3 ms·

Lots of ammunition is really old, e.g. 1921 (but really a slight tweak of a 1906 design): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_BMG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.5

by iguy 8y ago

Lots of ammunition is really old, e.g. 1921 (but really a slight tweak of a 1906 design): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_BMG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_BMG

user5994461 8y ago
That's inaccurate at best. The shell size is mostly unchanged. The powder inside, the materials and the manufacturing have progressed. Just looking at the diagrams in that page, I doubt that measurements were defined with a 0.001 inch accuracy in 1921.
- iguy 8y ago
  Well, not an expert, but have you got any information here? The technology was pretty mature in 1921, there were a few rounds of refinement before that. Machinists definitely talked about "one thou" back then. The same M2s which fire these things have been in production for over 80 years. I'm sure there have been small tweaks, special versions, etc, but basic compatibility has remained.
- Treblemaker 8y ago
  Vernier calipers capable of measuring 0.001 inch were available in 1851. Agree on your first point, however.
- CydeWeys 8y ago
  The powder really isn't that different. The max pressure allowable is part of the cartridge specification, which hasn't changed since the original design. Otherwise you'd have newer ammunition blowing up older guns, which clearly would be unacceptable. You can take modern .30-06 ammo, which is still a very popular hunting cartridge, and fire it in an M1903 Springfield with no issues.
CydeWeys 8y ago
Lots of good examples in firearms. Forget just ammunition, there's old firearm designs that regularly see use today. Some examples would be the 1911 pistol, or the M2 Browning machine gun (1918). And there's entire classes of firearms that are essentially unchanged from that period, like bolt-action rifles, most of which use a Mauser action which was designed in 1895. The key difference here, I think, is that there haven't been radical new improvements in firearms. You can clearly point out where the faults in, say, legacy airplanes lie, but guns (at least in civilian uses) haven't changed as much. Now, granted, for military uses, the modern assault rifle is a far cry from the aforementioned guns.

by iguy 8y ago

Lots of ammunition is really old, e.g. 1921 (but really a slight tweak of a 1906 design): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_BMG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_BMG

user5994461 8y ago

That's inaccurate at best. The shell size is mostly unchanged. The powder inside, the materials and the manufacturing have progressed. Just looking at the diagrams in that page, I doubt that measurements were defined with a 0.001 inch accuracy in 1921.

iguy 8y ago
Well, not an expert, but have you got any information here? The technology was pretty mature in 1921, there were a few rounds of refinement before that. Machinists definitely talked about "one thou" back then. The same M2s which fire these things have been in production for over 80 years. I'm sure there have been small tweaks, special versions, etc, but basic compatibility has remained.
Treblemaker 8y ago
Vernier calipers capable of measuring 0.001 inch were available in 1851. Agree on your first point, however.
CydeWeys 8y ago
The powder really isn't that different. The max pressure allowable is part of the cartridge specification, which hasn't changed since the original design. Otherwise you'd have newer ammunition blowing up older guns, which clearly would be unacceptable. You can take modern .30-06 ammo, which is still a very popular hunting cartridge, and fire it in an M1903 Springfield with no issues.

CydeWeys 8y ago

Lots of good examples in firearms. Forget just ammunition, there's old firearm designs that regularly see use today. Some examples would be the 1911 pistol, or the M2 Browning machine gun (1918). And there's entire classes of firearms that are essentially unchanged from that period, like bolt-action rifles, most of which use a Mauser action which was designed in 1895. The key difference here, I think, is that there haven't been radical new improvements in firearms. You can clearly point out where the faults in, say, legacy airplanes lie, but guns (at least in civilian uses) haven't changed as much. Now, granted, for military uses, the modern assault rifle is a far cry from the aforementioned guns.