Comments by "Michael Wright" (@michaelwright2986) on "Royal Armouries"
channel.
-
40
-
26
-
13
-
12
-
7
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
Jonathan's explanation is ingenious, but wrong. These are, in fact, pairs of Transylvanian duelling pistols. In a Transylvanian ceremonial duel, the seconds loaded each pistol mechanism, and then screwed them together on the common barrel. The principals then took one end each of the assembled apparatus, and at the drop of the umpire's handkerchief both fired, as near simultaneously as possible. The results were rarely fatal, but the participants were likely to be wounded by flying pieces during the self-disassembly that inevitably occurred. These wounds resulted in scars, which were worn as a badge of honour, like the scars of German university duels with edged weapons.
1
-
1
-
1
-
When I heard "pill-lock pistol" I immediately thought of the companion self-defence weapon, the bollock knife (or ballock dagger). And yes, that is a bona fide, fair dinkum, technical term.
Any clue what was the composition of the priming compound? As there was some still in the flask, I do hope it got analysed.
And, as for the proportion of female gunmakers, my hobbyhorse is that, although the patriarchy is real, it is a mistake to assume that it was worse the further back you go. There's a fairly common thought that the status and opportunities of women declined in the Renaissance, and again in the 19th c. But I do hope Ann Patrick retained a significant role in the new merged company.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PassportToPimlico I think it started with the RAF just wanting a fighter. They were talking with North American about bombers, and asked them if they could manufacture P-40s (which were good fighters, about equivalent to the Hurricane). NAA said they could do a better fighter with the same engine. RAF Mustangs with the Allison engine were used for Army Co-Operation (because of the notorious high altitude limitations of the Allison without a turbo-supercharger); Army Co-Operation at that time was NOT a high status role. So the origins were pretty unglamorous, but various people had the idea of putting in a Merlin, with its high performance mechanical supercharger, and with the addition of fuel tanks everywhere, and six .50" calibre guns (replacing a mixture of calibres), it became the best escort fighter of the war.
The P-38, BTW, was a purely US origin design: it did have the turbo-superchargers the Allison needed for high altitude, but the installation wasn't satisfactory in Europe. Yes, they did think of putting Merlins in the P-38, but various US interests successfully resisted putting nasty foreign engines in a US design.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So, just to simplify matters, there are THREE designations "Mk. IV" applying to Webley revolvers. Webley's Mk IV in the service revolver series; the gun is adopted, and happens to be Mk IV in the quite separate Army sequence. Then there is Webley's Mk IV pocket revolver (they having two different lines, which seem never to get mentioned in the naming of parts), which gets adopted with the manufacturer's name, not a separate military designation. That military naming is, by then, completely out of line with the standard designation for Army revolvers, but it would, I guess, have been far too easy to call it Revolver No. 3. Of course, they couldn't have called it Revolver No. 2 Mk 1, because that would have been to admit that the Enfield was a knock-off.
Glad to be able to clear that up for everyone.
1