Fun fact: oak has antimicrobial properties and so splinter wounds tended not to get infected. Ships made of Asian hard woods like teak did not have this advantage and so teak was discontinued for warship construction even though no one at the time understood what or why this was happening. Also I have read that the floors of the gun decks on British war ships were painted red so the blood would be less visible and so less demoralizing. Buckets of sand were provided if the floors became too slippery. Sounds like a good time all 'round...
With the vigorous cleaning of decks and hard use that happens on age of sail English warships I doubt the deck was painted. It would wear off rather quickly being scrubbed with holystones quite often. The sanding the deck to make it less slippery in combat part is true.
warfare in the age of sails was unimaginably brutal. And we didn´t even start thinking about boarding parties.... Fun fact no. 2: oak dust is classifies as hazardous substance, as it is cancerogenic and can lead to allergies. Teak has the advantage of being naturally oily, so it doesn´t degrade in prolonged contact with sea water. It is also slightly toxic and can cause allergies. (tbh, oak does also fare pretty well in water due to its tannine content, but it tends to cause iron to rust pretty quickly for the same cause)
@@rustknuckleirongut8107 don't know really about that. I work with oak all day and if u get deep splinters they get puss and infected if i dont pull them out.
One thing I noticed and never thought of before, the need to secure the elevation blocks to the cannon. Also shows another advantage of the screw elevator because it won't require extra work to secure.
Shooting a plyboard with a small cannon for purposes of reconstruction is like shooting a piece of tin foil with a musket and then concluding that gunshot wounds weren't something you needed to worry about. So glad some people finally started taking reconstructive archaeology seriously last decade.
I love imagining a battery of nothing but these on Oscarsborg back in *1940. Krupp guns, Whitehead torpedoes, and quadricentennial 24-pounders for _sheer dominance._ 👌
@@JackHiper Hi there. Yes we do but we have a bit different pronunciation. Missile - missil (mis-sil) Canon - kanon (ka-non) Ammunition - ammunition (am-un-i-tion) Kind of sort. Eng - swe
Peter Englund har en del målande och fruktansvärda beskrivningar i en av sina böcker vad den här tekniken innebar för tätt packat manskap i slagformering på 1600-talet...
What kind of ramrod was that? I've been firing muzzle-loading cannons of all sizes, 1 pound to 64 pound guns, for over 40 years and have never seen one like that. Beautiful shot though.
@@cola98765 Good guess, but the gun isn't loaded until the round is pressed fully against the breach, the bag is broken, and the quill is set in the vent. Then it's a loaded gun.
Well if it hits the armor it probably would just bounce off without causing real damage. I guess you might be able to destroy some equipment like cameras etc. if you hit those spots.
@@HingerlAlois One should try it :-) Would love to see what happens if lots (!) of old 16th century powder guns would continously fire on a modern surplus tank. (Maybe for one hour)
24 pounder from the 1500s. Low velocity, about 700 meters per second I believe. Can penetrate a metre of oak in ideal conditions according to these tests. From a recent Dracinifel video.
Same thing happens with a bullet - even if it passes through a very brittle material such as glass, it’s entry hole will never be any bigger than the bullet. But the shockwave from the initial impact travels through the entire length of whatever it hit, in the form of an expanding cone, making more and more shrapnel the more materials they pass through. That’s why a 19th century torpedo boat, with, by definition, no armor, would be the safest place to be - a big battleship shell will hardly do anything after passing through what’s essentially a sheet of tin.
I doubt if they did this but to fully authenticate this cannon they should have inscribed it with the wording "ultima ratio regum". To authenticate it as a cannon from the army of the French King, Louis XIV, le Roi-Soleil, that is.
I guess the firing might have not been authentic but at optimal circumstanses - percfect cannon balls fired with perfect powder on a fresh unpainted not moving shipside and the OAK might have been grown with big porus cells eg modern growth .
So what youre saying is that 1600 era oak would have stopped that? Pretty sure that the oak used came from Visingsö where they have been growing since the 1830's. Authentic are for a few reasons an impossibility.
They actually went to quite a bit of effort to get the cannon to perform like it would have back in the 1620's. Modern powder of course doesn't behave like 1600's powder, but there are gunnery manuals from back then that provide expected ranges at certain elevations for these guns, and from that they could calculate what the muzzle velocity should be and then make a powder charge to get that velocity. Fred Hocker who you see featured in this video has written a very interesting paper about these trials, which you can check out here: kurage.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/hocker-isbsa-14-proof.pdf
Fun fact: oak has antimicrobial properties and so splinter wounds tended not to get infected. Ships made of Asian hard woods like teak did not have this advantage and so teak was discontinued for warship construction even though no one at the time understood what or why this was happening.
Also I have read that the floors of the gun decks on British war ships were painted red so the blood would be less visible and so less demoralizing. Buckets of sand were provided if the floors became too slippery.
Sounds like a good time all 'round...
With the vigorous cleaning of decks and hard use that happens on age of sail English warships I doubt the deck was painted. It would wear off rather quickly being scrubbed with holystones quite often. The sanding the deck to make it less slippery in combat part is true.
The interiors were painted blood red.
@@chrisbrent7487 the Bulkheads, inside of the Hull and oder structures were painted red. the Deck was left unpainted
warfare in the age of sails was unimaginably brutal. And we didn´t even start thinking about boarding parties....
Fun fact no. 2: oak dust is classifies as hazardous substance, as it is cancerogenic and can lead to allergies. Teak has the advantage of being naturally oily, so it doesn´t degrade in prolonged contact with sea water. It is also slightly toxic and can cause allergies. (tbh, oak does also fare pretty well in water due to its tannine content, but it tends to cause iron to rust pretty quickly for the same cause)
@@rustknuckleirongut8107 don't know really about that. I work with oak all day and if u get deep splinters they get puss and infected if i dont pull them out.
One thing I noticed and never thought of before, the need to secure the elevation blocks to the cannon. Also shows another advantage of the screw elevator because it won't require extra work to secure.
Shooting a plyboard with a small cannon for purposes of reconstruction is like shooting a piece of tin foil with a musket and then concluding that gunshot wounds weren't something you needed to worry about.
So glad some people finally started taking reconstructive archaeology seriously last decade.
Dracinifel sent me..
~ smiles ~
Same here! Shots of rhum to that !
Do you see Torpedo Boats?
I was expecting to find this post right there :)
Very Cool, gonna go watch Master and Commander now ! lol
Go Drach wooo
Ouffff... Brutally savage... That last slo-mo shot...
Cheers!
I.
Fantastisk jobb ni gjort och vilken vacker kanon 👌🇸🇪
Now that is dedication, a pleasure to watch.
I love imagining a battery of nothing but these on Oscarsborg back in *1940.
Krupp guns, Whitehead torpedoes, and quadricentennial 24-pounders for _sheer dominance._ 👌
1939?
1940
Drach sent me!
It’s hard not to love this!
Bofors test center. "We make things go boom"
It would be interesting to have a bit of data, such as weight of shot and velocity.
So You need these two videos. Please also check the descriptions.
ruclips.net/video/6jRhEiibhCc/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/lIDu7NPLbwc/видео.html
@@lukaszg2280 I was worried this would be one of those insufferable spam comments. I am rarely pleased to be wrong, but this is one case of that.
The fastest speed was just over the speed of sound and the lowest around 200 m/s. A 24lb shot.
Fred Hoecker has another longer and more detailed video on the whole thing, which includes more data
This channel needs more content.
Häftigt värre ju!
Fascinating!
Check out the test with the Canon of the fregat "Jylland" I Oksboel. They used ne of her own canon on a replicated section of her hull.
Those things are a lot more powerful and violent than all those hollyweird movies tend to make you believe.
Needed a much longer video!
That was groovy in a far out happening kind of way.
omg post more of these! Where is the full thing?
Vasa ship in Stockhom, you remember ?!
This is a mighty cannon
I'm impressed, where can I order one?
Jag behöver en Wasa kanon när min svärmor nalkas mitt hem.😎
Awesome canon
Okej... jag är dum i huvudet.... En svensktalande person pratar och jag läser den engelska texten...
Är ju inte bara svenskar som kollar på det här... så ja lite grann verkar det som 😂
Do you mind telling me if the word the Swedish guy used for missile is the normal word used in Swedish. I had never heard that one before.
@@JackHiper
Hi there.
Yes we do but we have a bit different pronunciation.
Missile - missil (mis-sil)
Canon - kanon (ka-non)
Ammunition - ammunition (am-un-i-tion)
Kind of sort. Eng - swe
@@hannescamitz8575 min svenska är dålig. Tack för hjälpen.
Den stora skillnaden mot vardagen är väl bristen på behov av hemlighetsmakeri? 🙂
Va bra att det var musik på!
👍🏻
Den kulan fortsatte rakt in i skogen och träffade en massiv tall
C_N66 Gick den inte igenom tallen också?
Mäktig kraft i dessa!
Japp det gjorde den :)
Svartkrut är kraftiga grejer🔫💣☠
Leif haglund
Peter Englund har en del målande och fruktansvärda beskrivningar i en av sina böcker vad den här tekniken innebar för tätt packat manskap i slagformering på 1600-talet...
Everybody is Gangsta till Vasas 24-pundiga bronskanon show up.
Noice... Where can I buy one?
It's been, it's been, A BLAST!!! LOL I bet is what he was going to say but thought better of il🐺🤣🤣🤣
What kind of ramrod was that? I've been firing muzzle-loading cannons of all sizes, 1 pound to 64 pound guns, for over 40 years and have never seen one like that. Beautiful shot though.
Just a guess here, but I think it has to do with not having to put hands in line of fire of loaded gun.
@@cola98765 Good guess, but the gun isn't loaded until the round is pressed fully against the breach, the bag is broken, and the quill is set in the vent. Then it's a loaded gun.
@@Panzerhauptman Still, the powder is in the barrel, and so there's no reason not to be safe about it.
Chicken Ramrod :D
I'll take two. Put them on my Visa card.
You mean your Wasa-card? 🙂
what would happen if you fire 80 of these guns simultanously on a modern Leopard 2 or Leclerc tank?
Well if it hits the armor it probably would just bounce off without causing real damage.
I guess you might be able to destroy some equipment like cameras etc. if you hit those spots.
@@HingerlAlois I am sure you hit the same spot 80 times, surely you got to punch through eventually
@@wonniewarrior
I doubt it.
I would expect almost no effect on modern MBT armor.
@@HingerlAlois One should try it :-) Would love to see what happens if lots (!) of old 16th century powder guns would continously fire on a modern surplus tank. (Maybe for one hour)
@@Schlipperschlopper You would have at most just a bump in the armor. Modern ammunition hits so goddamn much harder.
Seriously who would hit the dislike button……………
24 pounder from the 1500s. Low velocity, about 700 meters per second I believe. Can penetrate a metre of oak in ideal conditions according to these tests. From a recent Dracinifel video.
They cast a replica gun for these tests. No way would they risk a piece of history.
8 pounder. And 700 meters a second is TWICE the speed of sound. On what ocean is that "low velocity"?
700 m/s seems too high for a cannon of the period, I wonder if they supercharged it?
1600s, and they tested about 200-360 m/s.
BL**DY perfect. I did note the 'elf and safety' ram. In the old days they jumped out of the way. That's a joke.
I'm not sure what I expected, but that's a very small entry hole.
It’s the mess it makes inside that kills an mames. Have a look at the Vasa cannon video by Dr Fred.
@@keithwoodburn7895 which is precisely why I find the small size of the entry hole so surprising (because of the carnage on the rear side).
That's what he said.
Same thing happens with a bullet - even if it passes through a very brittle material such as glass, it’s entry
hole will never be any bigger than the bullet.
But the shockwave from
the initial impact travels through the entire
length of whatever it hit,
in the form of an expanding cone, making more and more shrapnel the more
materials they pass through.
That’s why a 19th century torpedo boat, with, by definition, no armor, would be the safest place to be - a big battleship shell will hardly do anything after passing through what’s essentially a sheet of tin.
I would like to make a scale model of the cannon in cast bronze. Are there any drawings, plans, photographs, or 3D files available?
I would be very interested.
@@hanspeterlillese2225 thank you! There is a lot of information using the Swedish search words which do not show otherwise.
... now do it underwater...
I doubt if they did this but to fully authenticate this cannon they should have inscribed it with the wording "ultima ratio regum". To authenticate it as a cannon from the army of the French King, Louis XIV, le Roi-Soleil, that is.
Why do that when it is a copy of one of Gustavus II Adolphus 24 pounders from the il fated flagship Wasa?
I guess the firing might have not been authentic but at optimal circumstanses - percfect cannon balls fired with perfect powder on a fresh unpainted not moving shipside and the OAK might have been grown with big porus cells eg modern growth .
So what youre saying is that 1600 era oak would have stopped that? Pretty sure that the oak used came from Visingsö where they have been growing since the 1830's. Authentic are for a few reasons an impossibility.
They actually went to quite a bit of effort to get the cannon to perform like it would have back in the 1620's. Modern powder of course doesn't behave like 1600's powder, but there are gunnery manuals from back then that provide expected ranges at certain elevations for these guns, and from that they could calculate what the muzzle velocity should be and then make a powder charge to get that velocity. Fred Hocker who you see featured in this video has written a very interesting paper about these trials, which you can check out here: kurage.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/hocker-isbsa-14-proof.pdf
@@renhanxue I guess they used moist powder - or why not store the powed underdeck in woden ship -let it degenerate and then fire
@@renhanxue Thanks for the link.
@@jari2018 your nitpicking too hard