by 1.356E+07.
gram-calories, multiply by .3238.
hp-hrs, multiply by 5.05E-07.
joules, multiply by 1.356.
I believe ft/lbs was introduced as a much more simple way of putting in place legislation.......
Boy thats nough seriousness for one day :o :o
-
Footski, 12ft x 12 lbs is 144 ft lbs. The rubber band powered torpedo is a great idea, I hadn't heard of that before.
-
Footski, 12ft x 12 lbs is 144 ft lbs. The rubber band powered torpedo is a great idea, I hadn't heard of that before.
??? ???
-
hence 12 ft/lbs is like dropping a 12 lb weight from 12 feet. It would bloody hurt if landing on your head.
Footski, I was pointing out your math error {-). I believe in this instance you might say 12 ft lbs is like dropping a 12 lb wt 1 foot, or a 1 lb weight 12 feet, (a 12 lb wt dropping 12 feet would be 144 ft lbs). In any case it would still likely cause a lump. Out of curiousity, which (of the 12 ft lbs) do you think would hurt worse? Cap
-
Cap,
Thanks for pointing that out...You are right of course....
As to which would hurt the most.....I reckon that at about 2 feet you would be unconcious so it does not really matter!! :o :o
-
Out of curiousity, which (of the 12 ft lbs) do you think would hurt worse? Cap
Isn't that like asking what weighs more a pound of feathers or a pound of lead? 8)
-
Dougal99,
Not exactly, one lb dropped 12 ft, might hurt worse than 12 lbs dropped one ft, I guess the point is the kinetic energy is about the same. The momentum is different though.
-
We over here do not seem to have much control over what we can fire, unless it is a
designated firearm, so at our Sub Regatta on the Easter weekend here we had some
fun during our Regatta, I will attach a video clip of one of the Subs firing it's Torpedos
at a model of a Corvette, we think it is quite spectacular, I have several clips to put up,
and will add these as we go...............
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=1WvZypihdZ4
Roy
-
Roy, that's quite a show, thanks for putting it on. Looks like the torpedos had a fair sized charge in them, were they reusabe? Cap
-
Cap,
Yes they are reusable, they are gas powered, with a small (or not so small) charge in the nose cone...........
Roy
-
Roy,
Very impressive film. Shame about the Corvette though.....
-
Excellent Roy! Are the diagrams of the construction anywhere?
-
Martin,
I will check up on that info for you, as the chap that has the torpedo setup lives on the mainland,
so it will take a few days............
Roy
-
This is the answer clip from the Destroyer against the subs,
I think it is brilliant, if nothing else it is good viewing.........
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=1fuBFAZ90sQ
Roy
-
We over here do not seem to have much control over what we can fire, unless it is a
designated firearm, so at our Sub Regatta on the Easter weekend here we had some
fun during our Regatta, I will attach a video clip of one of the Subs firing it's Torpedos
at a model of a Corvette, we think it is quite spectacular, I have several clips to put up,
and will add these as we go...............
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=1WvZypihdZ4
Roy
Roy, did the overshoots damage tiles?
I have to say, that looks a blast! :-) How do the depth charges work?
-
No damage to the tiles, and the same gent has the destroyer
and I will not catch up with him for a while as he is overseas...........
Roy
-
Torpedoes...I hope you can solder. O0
Rich
-
Model working torpedoes are covered by the Firearms Act in Britain.
They are classed as projectiles and the vessel firing them has to conform to very strict laws (Too complicated to go into here), but under many circumstances, Licences have to be applied for and not likely to be given.....This is a Fact. people operating them do break the law so be careful...You have been warned...
If model,working torpedoes, are covered by the Firearms Act,into what catogory do the airsoft firing model tanks fall,there power is in the region of 1.6 joules,Furthermore,i have an rc 1/6th scale tank that can fire 8mm paint balls,using Co2 as a propellant,but this does not require to be registered, and i would have thought that a paint ball marker is more dangerous than a working model torpedo,which will after coming out of the tube will run aimlessly in the water,and depending on its power source,it will sink or swim
Wullie
-
Good morning Wullie,
I notice that you live in Scotland and so the laws are different, although I believe quite similar. I am sorry to tell you that they are all governed by the firearms legislation, in so much as if the projectile being fired, either by compressed air or CO2 is ejected at greater than a certain velocity, which in England is either 6 or 12 foot pounds (I do not know the joule equivalent), depending on what is firing it, then they become firearms and therefore would be illegal.
The scale tanks, all fire well below the regulated pressure.
Barry
-
My torpedoes never ran aimlessly in the water after firing Wullie...the bow was aimed at the target, torpedoes were fired and they would run *straight and true* until they either expired and floated, or hit their intended target. There's many a goose on Princes Park Lake in Eastbourne that will testify to that! :embarrassed:
(mind you, there was the time when we were testing the prototypes and one of 'er indoors goldfish was fatally injured....) {-)
Rich
-
There seems to be a misconception about the firearms act, it covers explosive devices not air,gas or electric propulsion unless a certain velocity is exceeded (as in an air rifle)
you can legally fire an estes rocket and I have launched many a torpedo at public displays as well as my local pool on many occasions and once in front of the then Lady Dianne Spencer and all her
security staff looking on. If you are planning on putting live warheads on them then expect trouble (conspiring to make an explosion) but as long as they have a limited range and speed
then you should not get into trouble, however if you have third party insurance then tell the brokers what you are doing for your own peace of mind and remember if you do actually sink someone
they can make a claim, its not likely but some balsa boats can be very week.
RonP
-
Nice to see you on here Ron.
-
Thanks Turbulent, I'm still alive and kicking.
As for torpedoes, the link shows one of the units I made for my 1/72nd Revell Gato being tried out.
Hope you like it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF3zfSwSEOc
-
That's not THE RonP is it Turbs, old boy?
Rich
-
Its the velocity that matters. I doubt that any scale torpedo will be launced at an illegal speed.
On explosives, I am not sure of the current legislation, however we used to be black powder registered and bought rockets and "depthcharges" pre-manufactured with built in electrical firing from Standard fireworks. We never modified or tampered with them, as supplied they were legal.
-
That's not THE RonP is it Turbs, old boy?
The very same - I told you he wasn't dead!
Rich
-
Good grief...now there's a turn up for the books!
-
Someone once said that rumours of my death are much exaggerated, yes I'm still alive and kicking. After a gap of almost twenty years I have come back to model subs. I quit in the early 90s due to pressure of work, I had changed my full time job and was working a lot of hours. The pay was good but I had a lot of trouble working full time and trying to run R&R at the same time,something had to give. I got myself a reputation for slow delivery and I can understand peoples frustration with me at the time so decided to put the whole lot to bed for keeps. I took up dog showing
for a while and my mut got a first at Crufts in 1999 so we did good. Any road up, about 18months ago a friend to whom I owe more than I can ever repay, turned up with an Engel Typhoon
and asked what he should do with it. After the obvious suggestion I gave it some thought and designed a couple of modules for the model based around a much improved version of my piston ballast tanks. I fitted the boat with a couple of torpedo tubes and a bow thruster (not scale) and the whole plot works really well. I guess that fired me up again and a trip to Norwich model boat club was the clincher. Those guys are so enthusiastic about subs---its contagious, so I got busy with the fizzy again and built myself an Alpha that had been in my loft for years together with some other old moldings. The Alpha is great fun and has enabled me to further develop the module concept. I'm busy working on the torpedo design with a view to going back into the market
in the spring with the module, a motor box and of course the torps. I'm now pretty much retired (not my choice) so I have loads of time on my hands.
Check out these links, first time out for both boats but the alpha was not as good as I hoped but its sorted now.
Regards to all
RonP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhvRLkgBSuI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF3zfSwSEOc
-
I think the most impressive thing about this is the stability of the Typhoon when partially submerged & the bow thrusters working.
When will you get these units on the Market Ron?
Might even put a set of tubes in the Akula
-
Target is the spring (End of March/beginning of April) I am building up 5 units (1 maybe 2 is for Ramesh) at present and have the motor boxes done and ready, I am awaitiing carbon fibre tube for torpedo bodies and new moulds for tails and caps so that I can build up some for stock. I am NOT going to get caught out with delivery problems when I get going.
I,m coming up to Norwich as soon as the weather breaks with the Alpha and Mick has said he is coming with the Typhoon. I've promised to let Jeff know when.
Regards
RonP
-
One thing about launching torpedoes that springs to mind - they exit relatively slowly and accelerate to their final speed, so even a quite heavy one will have a low ft/lb figure. Bullets, by their nature, peak at the point of leaving the muzzle, then progressively slow down.
I can see the authorities frowning upon BB firing models shooting at each other in the UK.
-
Ron P will these new dive modules incorporate features that can be retro fitted to your old tanks?- as i have a pair i could fit to an old project. Sorry for the diversion from topic :embarrassed:
-
Sorry but the answer is no, the whole system has been redesigned from scratch, the gears are helical the threads are metric, the tubes are clear acrylic (with drain screws) and the main components are polyester. If you check out the sub driver forum there are pictures on there of my Alpha with the module in it. Its nice to know that my tanks are still operational after what must be close to twenty years. I still have a few spares (gears etc)if you need them.
RonP