AOG breechloader

jmbm wrote:I assumme the trapdoor mechanism of this Mayhdrahn conversion works like Tom Selleck's Sharps in "Quigley Down Under" or Burt Lancaster's in "valdez is coming". Am I right ?.

Nope.

The Sharps used a sliding block. That is, you lower the trigger guard/cocking lever and the block which seals the breech behind the cartridge moves vertically in a set of guides. This is why a lot of folks thought I was basically using the Sharps' action when I first described the Mahndrayn, which is really a quite different and — frankly — less efficient design than the Sharps for several reasons. I deliberately made it a less than optimum but workable design. If I’d wanted to go immediately to a better action, or if I’d decided the Temple would be able to mass produce metallic cartridges and I wanted to give them a qualitative edge there, the rolling block would have arrived on the scene, as used in the Remington, because it's a very strong, very simple, and much more easily machined action than the one I actually adopted. For that matter, in my opinion, it's also much better than the Sharps' sliding block.

Be that as it may, the Westley Richards Monkey Tail (the actual historic ancestor of the Trapdoor Mahndrayn) was similar in concept to the Trapdoor Springfield, but had (in my opinion) a better system for locking up the breech block when firing. In both weapons, the breech block was hinged at the forward end, swinging up when a lever was lifted to open the breech (hence the name “Trapdoor” for the Springfield; the Westley Richards’ breech was curved and thought ny some to look like a monkey’s tai. I happen to think that "trapdoor" is actually a better, more descriptive term, so I went ahead and grafted it onto the Monkey Tail with a fine disregard for historic tradition.)

So whereas the Sharps block slid downward and the rolling bock pivoted down and back through a half circle when the breech was opened, the Trapdoor and Monkey Tail both lifted up and forward. These are all examples of the many and manifold breech closures which were experimented with through the 19th century, and IIRFC, the Westley Richards was still being manufactured well into the 20th century. (BTW, I also cribbed the basic design for the Mahndrayn’s cartridge, felt base and all, from an earlier Westley Richards design. What can I say? When you care enough to steal from the very best . . . . )

I have to applaud RFC for allowing me to learn a wealth of information about early designs of breech loading weapons at the turn of the century.

It reminds me of the early wildcatting days of PC creation. A host of companies where out there designing and producing them, leaving many buyers wondering if they were getting the next great thing or a pig in a poke. This far removed from the process it seems so simple; at the time each country and military had ample opportunities to completely screw up the development/procurement process.

Another of the many reasons to enjoy this forum. Thank you all.

Damonby wrote:I have to applaud RFC for allowing me to learn a wealth of information about early designs of breech loading weapons at the turn of the century.

It reminds me of the early wildcatting days of PC creation. A host of companies where out there designing and producing them, leaving many buyers wondering if they were getting the next great thing or a pig in a poke. This far removed from the process it seems so simple; at the time each country and military had ample opportunities to completely screw up the development/procurement process.

Another of the many reasons to enjoy this forum. Thank you all.

I commend Louis L'Amour's "Ferguson Rifle" (1973) which was my first intro to this weapon. L'Amour is an impressive predecessor to RFC as an expert historian writing to their strengths in their novels. It would be interesting if LLA had lived to this era so friendly to the concepts of alternative history.

Damonby wrote:I have to applaud RFC for allowing me to learn a wealth of information about early designs of breech loading weapons at the turn of the century.

It reminds me of the early wildcatting days of PC creation. A host of companies where out there designing and producing them, leaving many buyers wondering if they were getting the next great thing or a pig in a poke. This far removed from the process it seems so simple; at the time each country and military had ample opportunities to completely screw up the development/procurement process.

Another of the many reasons to enjoy this forum. Thank you all.

I've always used that very comparison when talking about 19th Century firearms development.

Remember when the newest and greatest CPU advancement would end up being obsolete 6 months or a year later? Pretty much the whole 19th Century was that way when you are talking about firearms. Firearms designers had to strike while the iron was hot if they were going to make anything off their designs because there was always someone, somewhere, that was a couple steps behind them in the process with something better.

When it comes to breechloading in the mid 19th Century when it was really taking off, if you can imagine a way to do it, there's been a gun (or 3) developed that worked that way. Barrels moving up, down, left and right, sliding forward, pulling back,.... Breech blocks rolling, sliding, falling, raising, flipping, pivoting and sometimes in some unique combinations of the above, too. Some designs leave you wondering why they didn't catch on while many just leave you scratching your head as you wonder exactly why they thought it was a good enough idea to actually build a gun like that in the first place.

By the time things settled down a bit in the latter 1/3 of the Century, the firearms business was just cutthroat. Smith and Wesson started the ball rolling when they rabidly defended the Rollin White patent. Winchester, after 1887, bought absolutely anything Browning designed, the filed the patents for the designs and went after anyone they thought was infringing on them. (Seriously, they bought and patented EVERYTHING Browning brought to them. Browning challenged his brothers to come up the the cheapest, shootable .22 boy's rifle they could think up as a joke nad friendly ocntest. One of the designs became the Winchester Model 1900.) Many times, Browning was asked to come up with something in particular and would show up back East with 3 or 4 guns that fit the bill but did it in completely different ways. Winchester would buy the designs, blueprint the guns, file the patents on all of them to keep the competition from developing something similar and build one of the designs.

Hi JTG452,

Yup, JMB, or John Moses Browning was a certified genius 7 ways from Sunday.

L

Keep smiling

jtg452 wrote:

Damonby wrote:I have to applaud RFC for allowing me to learn a wealth of information about early designs of breech loading weapons at the turn of the century.

It reminds me of the early wildcatting days of PC creation. A host of companies where out there designing and producing them, leaving many buyers wondering if they were getting the next great thing or a pig in a poke. This far removed from the process it seems so simple; at the time each country and military had ample opportunities to completely screw up the development/procurement process.

Another of the many reasons to enjoy this forum. Thank you all.

I've always used that very comparison when talking about 19th Century firearms development.

Remember when the newest and greatest CPU advancement would end up being obsolete 6 months or a year later? Pretty much the whole 19th Century was that way when you are talking about firearms. Firearms designers had to strike while the iron was hot if they were going to make anything off their designs because there was always someone, somewhere, that was a couple steps behind them in the process with something better.

When it comes to breechloading in the mid 19th Century when it was really taking off, if you can imagine a way to do it, there's been a gun (or 3) developed that worked that way. Barrels moving up, down, left and right, sliding forward, pulling back,.... Breech blocks rolling, sliding, falling, raising, flipping, pivoting and sometimes in some unique combinations of the above, too. Some designs leave you wondering why they didn't catch on while many just leave you scratching your head as you wonder exactly why they thought it was a good enough idea to actually build a gun like that in the first place.

By the time things settled down a bit in the latter 1/3 of the Century, the firearms business was just cutthroat. Smith and Wesson started the ball rolling when they rabidly defended the Rollin White patent. Winchester, after 1887, bought absolutely anything Browning designed, the filed the patents for the designs and went after anyone they thought was infringing on them. (Seriously, they bought and patented EVERYTHING Browning brought to them. Browning challenged his brothers to come up the the cheapest, shootable .22 boy's rifle they could think up as a joke nad friendly ocntest. One of the designs became the Winchester Model 1900.) Many times, Browning was asked to come up with something in particular and would show up back East with 3 or 4 guns that fit the bill but did it in completely different ways. Winchester would buy the designs, blueprint the guns, file the patents on all of them to keep the competition from developing something similar and build one of the designs.

lyonheart wrote:Hi JTG452,

Yup, JMB, or John Moses Browning was a certified genius 7 ways from Sunday.

L

Keep smiling

The man designed everything from single shot .22's to automatic cannon (the 37mm AA and aircraft cannon used in WW2 was his design) and worked with everything from muzzle loaders to machineguns as a gunsmith.

There was a period of decades when everything Winchester was making and every semi auto pistol Colt was making his design. He wasn't just prolific, his designs were innovative and over designed to a level where when smokeless powder came around, Winchester didn't have to redesign the guns for them to use it safely. A change in the steel used to make them was needed in some cases, but the design was already safe with that level of pressure. His semi auto pistol action is still the industry standard well over 100 years after he designed it. And he didn't just design guns, most of the time he designed the ammunition that the guns shot as well. Pull out a Cartridges of the World. Every round that is listed with the 'ACP' suffix is a Browning design along with the 'Browning' suffixed cartridges that were used in Europe. He was so successful in Europe that at one time, 'browning' was a slang term for a small semi auto pistol because his .25, .32 and .380 semi autos were that popular. He's also the only designer to present weapons to the US military for trial that never had a failure during the trials. That's impressive when you realize that we fought WW2 with a whole lot of Browning designed arms- like the 37mm auto cannon, the numerous variants of the .50 and .30 Browning MG's, the BAR, and the 1911.

His designs have stood the test of time. The gun that broke his relationship with Winchester was the semi auto shotgun. While it is known as the Browning Auto 5, the initial deal he made with FN named Remington as the Western Hemisphere distributor. It was marketed by Remington as the Model 11- the direct design ancestor (the design they are based on) of the modern Remington 1100 and 11-87's you can pick up pretty much anywhere today. Not to mention that the M2 .50 caliber Browning Machine gun is still in production today- nearly 100 years after he designed it- with no real plans to replace it in the near future.

Just a question for you gun wizzards... What if any drawbacks is the Temple going to experience using iron in their St. Klymans rather than going to steel (which they can't produce in sufficient quanity for their needs)?

Don

I understand that the temple's breach loader is a fine weapon, but the problem as I see it is that they will not have enough of them. IIRC the RDA will have maybe 12000 and the Harchong army will have about 15000. Not enough now and when the M96 hits the front they will be even further behind. Then there is the doctrine for the use of breach loaders which the temple has not developed yet. Then smokeless powder is not too far down the line along with true high explosives, and when the temple steals how to make smokeless powder (its the only way the have even a chance to stay close) then I expect them to have some real problems with the use of iron in their rifle designs. Should make for an interesting read.

Hi Iranuke,

HFQ will definitely be an interesting read.

Actually, the GHoGatA will have 90,000 St Kylmahn's not 15,000 if delivery schedules are met.

You're quite right we have no evidence that the GHoGatA has caught up tactically with the ICA, so we can expect lots of casualties from long range rifle fire when they meet in a couple month's or so, by which time the M96's should have arrived and been distributed.

I'd expect a large mortar (~120 mm size) might be a weapon quickly introduced after cordite makes it very possible for its rate of fire and HE shell fraction, very helpful for the rather lean RSA artillery.

L

iranuke wrote:I understand that the temple's breach loader is a fine weapon, but the problem as I see it is that they will not have enough of them. IIRC the RDA will have maybe 12000 and the Harchong army will have about 15000. Not enough now and when the M96 hits the front they will be even further behind. Then there is the doctrine for the use of breach loaders which the temple has not developed yet. Then smokeless powder is not too far down the line along with true high explosives, and when the temple steals how to make smokeless powder (its the only way the have even a chance to stay close) then I expect them to have some real problems with the use of iron in their rifle designs. Should make for an interesting read.

n7axw wrote:Just a question for you gun wizzards... What if any drawbacks is the Temple going to experience using iron in their St. Klymans rather than going to steel (which they can't produce in sufficient quanity for their needs)?

Don

The quality of their iron isn't the issue. According to what RFC has already said both here and in previous books, Safehold is actually far head of the curve on quality of steel they are capable of making. They are actually about even with late 19th- early 20th Century in what they produce. That puts them about 50 years ahead of Earth, metallurgically speaking, when we started messing around with breechloaders in any quantity and about 30 years ahead of us from when large bore rifles carrying self contained cartridges were developing. The Temple's problem isn't a quality issue, it's making steel of the proper quality in the mass quantity that they need.

As long as they are using black powder, they can actually get away with skimping a little on steel quality. Their problem is that they don't have OWL whispering in the right ears to keep them from screwing up long term. Charis can design their M96 rifle with the idea of eventually using self contained cartridges using black powder AND smokeless ammunition in it while the Temple is just building what they think they need to get even with what's on the battlefield at the moment. The Ferguson action they are building now is a technological dead end. It faded into history back in the late 1700's on Earth for a reason. When the self contained cartridge makes an appearance in the next book, they are right back at square 1 and are going to have to do a 'Wrong! Do Over!' sort of rethink on their rifles. Charis can build something once and use it for longer than the Temple is going to use their new rifles. Rifle cartridges as big and powerful as what we are talking about (.577/450 Martini-Henry, .577 Snider, .50-70 Government, or any of the European military cartridges in the 9.5 to 11.5 mm range from the early 1870's- they look weak comparing them to modern cartridges but they were the top performers for their time), you aren't going to want to screw up the guns shooting them even with BP as the propellent. Once smokeless comes into play, the pressures go up and the wiggle room in steel quality shrinks dramatically. RFC has mentioned that the Remington Rolling Block (a hugely popular single shot action that sold well everywhere except in the US) may come into play 'somewhere, sometime' and a Roller is about as simple a breechloading action as you can come up with. No doubt it's robust enough, it was used with some of the most powerful sporting and military cartridges of the era.

I, personally, like the Browning designed Winchester 1885 'High Wall' action better because it's as simple or simpler as the Remington along with superior lock time and it made the transition to smokeless with only changes in the metallurgy not the design but this is Mr. Weber's fantasy and things tend to go his way for some reason.