Growth of voting

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 09:45:22 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote:

Most heavy cruisers are now outfitted with ultra long range guns
that could fire a cannon for 1,000 miles.

Ummm... most of the US Navy big gun cruisers have been replaced by
guided missile and cruise missile carriers.

One does not fire a cannon 1,000 miles. One fires a shell 1,000
miles. It might be rather amusing to see the gun flying down range,
but that's rather improbable.

The current technology for the Army is 43 miles range:
https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/12/21/army-long-range-cannon-gets-direct-hit-on-target-43-miles-away/

The 1,000 mile gun is a possibility, but does not currently exist:

"Army developing 'high-rate-of-fire' breakthrough 1,000-mile range
cannon"
https://www.foxnews.com/tech/army-builds-never-before-seen-breakthrough-1000-mile-range-cannon
The long-range cannon could be a possibility by 2023

"Leaked Photos Reveal the U.S. Army Wants a 1,000-Mile Range 'Cannon'"
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/leaked-photos-reveal-us-army-wants-1000-mile-range-cannon-130212

I couldn't find anything for such a Navy cannon.

The arch on this sort of cannot puts it into space.

Space starts at an altitude of 60 miles. I don't know if the 1,000
mile shell skips off the atmosphere, or has wings to provide lift and
thus extend it's range. If it skips, then it has gone into space.


--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 22:35:30 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 09:45:22 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote:

Most heavy cruisers are now outfitted with ultra long range guns
that could fire a cannon for 1,000 miles.

Ummm... most of the US Navy big gun cruisers have been replaced by
guided missile and cruise missile carriers.

One does not fire a cannon 1,000 miles. One fires a shell 1,000
miles. It might be rather amusing to see the gun flying down range,
but that's rather improbable.

The current technology for the Army is 43 miles range:
https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/12/21/army-long-range-cannon-gets-direct-hit-on-target-43-miles-away/

The 1,000 mile gun is a possibility, but does not currently exist:

"Army developing 'high-rate-of-fire' breakthrough 1,000-mile range
cannon"
https://www.foxnews.com/tech/army-builds-never-before-seen-breakthrough-1000-mile-range-cannon
The long-range cannon could be a possibility by 2023

"Leaked Photos Reveal the U.S. Army Wants a 1,000-Mile Range 'Cannon'"
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/leaked-photos-reveal-us-army-wants-1000-mile-range-cannon-130212

I couldn't find anything for such a Navy cannon.

The arch on this sort of cannot puts it into space.

Space starts at an altitude of 60 miles. I don't know if the 1,000
mile shell skips off the atmosphere, or has wings to provide lift and
thus extend it's range. If it skips, then it has gone into space.

The HARP project's 16-inch HARP gun currently holds the world record
for the highest altitude (180 km) a gun-fired projectile had achieved.
1966 I believe.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 14:04:27 +0700, John B.
wrote:

The HARP project's 16-inch HARP gun currently holds the world record
for the highest altitude (180 km) a gun-fired projectile had achieved.
1966 I believe.

That's 112 miles up, which is well into space. However, it was fired
pointing almost straight up, which is useful for altitude records, but
is not going to deliver a 1,000 mile range artillery shell. Almost
straight up means the gun has to be fired slighly toward the east, so
that earth's rotation (west to east) will allow the shell to land near
to where the gun was located. I couldn't find a number for the time
of flight.

--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, January 29, 2021 at 8:47:49 PM UTC-8, Ralph Barone wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
On 1/29/2021 8:17 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, January 29, 2021 at 12:57:19 PM UTC-8, Ralph Barone wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
On 1/29/2021 11:45 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, January 28, 2021 at 4:16:04 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/28/2021 6:11 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 14:54:19 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 11:53:17 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On the news this morning we were told that you and the entire town
was washed away or drowned in mudslides with boulders the side of
a car washing down the street.

No link to the source? I would call that plagiarism.

What actually happened was a piece of Boulder Creek Drive got washed
away:
https://www.facebook.com/BoulderCreekFireDepartment/videos/1088883534571509
The word "Drive" seems to have disappeared and morphed into the town
of Boulder Creek washing away. Congratulations for having expanded
that to the "entire town".

Webcam and graphs of the San Lorenzo River at the entrance to Henry
Cowell State Park:
https://ca.water.usgs.gov/webcams/bigtrees/
16ft gauge height is considered flooding. At 9.0ft, we have a long
way to go. Far more data than you probably want:
http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/slv-wx-fire/SLV%20Weather%20Links.htm
(Yes, I know it needs work).

My apologies for ignoring your recent rants in R.B.T. I took the
opportunity presented by the ongoing "atmospheric river" and the
evacuation of some distracting customers to work on my collection of
chain saws, generators, leaf blowers, and string trimmers. I'm about
halfway done and should be back shortly to provide you with something
to complain about. Also, after a judiciously applied regimen of 2
gallons of wet patch, for the first time in 45 years, my roof doesn't
leak. I believe that the resident ghosts have finally been appeased.

This is the world you seem to find very appealing.

It's the only world we've got. If you fail to appreciate this world,
I can introduce you to an inventor who wants to resurrect the WWII
Hochdruckpumpe for launching orbital payloads. I believe you will
make a perfect candidate for the first astronut:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon


Didn't a Canadian Chap,Gerald Bull, develop a giant cannon for
launching super sonic projectiles as a cheap way of researching
supersonic flight?
I don't know about that, but I'm sure a gun capable of reaching orbit
(or the moon, a la Jules Verne) would impose enormous accelerations on
the payload. I imagine any astronaut would be turned to soup.

Come on Frank, you know the difference between speed and acceleration.
Most heavy cruisers are now outfitted with ultra long range guns that
could fire a cannon for 1,000 miles. The arch on this sort of cannot
puts it into space. The Army has similar artillery. We have rail guns
that spread the acceleration over a much longer period etc.
Theoretically we could use a long railgun to launch space ships all of
the way to the Moon without accelerations too high for the human body to
sustain. Not that I'm volunteering mind you.


Naval guns top out at under twenty miles range. (16 IIRC)

For propelled munitions (rocket, missile) you're outside of
'artillery'. Railguns are sui generis.

Let’s throw some math at this. Escape velocity is a little over 11,000 m/s.
Assuming 5g acceleration, and a 20% margin (probably not enough) to account
for frictional slowdown after you leave the cannon, we would need to be
accelerating for t = v/a = 11000*1.2 / 5*9.8 = 270 seconds, which gives us
a barrel length of d = 0.5*a*t^2 = 0.5*5*9.8*270^2 = 1786 km. That brings
a whole new meaning to the phrase “long gun�

If we try again at 10 g acceleration, we cut the time in half and the
barrel length by a factor of four to 135 seconds and 446 km respectively.

Being shot out of a cannon into space appears to be reserved for objects
that aren’t quite as squishy as humans.

The numbers seem higher than even I expected, so please point out the error
if you can find one.

Escape velocity is about .1 m/s with my space ladder. The cannon thing
gave me a headache.

-- Jay Beattie.


How many rungs are on that ladder of yours?


All of them.

Good thing. If you fell off 2/3 of the way up, it would hurt like the
dickens, plus you’d probably run out of breath screaming on the way down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZOc...ohnsotherstuff

Heinous.

-- Jay Beattie.


I was trying to find a clip of the Simpsons episode where Bart gets thrown
off a dam face by Sideshow Bob’s brother, and like in the Bill and Ted
clip, he has to take a breath halfway down.

On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 00:12:47 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 14:04:27 +0700, John B.
wrote:

The HARP project's 16-inch HARP gun currently holds the world record
for the highest altitude (180 km) a gun-fired projectile had achieved.
1966 I believe.

That's 112 miles up, which is well into space. However, it was fired
pointing almost straight up, which is useful for altitude records, but
is not going to deliver a 1,000 mile range artillery shell. Almost
straight up means the gun has to be fired slighly toward the east, so
that earth's rotation (west to east) will allow the shell to land near
to where the gun was located. I couldn't find a number for the time
of flight.

The HARP project was a "High Altitude Research Project" :-)
But, from what I can find out the projectile that went 180 km Up was
somewhere in the 800 - 1200 lb range at a velocity between 6500 - 7000
ft/sec.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projec...ch_gun_systems

So launch a, say 900 lb, projectile at, again say 6.500 ft/sec at 45
degrees and see how far it will go :-)

The ""Baby Babylon", the canon built as a prototype for test purposes
for Iraq was test fired horizontally and then set up at a 45 degree
angle and expected to have a range of some 750 km. . It had a bore of
350 mm (13.8 inches), and a barrel length of 46 metres (151 feet),.
--
Cheers,

John B.