Author Topic: Cut Bank Cannon Convention, III, the planning (Read 4794 times)

Double D · « **on:** October 10, 2011, 02:22:07 PM »

Well, 22 months until the next Cut Bank Cannon convention. Most likely we will hold the shoot the weekend of August 10 & 11 2013.
Start firming up your plans and get your reservations made....it never to early.

First and foremost, it will not be held the same weekend as the Airports fun days. To much conflict with aircraft flying over head and bowling balls.

I am looking at breaking own the the two days int small bore and large bore. Morning open range and afternoon structured shooting events.

Saturday guns under 1 inch mortars under 2 inch. Sunday everything else. Won't mean you can't shoot your big gun on Saturday or your little gun on Sunday. You just won't have priority. There will be two forts-one each day!

I was a bit over whelmed trying to shoot everything and shot nothing well. For the first time I thought, I have to many cannons.

Anyone else, with ideas or comments

KABAR2 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 10, 2011, 02:57:37 PM »

Yes I can understand you not wanting to start a new sport.... Bowling for airplanes.....

GGaskill · « **Reply #2 on:** October 10, 2011, 05:01:31 PM »

The airplanes were warned not to overfly the cannon range but did it anyway. I think we should have taken one down for them to get the idea.

Double D · « **Reply #3 on:** October 10, 2011, 05:57:21 PM »

George, I think you could have done it...although once you fired we never did see where your projectiles went. Did you eve see one land on the range?

I think that those boys had some hugh cases of tunnel vision had no idea where they were in realtionship to the ground.

The one really bothered me was the ultralight...

GGaskill · « **Reply #4 on:** October 10, 2011, 07:05:22 PM »

Most of the beer can zinc shot fired at the fort landed on the berm down range but may have bounced or rolled over the edge. Only found one or two but didn't thoroughly search.

But I think bowling balls would have been better. Even a near miss that a pilot observed would have required a change of underwear and maybe changed their approach pattern. Any idea why they weren't instructed to circle on the west side of the airport?

Double D · « **Reply #5 on:** October 11, 2011, 06:08:10 AM »

Quote from: GGaskill on October 10, 2011, 07:05:22 PM

Most of the beer can zinc shot fired at the fort landed on the berm down range but may have bounced or rolled over the edge. Only found one or two but didn't thoroughly search.

But I think bowling balls would have been better. Even a near miss that a pilot observed would have required a change of underwear and maybe changed their approach pattern. Any idea why they weren't instructed to circle on the west side of the airport?

They were all briefed about the firing going on at the range. I think the pattern they were flying that day had something to do with the prevailing winds. After their bombing run they were powering up and turning down wind for speed, I think. Then they were circling around and making their approach into the wind which lets them fly at a slower speed, I think. ...it's a pilot thing.

Some were cutting the circle to get ahead of others.

Rayfan87 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 11, 2011, 09:01:16 AM »

If the airport was notified and they told the pilots, then any damage would have been their own fault. Well as long as nobody was intentionally aiming for them.

GGaskill · « **Reply #7 on:** October 11, 2011, 07:08:32 PM »

Aerial photo of Cut Bank Airport and range (the oval structure to the right/east of the road.)

It's not clear which runway or taxiway they were using for the Bowling for Autos contest (trying to bomb a car with a bowling ball from a plane; there were no hits as far as I heard.) The area to the west of the airport appears to be mostly vacant so it is hard to understand why they didn't roll right to go around for the next pass instead of rolling left. Perhaps they didn't want to fly in the larger loop necessary to clear the runways.

gunsonwheels · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2011, 05:04:21 AM »

It might be both interesting and worthwhile to do the math on Powder Man's two mile bowling ball shot (measured with GPS at 2.1XX miles) as to what the apogee would have been and then turn the data over to the airplane folks next time before the shoot and request they make that data a part of their briefing. While no one would be making such a shot at this event, the data would still be applicable for the briefing as it is a capability of the ordnance.

So math types... on level ground and gravity being what it is and wind resistance figured in... how high would a bowling ball travel (elevation above the ground) in order to travel and land two miles away from the point of its exiting the mortar tube??

GOW

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #9 on:** October 12, 2011, 06:27:13 AM »

Hmmm. Where's my GFT for the M1A1 16lb bowling ball ....

Double D · « **Reply #10 on:** October 12, 2011, 06:45:32 AM »

We do not even want to bring the topic of the possibility of a 2 mile bowling ball shot up... we would be off that range so fast!!!

Now in the future there may be some work along that line but it will not take place on this range.

GGaskill · « **Reply #11 on:** October 12, 2011, 06:48:05 PM »

One doesn't have to get great range for a shot to rise to a great altitude. While I don't think any airplanes actually flew over the range oval, they weren't very far down range.

Double D · « **Reply #12 on:** October 13, 2011, 06:32:27 AM »

Quote from: GGaskill on October 12, 2011, 06:48:05 PM

One doesn't have to get great range for a shot to rise to a great altitude. While I don't think any airplanes actually flew over the range oval, they weren't very far down range.

Actually there was one aircraft who directly over flew the range a number of times. One time within 10 seconds of some ones mortar shot.and low enogh that there could have been a conflict. The Airport and I had some pretty harsh words about that one.

It is non issue now as we will not be shooting during the Airport fundays weekend again.

So what does every one think about have one day for smaller cannon and one day for larger cannons?

Double D · « **Reply #13 on:** November 05, 2011, 03:05:44 PM »

Southpaw and I have been doing some research work for CBCC III.

We are looking for a little drama for the siege of Fort Pallet, a grand finale of sorts...so we have been testing tannerite.

We learned the stuff will go of with a .223 but not a 17 HMR. We don't think a cannon will set it off. We also came to the conclusion it may a little to violent for use in Ft. Pallet. We don't want anyone hurt by flying wood splinters. We would have to build targets that could trigger a small firing mechanism to detonate the material

Here's a video of some of our tests including a hit from the 17 HMR that burst the bottle but didn't detonate, followed a shot with the .223. These were all 1/2 lb test. Guys if you try this stuff be careful it is very powerful.

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #14 on:** November 06, 2011, 01:59:21 AM »

It is easily set off with a .45acp (from a Reising) at 75'. I would think that a .50 or .75 cal cannon would do it.

Be sure that you use pre 1899 Tannerite.

Double D · « **Reply #15 on:** November 06, 2011, 02:47:15 AM »

Thought about a booby trap type device attached to a target of some sort....but this stuff is just to scarey for the intended use.

GGaskill · « **Reply #16 on:** November 06, 2011, 05:58:16 AM »

To me, the question would be how safe it would be to handle the stuff if it had been hit but didn't explode. The fort would have to be dismantled after the shoot and you wouldn't want it filled with "land mines" for the clean up crew.

shred · « **Reply #17 on:** November 06, 2011, 07:21:27 AM »

FWIW, We could not get some Tannerite (or equivalent, I forgot which brand it was) to go off when hit by a 300 gr .50 AE.

1Southpaw · « **Reply #18 on:** November 07, 2011, 05:46:35 AM »

the instructions say 2000 fps required to detonate. The 17 hmr blew the end out of the container.
the remainder of material in container was shot with 223 fmj . it exploded.

the training video showed burning and hammering on a anvil would not set it off.
beware of immatation binary products. they can be hazardous .

and yes that was yours truly rolling in the mud :-)

carmy53 · « **Reply #19 on:** November 07, 2011, 09:47:52 AM »

There is another company that makes a tannerite equivalent that can be set off by a 22LR
PM me if you want their web site link.

Double D · « **Reply #20 on:** November 07, 2011, 02:01:44 PM »

We have pretty much decided that tannerite or equivalent will not be used in Fort Pallet. Just too darn dangerous. You guys will just have to learn siege shooting...use Fort Pulaski as an example...to take down Fort Pallet.

GGaskill · « **Reply #21 on:** November 07, 2011, 02:46:25 PM »

Doesn't matter if there is a magazine inside if you can't put your shot on the target.

Double D · « **Reply #22 on:** November 07, 2011, 03:02:49 PM »

Quote from: GGaskill on November 07, 2011, 02:46:25 PM

Doesn't matter if there is a magazine inside if you can't put your shot on the target.

That sure was a problem with the mortars George. I had no problem getting on target with the Cairo gun and it has no sights.

As I see it, you have to do two things to be effective. Aim at a critical point-corners. And shoot repeatedly at that point.

Some one like Gary who can shoot well could do some serious damage in just a few shots.

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #23 on:** November 09, 2011, 02:05:51 PM »

Quote from: Double D on November 07, 2011, 03:02:49 PM

Quote from: GGaskill on November 07, 2011, 02:46:25 PM
Doesn't matter if there is a magazine inside if you can't put your shot on the target.

That sure was a problem with the mortars George. I had no problem getting on target with the Cairo gun and it has no sights.

As I see it, you have to do two things to be effective. Aim at a critical point-corners. And shoot repeatedly at that point.

Some one like Gary who can shoot well could do some serious damage in just a few shots.

Maybe that's why they shot iron spheres full of blackpowder and tried for an air-burst?

Double D · « **Reply #24 on:** December 15, 2011, 05:17:39 PM »

Quote from: GGaskill on October 10, 2011, 07:05:22 PM

Most of the beer can zinc shot fired at the fort landed on the berm down range but may have bounced or rolled over the edge. Only found one or two but didn't thoroughly search.

This was a discussion topic at this past Tuesday Board of Directors meeting. The fellow who has the horse pasture behind the range found a number zinc cannon balls and is less than pleased.

Mild warning was given and about making sure the cannon balls stay on the range.

I do have to wonder if this might have lit a fire under someone as all of a sudden we got dirt work done in mid November.

Here's the impact zone getting built.

Here is what it looked like when I went a look at it yesterday.

The subject of my bowling ball mortar and the mile bowling ball shoot was brought up...the club is interested in sponsoring this event. However they want to sponsor it as a money making event for the club. It was just a general "what if" type discussion and I do not know if anything will come of it. We'll see.

GGaskill · « **Reply #25 on:** December 15, 2011, 06:13:11 PM »

The fellow who has the horse pasture behind the range found a number zinc cannon balls and is less than pleased.

What was his problem (this is a serious question, not a flip rejoinder) ? Maybe if we give him $1 a piece for the shot, he will be more pleased.

Double D · « **Reply #26 on:** December 15, 2011, 06:49:11 PM »

Quote from: GGaskill on December 15, 2011, 06:13:11 PM

The fellow who has the horse pasture behind the range found a number zinc cannon balls and is less than pleased.

What was his problem (this is a serious question, not a flip rejoinder) ? Maybe if we give him $1 a piece for the shot, he will be more pleased.

He didn't like the idea of the shot leaving our range and going into his pasture endangering his horses.

GGaskill · « **Reply #27 on:** December 15, 2011, 07:17:28 PM »

Then maybe the old track is not a good cannon range as we can't guarantee that no shot will ever leave it. Centerfire rifle rounds would have a flatter trajectory so they would be unlikely to land in his pasture.

How many did he find?

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #28 on:** December 16, 2011, 12:46:09 AM »

Perhaps limit to high-angle only?

Don't call in mythbusters.

Double D · « **Reply #29 on:** December 16, 2011, 02:29:51 AM »

Quote from: GGaskill on December 15, 2011, 07:17:28 PM

Then maybe the old track is not a good cannon range as we can't guarantee that no shot will ever leave it. Centerfire rifle rounds would have a flatter trajectory so they would be unlikely to land in his pasture.

How many did he find?

I am not going ask him how many he found. I'm not going anywhere near him.

We can shoot cannons as long as we use our load table for 200 yards or less. We will also adhere to the angle of fire rule used by N-SSA 11.13 ANGLE OF FIRE Mortars shall be fired at an angle between 30 and 60 degrees only.

It's up to the shooter to keep his rounds on the range. The warning from the club was subtle, but succinct. if we can't keep the rounds on the range we can't shoot We have to shoot into the berm. We all know how the mortar balls liked to roll. I will do some testing, but I don't think we are going to roll over the new berm.

Reduce your loads and shoot lower angle. There is no need to shoot the mortar balls into low earth orbit.

Quote from: Cat Whisperer on December 16, 2011, 12:46:09 AM

Perhaps limit to high-angle only?

Don't call in mythbusters.

High angle was part of the problem, the balls were going into the jets stream and leaving the range