Logan Harris he didn’t understand that you were joking about believing in a flat earth lmao, that’s why I don’t put sarcastic stuff in messages/text in general, some people might think you’re for real.
It is even more amazing how this works when you consider the following: Not only has this been built mostly by hand, it also has been completely designed by hand. Somone thought of this and drew the blueprints and schematics by hand and did all the necessary claculations by hand. This is a true marvel of technology for the time it was built.
There’s a shit ton of problems, for example the loading process, it would take stupid amount of time to load a 200kg charge each weighing 51kg also moving the elevator by hand, it would be more devastating to load 10 150mm shells and shoot every minute towards enemy rather then give them a good 20-30 minutes break between the shell impact to run towards shelters and metros
@@abylaisartay8733 These are coastal defence guns. They were built and installed to shoot at early battleships. In fact, the specific Italian battleships this gun at Malta was meant to defend against used the exact same model of gun. It had about 6km range, and the shell had to be massive to defeat battleship armor.
@@Canofjuice72 nah leave it to armchair youtube commenters to criticize the gun design and make assumptions on its combat effectiveness some 150 ish years later🤡
@@georgeford6056 In practice a complex and annoying mechanism is not good for combat, if an elevator stops working it leaves the entire area defenseless.
You obviously missed the extensive section showing steam boiler, and steam-driven pumps. The pumping brigade are operating the emergency pumps to charge the main accumulator. They would only do this if the boiler was cold when the enemy appeared over the horizon, of if the boiler or main pump failed. If the boiler was able to supply steam, the troops were not needed. Rob
@@vbbsmyt I was also confused as to why there were two systems. Maybe you could annotate the video so people can understand better. 4:10 What are the big toilet rolls for? to clean the barrel?
This gun was first used on two Italian small battleships, not any British mounts until later. It had an interesting effect on armor design. The Italians in 1876 held a winner-takes-all armor shooting contest where they invited anybody who could make 22" armor (the belt thickness on these battleships!), which would be mounted as on one of the battleships on a realistic mockup, held on by actual armor bolts and such. The armor was shot at near the edges by the regular large naval guns of the time, circa 10", using Palliser or Grüson Chilled Cast Iron shot and then, in the center, by this huge gun. A few manufacturers brought chilled cast iron armor plates (similar to, but flat, those used in some domed land turret) but the rest brought wrought iron plates (major improvements over what could be made just a few years earlier!). Except one: The huge French firm of Schneider et Cie. brought a 22" solid mild (under 0.5% carbon content) steel plate for their entrant. This was the first time anybody had made steel armor for a warship, though experiments with steel projectiles were then in their infancy. When all of the plates were tested, none were penetrated more than deep pits by the smaller guns, though some, especially the cast iron ones, showed excess brittleness and were obviously going to fail the trials. The steel plate also had pieces around its edge crack off due to splitting starting at the bolt holes in its back. It actually fell off the mounting. It was remounted after some difficulty using some extra bolt holes that had been drilled (the French obviously knew about the brittleness). The British laughed at the French about their inferior armor. Then came the main show, the 100-Ton gun and its ~one-ton Palliser Chilled Cast Iron Shot projectile aimed at the center of each plate. They fired at the French armor last, since it had been being remounted during the other tests. Every plate hit prior to the French test had a huge hole punched entirely through as the shell broke up and acted like a shotgun behind the plate, destroying most of the support ship mock-up. The protection would obviously not protect the ship from that gun. This made the British even more jubilant, of course. Now the French steel plate suffered the attentions of the 100-ton gun. KEBOOM! The shell hit the plate and the plate literally disintegrated in small to medium size chunks flying in all direction and, of course, the projectile broke up as expected. When the smoke around the plate mount mock-up cleared, however, the British stopped laughing: Like the Mighty Casey in that Baseball poem, the British gun had "struck out"! There was no damage of consequence to the mockup, even though just a few bits of armor dangled from some bolts that were still attacked to the mockup!!! In completely absorbing the impact, even as it was destroyed in the process, the steel plate had COMPLETELY DEFEATED the British gun. The French won the contract. The British had to do something immediately or their reputation as an armor manufacturing country was "kaput". Since they could not make such thick plates from steel, they came up with COMPOUND ARMOR, which had a high-carbon (~1%) steel plate of about 1/3-1/2 of the plate's total thickness, bonded to a thick wrought iron backing plate (using solder or, better, using the iron plate as the back of the mold that they cast the steel plate in so it was permanently glued to the face of that iron back-plate). The plate, after being sizes and shaped to the desired thickness and width and height, was put into an oven and heated well above the hardening temperature and then quenched cold using a water spray. This made the steel face very hard and extremely brittle most of the way through, but the wrought iron did not change and remained able to stretch and twist under the impact of a projectile on the plate face that broke and pushed the face inward. Since the face was so hard, much harder than the French all-steel plate (which would have broken to pieces when hit by the smaller guns if it had been so hardened), it too could shatter the chilled cast iron shot or, later, shells and, though the face layer was largely destroyed near the hit, the total plate was about as resistant as the softer, tougher French mild steel plate. By 1890, though, steel projectiles had begun to be introduced and they could penetrate Compound Armor somewhat more easily. In 1890, Schneider et Cie. did it again by adding nickel to its steel and this greatly toughened its armor and made Compound Armor totally obsolete in one go. All-steel armors, of rapidly improving types, such as the introduction of chromium-nickel plate in 1894 by Krupp, made even plain nickel-steel eventually into a backing-plate-only status by about 1900.
I spent a summer working at the fort as a re-enactor and guide. It was a great pleasure learning to appreciate just how special this gun is. Your video truly completes my understanding of this mechanism. Thank you!
Daniel, please see reply to Chris wooden-eye above. My view is that the Forts would start to track the target, using Watkins Depression Range and Position finders (DRF and DPF). These would be sited away from the fort so would have a reasonable base line for triangulation. Then plot the bearings every (say) 3 mins. Where the bearings cross is the position. After a few such cuts, the target's course, speed and current range can be estimated from a plot. Assuming the target does not change heading or speed, then predict ahead where it will be in (say) 3 mins time, and pass that range and bearing to the gun. Gun elevation and time of flight taken from range tables. Now plot back along the track to get the bearing of target when the gun must be fired. Set your master telescope on that bearing and order fire when target is in the crosswires. Simple. (but I still doubt if a target at 10,000 yards could be hit). Rob
"...Andrey Chokov knew from the very first moment that this would not be a whopper cannon at all. Even if we assume that the barrel would fire grapeshot, a massive amount of propellant would be needed to push the two-ton shot, making it impossible for the cannon to be transported from one position to another. Therefore Chokhov did not mean to cast it as a functional cannon at all. His cannon is always only a symbol of Russian power and of the capabilities of the Russian industry. If we render a Russian master able to create such a whopper cannon, the smaller ones would have much less use. Therefore, the Tsar Cannon was put on display in the Kremlin for foreign diplomats." -Albert Valentinov Also, there are currently two Armstrong 100 Ton guns in existence. One in Malta, and one in Gibraltar. They also work, albeit with a small signalling charge.
@@bluemarshall6180 The entire concept of this gun was to shoot far beyond the range of any ship mounted cannon of that time, and even beyond the horizon. If your enemy needs another 3-4 hours to come within shooting distance one round in 6-12 minutes is more than adequate enough, especially considering the caliber of the gun.
@@nickrollstuhlfahrerson8659 Except that the Italian Navy had Armstrong build two battleships with these guns... so yes the coastal defence guns were an answer to those. So the Italian battleship could have bombarded the fort at about an equal distance.
Thank you for making this. After Forgotten Weapon's video, even after his excellent explanation, I had trouble understanding how this gun was operated with the technology they had then.
Very well presented, I’ve visited the fort and it has a winding path to its entrance and once you go round the last curve and see the fort straight ahead, it has a wall of slits for rifle fire if an enemy assault attack the entrance. The fort was purpose built and it was a feat of engineering getting the gun from Newcastle to its mount. Also they did re-enactments at the weekend and they would have their Red coats and helmets on. It took 3 of us to hoist the ton shell off the floor as it was so heavy. It could return fire every 6 minutes, opposed to the same guns on the Italian ship taking 15 minutes because of the confinement of space on deck!
Growing up in the 70s all I saw on TV was WWII footage. So crazy to see something still from the age of steel and gun cotton, but manually powered, muzzle-loading, with chains and pulleys driving it!
Supposedly the British installed this gun in the fort in response to those guns as otherwise the Italian battleships would outrange the coastal fortifications and could bombard Malta and Gibraltar at will barring RN involvement
@@nath9091 I don't think this might be the main reason. At that time british-italian relations were excellent and the British response to the Duilio Class was the HMS Inflexible.
Wow! Congratulations for the very nice and precise animation, by chance can you do the same to understand how it worked on the Italian battleships? The largest muzzleloading black powder cannons ever built were the Armstrong 100-ton guns which saw service with the Italian Navy and with British coastal fortifications on Malta and Gibraltar. They were purchased by the Italians first, to outfit a pair of new super battleships, each vessel having two turrets with two of these guns in each. To avoid being outclassed, the British ordered two guns for installation to protect the Grand Harbor of Malta and two more to protect Gibraltar. Today one survives at each location, and we are visiting the Rinella Battery in Malta, which was built to house one of the Maltese guns.
Your videos are amazing! I've always found mechanisms from this era intriguing, being most of them are completely alien to someone who is used to 'modern' solutions... ...and the fact that they're probably the closest we'll ever get to real life steampunk.
@@robbieaulia6462computers need to be held together with bolts and rivets, and have polished brass buttons and knobs, we will let you make the casing in sand cast aluminum to keep the weight down of course, and it could come with its own spirit fuelled steam powered generator to keep it charged. Imagine a meeting with everybody charging their laptops, the smell of spirit, steam, and gear oil would be wonderful😊😊.
Brilliant animation job. Seemed a little confusing at first, but everything was very clearly explained with a minimum of text. Very well done! Side note: I did a field school on Bermuda years ago and spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to smuggle a 10" RML home in my luggage. They've got them lying around everywhere, they'll never miss one I thought, but I couldn't afford the overweight luggage fee at the airport . . . "Sir your luggage is a bit overweight I'm afraid." "Really, how much?" "Eighteen tons sir."
Surprisingly sophisticated and modern for a muzzle loading cannon. I am guessing that their Watkins Depression Range Finder compensated for the Coreolis effect.
Excellent animation. Well done. Regarding the laying on to target & firing: It is most likely that "CASE III" fire control would be used. The Gun Layer would connect up the electric tube to the wires and place the tube into the vent. The Gun Layer and Gun Commander then maintain the gun on to the target traversing & elevating as given by the range indicator dials which were set by the crew members at the Position Finding cell who would predict the position of the target. The wires would run all the way back to the PF Cell where the firing battery box was placed. So once the Gun Commander had acknowledged that the gun was laid according to the information given, the telescope operator in the PF Cell would then wait for the target to be in position (allowing for time of flight, drift & winds) and then he would fire the gun from the PF cell.
D&T. The gun originally had reflector sights and was aimed by the gun commander (Jocelyn Case I), but this is impractical for long range fire at a moving target. I agree that the solution has to be 'predicted firing' (Jocelyn Case III), however not quite as you describe. It is believed that there were 2 Watkin Depression Range Finder positions at Rinella, but their locations are unknown. My belief is that one would have been a Position Finder with some sort of plot arrangement, but again there is no evidence. There was no electricity at Rinella - the ammunition passages were all lit by candles, so electrical transmission of range and bearing seems unlikely. There is no record or evidence that range and bearing dials were installed. I suspect that the Depression Range / Position Finder would be within shouting distance of the gun pit. Also the drill book makes it clear that the No. 4 fits the fuse and fires it locally, (in the case of an electric fuse, using a boat battery as shown in the animation) on the command from the gun commander in the gun pit. Your description would be correct for a multi-gun battery of breech loading guns, but I doubt that these modern innovations were worth applying to the almost obsolete huge muzzle loading Armstrong guns at Forts Rinella and Cambridge. Nevertheless, thanks for your interest in the fire control of this gun and for your informative comment, much appreciated. Rob
@@vbbsmyt Hi Rob, Just for information: The range indication from 1889 was through the use of manually controlled range indicator boards which were in use at all coastal batteries (the IWM has a photograph showing them in use with smaller RMLs at the Southsea Castle wing batteries). Details of these are given in the "Lists of Changes". However, they look a bit like clock faces made out of wood, about three feet across, and mounted on an easel. They were manually controlled by one of the PF cell detachment. These range indicator boards were also used on warships, I have seen another photograph showing them still in use on a WW1 battleship. So long as electrical tubes were in use, Case III could be used on any gun, whether breech or muzzle loading. After all the 17.72" Gun Manual states that 250 yards of copper cable were issued, together with the batteries. Even if Case I firing was used, the range indicator boards would still be used to transmit the range from the PF cell to the gun detachment. As you state Case III fire control would be more accurate than Case I. I am pretty sure that the DRF positions at Fort Rinella were positioned in the rear-right and rear-left hand corners of the fort. I am sure that Mario will be able to confirm their positions although the pedestals may now be missing. Cheers, Duncan
Duncan, I agree range indicator boards could have been used, but that would have meant the Gun Captain having to look up elevation from range tables, since the gun only has an indicator of elevation. We must press Mario to see if he has any further information. I hope to be out in Malta inMarch and will ask to see his Watkin DRF. Regards Rob
vbbsmyt I always enjoy your animations they provide a great visual on how the weapons work which is especially helpful on a system as large and multifaceted as this. Besides it beats me posting a comment that only says first.
The designer of the gun, Sir William Armstrong also designed the hydraulic mechanism that operates London’s Tower Bridge. His house, Craggsude in Northumberland was the first in the world to be powered by hydroelectricity.
Briliant , thanks for this . I have seen another video about thei gun but this explains how it worked so well . that mechanism of the hydraulics is very similar to how tower bridge works . Great engineering
You mentioned about Tower Bridge . I wonder if somehow the two are related in some way . Tower Bridge was built two years later so maybe they ttok the idea from these guns and used it for the bridge . The other video you have seen might have been on ''forgotten weapons''. This was built when Britain used to do some great engineering , now all this kind of stuff is done in Korea and china
One of the educational programs does a tour of this gun. Some of that tour is animated. The tour really shows the small passageways and safety systems built into this. This video presents a very excellent overview of the system. This video with the tour would be very impressive.
Theres some excellent military stuff around malta, i lived there half of the year as i was growing up, spent all day climbing around the emplacements etc around entrance to grand harbour near kalkara, our house overlooked the admiralty too! Days ill never forget and the people were amazing.
Daniel, The driving band is fitted to the shell base, and initially is loose fitting, so that that shell does not have to conform to the rifiling during loading. The driving band can rotate during loading, while the shell does not. When the charge explodes, the driving band is forced against the base of the shell, which has 80-odd ridges in its base, and fuses with the shell casing, so that the driving band and shell rotate during exit. Rob
Amazing engineering, cannon could fire every 6 minutes with a maximum range of 3.7 miles and pierce up to 21 inches of armor on a ship and was equipped with an optical system for accuracy. Projectiles came in shrapnel, explosive or armor piercing and all variations weighted 2,000 pounds. Each cannon required 35 men to operate, 18 just for the ammunition. Only 20 years later, the cannons was outdated by smaller caliber cannons with longer range and a rate of fire of under 1 min.
There's a lot of moving parts here. Maintenance and training was a must. The gun crews had to know what they were doing at all times or lose a limb. Very interesting to watch.
Kpadmirer: You are correct- The Italian ironclads Enrico Dandalo and Caio Duilio each carried 4 100-ton Armstrong guns in 2 twin turrets. These ships were comissioned about 1877. Britain's decision to install 2 100-ton guns at Gibraltar and Malta was to counter the threat from Dandalo and Duilio, which out-ranged every ship in the Royal Navy. However, Dandalo and Duilio took 15-20 minutes to reload a turret, while shore based guns coulld be fired every 6 minutes. Rob
vbbsmyt More interesting is the fact that British Empire gone mad when they saw cannons so powerful on Italian ships, but before Mussolini and WWII, Italy had no interests in Malta as the rival of Italy in the Mediterranean Sea was France that occupied Tunisia in 1881 preventing Italy occupying it first and acquiring the control of naval traffic in Mediterranean straits... 🤔
Animation shows every step separately so everyone can focus and understand the procedure, but remember many of these things were done in parallel, so reloading time, although long isn't THAT long.
Very good animation. It’s simple but easy to see and understand everything. Reminds me of animations in higher quality discovery and science channel documentaries in which they didn’t try to apply flashy graphics but maximally good illustration.
Alright boys we missed. Do it again.
How can you miss with this thing
Whatever is in a 100yd radius is dead
@@chrislister4326 damn son. Whoosh.
@@tunnelsnake627 I mean, it’s like you and kill whatever you shot at theres is no missing with a shell that size
@@chrislister4326 what about a fly
@@chrislister4326 You would not want to be standing next to it when it fired thats for sure . Goodbye eardrums
It's comforting to know that if Earth suddenly stops rotating at any point, we've got the means to start it up again.
It surely would be quite a violent blow that would stop a planet
Your micro aggressions in ascertaining the world is round have offended my flat earth Ideology.
Loli4lyf if you knew what “ascertaining” meant, you would know it’s a joke
Loli4lyf I’m confused
Logan Harris he didn’t understand that you were joking about believing in a flat earth lmao, that’s why I don’t put sarcastic stuff in messages/text in general, some people might think you’re for real.
It is even more amazing how this works when you consider the following: Not only has this been built mostly by hand, it also has been completely designed by hand. Somone thought of this and drew the blueprints and schematics by hand and did all the necessary claculations by hand. This is a true marvel of technology for the time it was built.
There’s a shit ton of problems, for example the loading process, it would take stupid amount of time to load a 200kg charge each weighing 51kg also moving the elevator by hand, it would be more devastating to load 10 150mm shells and shoot every minute towards enemy rather then give them a good 20-30 minutes break between the shell impact to run towards shelters and metros
@@abylaisartay8733 These are coastal defence guns. They were built and installed to shoot at early battleships. In fact, the specific Italian battleships this gun at Malta was meant to defend against used the exact same model of gun. It had about 6km range, and the shell had to be massive to defeat battleship armor.
@@Canofjuice72 Weren’t these used in France by nazi germany to shoot towards London?
@@Canofjuice72 nah leave it to armchair youtube commenters to criticize the gun design and make assumptions on its combat effectiveness some 150 ish years later🤡
@@abylaisartay8733 Uh huh, and all ten 150mm projectiles will shatter against the armor of the BATTLESHIPS this thing was built to shoot at.
Idiot.
This thing is the final evolution of a muzzle loader
Is too useless is better 100 cannon of 1 ton
@@arianaxdr7399 When you out-ranged the battleships of the day by 50%, nobody would dare to try to attack. These heavy guns served their purpose well.
@@arianaxdr7399 I don’t think you know how armour or distances work.
@@paulbrozyna3006 i mean what you expect for battleship of 1800s something like 4 inches of armor a 250mm projectile is enough
@@georgeford6056 In practice a complex and annoying mechanism is not good for combat, if an elevator stops working it leaves the entire area defenseless.
They missed the opportunity to call the munitions elevator the "Shellevator"
Yes
Or hellevator
@@Eradicator-jv9xr one way trip
Thats a good one
grow up kid
Imagine firing this one then completely missed
Likely more comon then you think
Not just a miss though like a miss of a battleship by a hair completely stunning the crew in fear
That's why we use missiles and torps now a days more.
The shockwave from impact would likely damage any nearby ships, due to the sheer power of the cannon
Many rounds missed, it was a "hit or miss" affair.
God imagine being one of the poor bastards who spend the whole engagement working the pumps to keep hydraulic pressure up
You obviously missed the extensive section showing steam boiler, and steam-driven pumps. The pumping brigade are operating the emergency pumps to charge the main accumulator. They would only do this if the boiler was cold when the enemy appeared over the horizon, of if the boiler or main pump failed. If the boiler was able to supply steam, the troops were not needed. Rob
vbbsmyt Ok that makes more sense, I didn’t notice the first pump, only the second one for the washing out lines.
@@vbbsmyt I was also confused as to why there were two systems. Maybe you could annotate the video so people can understand better. 4:10 What are the big toilet rolls for? to clean the barrel?
@@myleswillis those are powder charges, think of it like gunpowder
@@panzerfaust_1821 Oh...I get it now. I thought all the gunpowder was in the bullet. Thanks very much man.
This gun was first used on two Italian small battleships, not any British mounts until later. It had an interesting effect on armor design. The Italians in 1876 held a winner-takes-all armor shooting contest where they invited anybody who could make 22" armor (the belt thickness on these battleships!), which would be mounted as on one of the battleships on a realistic mockup, held on by actual armor bolts and such. The armor was shot at near the edges by the regular large naval guns of the time, circa 10", using Palliser or Grüson Chilled Cast Iron shot and then, in the center, by this huge gun. A few manufacturers brought chilled cast iron armor plates (similar to, but flat, those used in some domed land turret) but the rest brought wrought iron plates (major improvements over what could be made just a few years earlier!). Except one: The huge French firm of Schneider et Cie. brought a 22" solid mild (under 0.5% carbon content) steel plate for their entrant. This was the first time anybody had made steel armor for a warship, though experiments with steel projectiles were then in their infancy.
When all of the plates were tested, none were penetrated more than deep pits by the smaller guns, though some, especially the cast iron ones, showed excess brittleness and were obviously going to fail the trials. The steel plate also had pieces around its edge crack off due to splitting starting at the bolt holes in its back. It actually fell off the mounting. It was remounted after some difficulty using some extra bolt holes that had been drilled (the French obviously knew about the brittleness). The British laughed at the French about their inferior armor.
Then came the main show, the 100-Ton gun and its ~one-ton Palliser Chilled Cast Iron Shot projectile aimed at the center of each plate. They fired at the French armor last, since it had been being remounted during the other tests. Every plate hit prior to the French test had a huge hole punched entirely through as the shell broke up and acted like a shotgun behind the plate, destroying most of the support ship mock-up. The protection would obviously not protect the ship from that gun. This made the British even more jubilant, of course.
Now the French steel plate suffered the attentions of the 100-ton gun. KEBOOM! The shell hit the plate and the plate literally disintegrated in small to medium size chunks flying in all direction and, of course, the projectile broke up as expected. When the smoke around the plate mount mock-up cleared, however, the British stopped laughing: Like the Mighty Casey in that Baseball poem, the British gun had "struck out"! There was no damage of consequence to the mockup, even though just a few bits of armor dangled from some bolts that were still attacked to the mockup!!! In completely absorbing the impact, even as it was destroyed in the process, the steel plate had COMPLETELY DEFEATED the British gun. The French won the contract.
The British had to do something immediately or their reputation as an armor manufacturing country was "kaput". Since they could not make such thick plates from steel, they came up with COMPOUND ARMOR, which had a high-carbon (~1%) steel plate of about 1/3-1/2 of the plate's total thickness, bonded to a thick wrought iron backing plate (using solder or, better, using the iron plate as the back of the mold that they cast the steel plate in so it was permanently glued to the face of that iron back-plate). The plate, after being sizes and shaped to the desired thickness and width and height, was put into an oven and heated well above the hardening temperature and then quenched cold using a water spray. This made the steel face very hard and extremely brittle most of the way through, but the wrought iron did not change and remained able to stretch and twist under the impact of a projectile on the plate face that broke and pushed the face inward. Since the face was so hard, much harder than the French all-steel plate (which would have broken to pieces when hit by the smaller guns if it had been so hardened), it too could shatter the chilled cast iron shot or, later, shells and, though the face layer was largely destroyed near the hit, the total plate was about as resistant as the softer, tougher French mild steel plate. By 1890, though, steel projectiles had begun to be introduced and they could penetrate Compound Armor somewhat more easily. In 1890, Schneider et Cie. did it again by adding nickel to its steel and this greatly toughened its armor and made Compound Armor totally obsolete in one go. All-steel armors, of rapidly improving types, such as the introduction of chromium-nickel plate in 1894 by Krupp, made even plain nickel-steel eventually into a backing-plate-only status by about 1900.
cool
Thanks. Amazing explanation.
Thanks for the write-up! Compound armour is back in style now ofc 😁
🤓
@@southmissourisirens4381 mate you clicked on this video
I spent a summer working at the fort as a re-enactor and guide. It was a great pleasure learning to appreciate just how special this gun is. Your video truly completes my understanding of this mechanism. Thank you!
Ya this guns awesome
Cringe
My favourite part of the video is mechanical Labour
@@gabrielabela4083hows this cringe???
@@boringbuilder was probably responding to a reply that has since been deleted
19th century nuclear deterrant, also great animation.
Deterrant, yes. Ability to hit anything - very doubtful
Yeah, made me think of ICBM silos.
@@vbbsmyt well the best gun is one you never have to fire.
@@vbbsmyt how did they aim this thing anyways?
Daniel, please see reply to Chris wooden-eye above. My view is that the Forts would start to track the target, using Watkins Depression Range and Position finders (DRF and DPF). These would be sited away from the fort so would have a reasonable base line for triangulation. Then plot the bearings every (say) 3 mins. Where the bearings cross is the position. After a few such cuts, the target's course, speed and current range can be estimated from a plot. Assuming the target does not change heading or speed, then predict ahead where it will be in (say) 3 mins time, and pass that range and bearing to the gun. Gun elevation and time of flight taken from range tables. Now plot back along the track to get the bearing of target when the gun must be fired. Set your master telescope on that bearing and order fire when target is in the crosswires. Simple. (but I still doubt if a target at 10,000 yards could be hit). Rob
When you really have to kill that spider...
Or she run away
Or it jumps on ya
after you smash that spider into million pieces, each of tiny bit turns into a tiny spider
The largest gun in the world up until WW1. Also, the largest gun that is still around today.
nope. Tsar cannon
@@gunnarthefeisty The Tsar gun was a decorative piece, never actually fired a single shot.
@Salivar Ravilas The Gustav was destroyed by the Germans to prevent its capture by the Russians.
@@TheArtilleryman but it works. And exists
"...Andrey Chokov knew from the very first moment that this would not be a whopper cannon at all. Even if we assume that the barrel would fire grapeshot, a massive amount of propellant would be needed to push the two-ton shot, making it impossible for the cannon to be transported from one position to another. Therefore Chokhov did not mean to cast it as a functional cannon at all. His cannon is always only a symbol of Russian power and of the capabilities of the Russian industry. If we render a Russian master able to create such a whopper cannon, the smaller ones would have much less use. Therefore, the Tsar Cannon was put on display in the Kremlin for foreign diplomats."
-Albert Valentinov
Also, there are currently two Armstrong 100 Ton guns in existence. One in Malta, and one in Gibraltar. They also work, albeit with a small signalling charge.
"Should we fire another round, general sir?" "Naw. Nevermind. Wars over. The Slow Shuffling Zombies overran us."
It takes 12mins to load and reload. While the fort is being bombard with a lot of shells. Kaboom!
@@bluemarshall6180 They were at least two times faster and safer than other cannons this size. The forts were part of a broader defense system.
@@bluemarshall6180 Firing rate one round EVERY 6 MINUTES. For size and complexity (and period) impressive.
@@bluemarshall6180 The entire concept of this gun was to shoot far beyond the range of any ship mounted cannon of that time, and even beyond the horizon. If your enemy needs another 3-4 hours to come within shooting distance one round in 6-12 minutes is more than adequate enough, especially considering the caliber of the gun.
@@nickrollstuhlfahrerson8659 Except that the Italian Navy had Armstrong build two battleships with these guns... so yes the coastal defence guns were an answer to those.
So the Italian battleship could have bombarded the fort at about an equal distance.
Fantastic! Having been to the one at Gibraltar, it all comes together! Thank you so much for your effort and skill in putting this together!
Eey noice seeing ya here Rob! Think the twins could handle this ere muzzleloader?
"making the mother of all guns here Jack. Can't fret over every bullet"
I'M MAKING THE MOTHER OF ALL OMELETTES HERE, JACK.
YOU CAN'T FRET OVER EVERY EGG.
Amazing the amount of engineering that went into the operation of this gun and for the time period it served.
I thought this gun was a completely made up gun until I read this comment! :O
@@elephant35e 😀😀😀😀
@@elephant35e 😀😀😀😀
Imagine building it
@@elephant35e and guess what it’s not the biggest
Thank you for making this. After Forgotten Weapon's video, even after his excellent explanation, I had trouble understanding how this gun was operated with the technology they had then.
The art of building giant and powerful guns of formidable deterrence has been passed down the Armstrong family line for generations!
we are still building giant and powerfull weaponst in minecraft, some cannons are bigger than this and take several factories to reload once
Excellent and elegant!
Senator Armstrong??
@@Doge-zu5sw Probably Alex Louis Armstrong
@@Doge-zu5sw "Making the mother of all cannons here, Jack. Can't fret over every shell!"
With the shear detail in your videos, imagine 3D printing the components at scale and having working models!
Gah, it would be awesome!
To scale would take forever but if they shrunk it down so it’s about 4 square metres, that would be cool
The amount of primer and sanding for that, my fingers are hurting just thinking about it
@@samuellambe1568 To scale -> any size as long as the angles and relative sizes match up
"Making the mother of all cannons here jack! Can't fret over every shell!"
Love the little details, like the washer system and electric ignition.
"That's no gun, that's a " Weapons system! " 🤓
LOL
I know this post is a bit old. But glad it's still here. Always wanted to see the process for this gun. Thanks, it was pretty interesting.
Making the mother of all guns here jack, cant fret over every shell!
That video is a piece of art. Greetings from the Netherlands 🇳🇱.
Very well presented, I’ve visited the fort and it has a winding path to its entrance and once you go round the last curve and see the fort straight ahead, it has a wall of slits for rifle fire if an enemy assault attack the entrance.
The fort was purpose built and it was a feat of engineering getting the gun from Newcastle to its mount.
Also they did re-enactments at the weekend and they would have their Red coats and helmets on.
It took 3 of us to hoist the ton shell off the floor as it was so heavy.
It could return fire every 6 minutes, opposed to the same guns on the Italian ship taking 15 minutes because of the confinement of space on deck!
Growing up in the 70s all I saw on TV was WWII footage. So crazy to see something still from the age of steel and gun cotton, but manually powered, muzzle-loading, with chains and pulleys driving it!
Four Armstrong 100 t guns were also placed on the Italian "Duilio class" battleships and the onboard loading system was essentially the same.
Supposedly the British installed this gun in the fort in response to those guns as otherwise the Italian battleships would outrange the coastal fortifications and could bombard Malta and Gibraltar at will barring RN involvement
@@nath9091 I don't think this might be the main reason. At that time british-italian relations were excellent and the British response to the Duilio Class was the HMS Inflexible.
@@picardbs allies today are tommorows enemy
@@demonprinces17 ...and the other way round
So its a 100t gun, but whats the caliber?
Making the mother of all cannons here jack. Can't fret over every missed shot.
Incredible. I always look at these things and think it's just a big cannon mounted to a fort wall, but there is much more going on!
thanks ! it is very cool to see how pneumatics were used back in the day; I had no idea...
Wow! Congratulations for the very nice and precise animation, by chance can you do the same to understand how it worked on the Italian battleships? The largest muzzleloading black powder cannons ever built were the Armstrong 100-ton guns which saw service with the Italian Navy and with British coastal fortifications on Malta and Gibraltar. They were purchased by the Italians first, to outfit a pair of new super battleships, each vessel having two turrets with two of these guns in each. To avoid being outclassed, the British ordered two guns for installation to protect the Grand Harbor of Malta and two more to protect Gibraltar. Today one survives at each location, and we are visiting the Rinella Battery in Malta, which was built to house one of the Maltese guns.
Riccardo, thanks for an excellent summary.
They were also the first to be fired electrically.
Excellent. Most instructional details. Been to the fort on several occasions. Fascinating.
I didn't know they had a special tilted cradle for the shell and charge, I though it was just a straight one. Nice job. Well done.
Your videos are amazing!
I've always found mechanisms from this era intriguing, being most of them are completely alien to someone who is used to 'modern' solutions...
...and the fact that they're probably the closest we'll ever get to real life steampunk.
Computers really killed the steampunk dream didn't they.
@@robbieaulia6462computers need to be held together with bolts and rivets, and have polished brass buttons and knobs, we will let you make the casing in sand cast aluminum to keep the weight down of course, and it could come with its own spirit fuelled steam powered generator to keep it charged. Imagine a meeting with everybody charging their laptops, the smell of spirit, steam, and gear oil would be wonderful😊😊.
I love how this Black Powder Muzzleloader is in the realm of an Art Form!
Brilliant animation job. Seemed a little confusing at first, but everything was very clearly explained with a minimum of text. Very well done! Side note: I did a field school on Bermuda years ago and spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to smuggle a 10" RML home in my luggage. They've got them lying around everywhere, they'll never miss one I thought, but I couldn't afford the overweight luggage fee at the airport . . . "Sir your luggage is a bit overweight I'm afraid." "Really, how much?" "Eighteen tons sir."
Joseph: Where were you going to put them? Rob
MAKING THE MOTHER OF ALL GUNS HERE, JACK, CAN'T FRET OVER EVERY CALIBER
Awesome animation. Congrats from Argentina🇦🇷
Surprisingly sophisticated and modern for a muzzle loading cannon. I am guessing that their Watkins Depression Range Finder compensated for the Coreolis effect.
Greetings from Malta ! That gun is so expensive that every year only once they fire a round in an event !!!
Excellent animation on all of your featured weapons!!
I appreciate all the research that must go into these animations. Thank You
The drumbeat makes it suspenseful
Making the mother of all cannons Jack,can’t fret over every gunpowder.
Sorry I had to
In Gibraltar we also have a 100 ton gun like Malta. It is called Napier Battery.
shells son,they explode in response to direct contact
you can't survive this jack
Excellent animation. Well done.
Regarding the laying on to target & firing:
It is most likely that "CASE III" fire control would be used. The Gun Layer would connect up the electric tube to the wires and place the tube into the vent. The Gun Layer and Gun Commander then maintain the gun on to the target traversing & elevating as given by the range indicator dials which were set by the crew members at the Position Finding cell who would predict the position of the target. The wires would run all the way back to the PF Cell where the firing battery box was placed. So once the Gun Commander had acknowledged that the gun was laid according to the information given, the telescope operator in the PF Cell would then wait for the target to be in position (allowing for time of flight, drift & winds) and then he would fire the gun from the PF cell.
D&T. The gun originally had reflector sights and was aimed by the gun commander (Jocelyn Case I), but this is impractical for long range fire at a moving target. I agree that the solution has to be 'predicted firing' (Jocelyn Case III), however not quite as you describe. It is believed that there were 2 Watkin Depression Range Finder positions at Rinella, but their locations are unknown. My belief is that one would have been a Position Finder with some sort of plot arrangement, but again there is no evidence. There was no electricity at Rinella - the ammunition passages were all lit by candles, so electrical transmission of range and bearing seems unlikely. There is no record or evidence that range and bearing dials were installed. I suspect that the Depression Range / Position Finder would be within shouting distance of the gun pit. Also the drill book makes it clear that the No. 4 fits the fuse and fires it locally, (in the case of an electric fuse, using a boat battery as shown in the animation) on the command from the gun commander in the gun pit. Your description would be correct for a multi-gun battery of breech loading guns, but I doubt that these modern innovations were worth applying to the almost obsolete huge muzzle loading Armstrong guns at Forts Rinella and Cambridge. Nevertheless, thanks for your interest in the fire control of this gun and for your informative comment, much appreciated. Rob
@@vbbsmyt Hi Rob,
Just for information: The range indication from 1889 was through the use of manually controlled range indicator boards which were in use at all coastal batteries (the IWM has a photograph showing them in use with smaller RMLs at the Southsea Castle wing batteries). Details of these are given in the "Lists of Changes". However, they look a bit like clock faces made out of wood, about three feet across, and mounted on an easel. They were manually controlled by one of the PF cell detachment. These range indicator boards were also used on warships, I have seen another photograph showing them still in use on a WW1 battleship.
So long as electrical tubes were in use, Case III could be used on any gun, whether breech or muzzle loading. After all the 17.72" Gun Manual states that 250 yards of copper cable were issued, together with the batteries. Even if Case I firing was used, the range indicator boards would still be used to transmit the range from the PF cell to the gun detachment. As you state Case III fire control would be more accurate than Case I.
I am pretty sure that the DRF positions at Fort Rinella were positioned in the rear-right and rear-left hand corners of the fort. I am sure that Mario will be able to confirm their positions although the pedestals may now be missing.
Cheers,
Duncan
Duncan,
I agree range indicator boards could have been used, but that would have meant the Gun Captain having to look up elevation from range tables, since the gun only has an indicator of elevation.
We must press Mario to see if he has any further information. I hope to be out in Malta inMarch and will ask to see his Watkin DRF.
Regards
Rob
Great animation of very impressive shore battery canon
wow that was quick!
vbbsmyt I always enjoy your animations they provide a great visual on how the weapons work which is especially helpful on a system as large and multifaceted as this. Besides it beats me posting a comment that only says first.
The designer of the gun, Sir William Armstrong also designed the hydraulic mechanism that operates London’s Tower Bridge. His house, Craggsude in Northumberland was the first in the world to be powered by hydroelectricity.
Craigside. But otherwise correct.
@@vbbsmyt Cragside, my phone decided to auto correct. I was there just last week.
Шедеврально! Спасибо за ваше старания!,😀
Briliant , thanks for this . I have seen another video about thei gun but this explains how it worked so well . that mechanism of the hydraulics is very similar to how tower bridge works . Great engineering
You mentioned about Tower Bridge . I wonder if somehow the two are related in some way . Tower Bridge was built two years later so maybe they ttok the idea from these guns and used it for the bridge . The other video you have seen might have been on ''forgotten weapons''. This was built when Britain used to do some great engineering , now all this kind of stuff is done in Korea and china
amazing, I can only imagine the work you put into this
I'm not sure what's most impressive, the gun or the animation, both done excellently.
Still no match for "Neo Armstrong Cyclone Jet Armstrong Cannon"
Truly a terrible weapon
Lol, I was looking for this comment.XD
Oh it's from an anime
Its Steam Punk artillery. Really enjoying these, thank you.
Ohh the "neo armstrong cyclone jet armstrong cannon" It's Perfect
Gintama? 🤣
One of the educational programs does a tour of this gun. Some of that tour is animated. The tour really shows the small passageways and safety systems built into this.
This video presents a very excellent overview of the system. This video with the tour would be very impressive.
Nanomachines son.
Theres some excellent military stuff around malta, i lived there half of the year as i was growing up, spent all day climbing around the emplacements etc around entrance to grand harbour near kalkara, our house overlooked the admiralty too! Days ill never forget and the people were amazing.
Сложней этой артсистемы трудно что то представить!
Amazing what they have accomplished with the tech available of that time period. Imagine how much effort goes into building this beast.
Another great animation as always! How did the shell engage the rifling of the cannon without being a hollow based minie ball?
Daniel, The driving band is fitted to the shell base, and initially is loose fitting, so that that shell does not have to conform to the rifiling during loading. The driving band can rotate during loading, while the shell does not. When the charge explodes, the driving band is forced against the base of the shell, which has 80-odd ridges in its base, and fuses with the shell casing, so that the driving band and shell rotate during exit. Rob
we see the driving band being installed at 5:30.
@@vbbsmyt that's interesting, thank you
my 2 year old daughter really enjoyed this video.
Who would win
2 loading rooms requiring at least 2 men to assemble the round and 4 propellent bags
1 smol battery fire control boi
1:40 Is that 80 ton weight supposed to provide hydraulic pressure and force to all the other systems when they need to operate?
yes
Press R to reload
With this music .... unbelievable effect
"It was never used in combat, but every year it was test fired and the results mailed out to potential enemies"
They had already mail in 1884 😜😂
@Opecuted Yep, and we are forgetting slowly what paper mailing means 😜
@@rafab2774 We already had postage stamps on the mail in the UK. since about 1851.
Amazing engineering, cannon could fire every 6 minutes with a maximum range of 3.7 miles and pierce up to 21 inches of armor on a ship and was equipped with an optical system for accuracy. Projectiles came in shrapnel, explosive or armor piercing and all variations weighted 2,000 pounds. Each cannon required 35 men to operate, 18 just for the ammunition. Only 20 years later, the cannons was outdated by smaller caliber cannons with longer range and a rate of fire of under 1 min.
So, what’s that cannon’s damage per second
Amazing job of showing how how this gun was fired.
между выстрелами , можно было выспаться ...))
Ага... Вот только тем, по кому стреляли! Ибо те, кто стрелял - это вряд ли))))) Особенно "скучно" было тем, кто "на насосах"....
Самое обидное, после всех этих процедур, выстрел.....Иииииии, промазал. 😜
Обидно.... это еще очень ласково сказано!)))))
Designer: Okay I've got an idea.
Boardroom meeting: 😂😂😂
Designer: I did it.
Boardroom meeting: .........
One round every 6 minutes. Please read the notes.
Nanomachines son!
There's a lot of moving parts here. Maintenance and training was a must. The gun crews had to know what they were doing at all times or lose a limb. Very interesting to watch.
Some Italian battleships at the time carried four of these guns.
source?
Yeah this isn’t true
Kpadmirer: You are correct- The Italian ironclads Enrico Dandalo and Caio Duilio each carried 4 100-ton Armstrong guns in 2 twin turrets. These ships were comissioned about 1877. Britain's decision to install 2 100-ton guns at Gibraltar and Malta was to counter the threat from Dandalo and Duilio, which out-ranged every ship in the Royal Navy. However, Dandalo and Duilio took 15-20 minutes to reload a turret, while shore based guns coulld be fired every 6 minutes. Rob
vbbsmyt I stand corrected
vbbsmyt More interesting is the fact that British Empire gone mad when they saw cannons so powerful on Italian ships, but before Mussolini and WWII, Italy had no interests in Malta as the rival of Italy in the Mediterranean Sea was France that occupied Tunisia in 1881 preventing Italy occupying it first and acquiring the control of naval traffic in Mediterranean straits... 🤔
making the mother of all cannons here jack, can’t fret over reload time.
wait thats not senator amstong
Nanomachines son!
100 ton gun,son!
I had the opportunity several years ago to actually see the gun. Amazing tech for the time.
11:26.
This a really facinating Video to see how cannons work and especially and mega Sizes
found this in the 臨高啟明playlist HAHAHAHAHA my fellow readers
tf is that
Where did you find that playlist?
Animation shows every step separately so everyone can focus and understand the procedure, but remember many of these things were done in parallel, so reloading time, although long isn't THAT long.
I am simply in awe, thank you soooo much.
*Making the mother of all cannons here jack, can't fret over every gun!*
Seeing that beast in person is even more impressive. The entire battery is a fantastic feat of engineering.
I like that you modelled coat hooks in the anteroom.
The crew in the magazines had to 'shift' into clothing that contained no metal parts (risk of sparks) and no pockets (no smoking in the magazine).
Back in its day..this thing was a super weapon.
A very great video on the working of this large canon.
Thank you vbbsmyt. And thanks again for your CGI input. V. Good
The cannon fire sound scared the crap out of me
Its standing there... Realizing what power it beholds
Absolutely fantastic piece of work (both the battery and this video!!) Thanks very much!
Amazing animation. I understand all the functions step by step finally.
Pizza anyone?
Fascinating. Never realized all the steps and engineering needed to shoot one round
Thank you for animating in details such a big and complex machine.
Ah. The "nanomachines, son" gun.
Very good animation. It’s simple but easy to see and understand everything. Reminds me of animations in higher quality discovery and science channel documentaries in which they didn’t try to apply flashy graphics but maximally good illustration.