Tweet
Quite a lot of our customers have asked me what Merriman is up to these days, and if he’s ever going to get his act together and make some torpedoes. He’s very annoying, as you all know, and I was pretty sure he made those torpedoes a few years ago, just to irritate us all. So I asked him the following questions, and have posted the best parts of his replies. The rest of his rantings and ravings are in my trash can, so the more meek members won’t have fainting spells. I can tell you all now, he doesn’t get better with age!
THE Q&A
Well, Your Eminence, I guess you've eventually gotten around to producing a torpedo system that can go commercial. So, my first question to you is, what took you so long? I mean it looks pretty easy to me, and good grief, you WERE a torpedo man in the US Navy weren't you?
"Finally gotten around to producing a torpedo system" ....Finally?!!
You darned well know that I've been busting my tail making product for the Caswell Inc. Empire, you slave-driving, unappreciative, sweat -shop proprietor! I've never been more overworked in my life since I hooked my wagon to yours. Yeah, I'll get to the torpedo-launcher system .... I'm on it, damit!
It's not like I'm jumping into this latest assignment from you cold, Mike; I've been playing with the development, perfection and use of practical weapons and launchers for over twenty-five years now. Sure, that work has not been full time, but without the prospect of commercial gain from that activity, I've had little incentive to engage the job with any meaningful commitment. I am, after all, one who will chase activities that garner the most money -- those things I do just for fun do not get the same attention as those things I sell to the market.
I first became seriously enamored with the idea of outfitting my r/c submarines with practical torpedoes (and their attendant sub-system, a practical launcher/torpedo tube) after observing the great performance of Mike Dory's gas propelled torpedoes -- it was his years of development and use that showed me that these things were do-able, my advancements are simply refinement of the work Mike Dory started.
I finally captured the above shot of a Thor 1/72 ALFA getting off one of my gas propelled torpedoes ... took two rolls of film till I finally caught the moment of launching in the frame -- six hours of work at the pool to get this one good shot, but it was worth it!
Looks easy to you?! ... why don't you build it then?
Mike, I've read so, so many posts by people out there who think they have the brains and talent to come up with a reliable and well performing weapon-launcher system. And of those only a few have transitioned from the Internet babbeling stage and onto completion of viable systems. This very short list of accomplished weaponeer's includes Mike Dory, Gene Berger, Dan Kachur, Simon Smith, the very scary Doctor Drake, and a few others.
Making small, scale-like torpedoes work in the environment is a major engineering feat, and one accomplished by only a few.
Man! Have you thought this through? But, you wave the cash in my puss and I'll grab at it.
Yeah, I was a Torpedoman in the navy. But don't get your hopes up. Little of that training -- other than an appreciation of how dangerous HP air systems, oxygen bearing compounds and explosives can be -- is of use as I transition from 'the real thing' to the model torpedoes we're currently interested in, Mike. The motto of squid's in my rate was this: "I may not be able to spell it, but I can lift it"; In my day TM/Diver's were not bred to be smart, just capable of doing tough jobs. You know, like big, trainable monkeys. And just to make my point, I learn that in the late 80's the navy started pulling TM's off submarines and left the weapons and launchers in the equally capable hands of the A-Gang thread-strippers: another rate populated by nuckle-dragging uni-brow types.
I've seen dusty old photos of some of your previous attempts at this project and it looks like you got a couple of systems to work. So why haven't you marketed them? Eh? Eh? Spending too much time being rude to people on forums?
It's been an evolutionary path for me. But a focused one: from the onset of my weapon and launcher work I confined myself to gas propelled weapons, and launchers that did two basic things -- secured the weapon until time of launch and to make use of the gas within the weapon to be the agent of launcher activation and weapon expulsion from the tube. The objectives were: ease of production, reliability, minimal tasks to re-load weapon and re-set launcher, easy access to all elements of the weapon and launcher sub-systems, safety, and low exposure of lawsuit as a consequence of use.
Over the decades I sent around photos and authored articles on the work as it stood at the time. Some of that appeared in the pages of the SCR. These screeds went out to establish original art as well as to pass on what I learned to others -- an obligation a Master Craftsman has to his peers and understudies.
Before entertaining your suggestion of going commercial with the weapon and launcher I was very free with the dissemination of all details involved in the design, fabrication and use of weapon and launcher. Now, however, as we're going ahead with a commercial version of the weapon and launcher I'm compelled to keep some of the details close to the vest. Once we secure patent pending status all will be revealed. But, for this discussion I have no problem giving out the broad picture as to weapon and launcher configuration and theory of operation.
Initially the weapon body was a length of aluminum tube capped with cast resin warhead and afterbody -- careful selection of weapon materials that would result in an 'empty' weight a bit less than the weapons displacement was a prim design criteria: Though simple and cheap to produce, the weapons are still a pain if you lose one to sinking with each shot -- you want them to float for retrieval and re-use. Also, the early launchers suffered in that they did not provide for the positive retention of the weapon within the tube until the moment of launch -- the result was the inevitable 'cook-off' as a weapon left the launcher, un-commanded. Very embarrassing. Today the launcher mechanically holds the weapon in the tube with the launcher in the 'battery' condition.
What a plumber's nightmare the launcher presents! The majority of this pictured Rube Goldberg involves the plumbing and mechanics of the rotary firing valve distributor. This particular experimental launcher suffered from the lack of a positive means of holding the weapon in the tube until the launcher went to the 'launch' condition. The result was the occasional 'cook off' of a weapon; self-launching without command. Bad ju-ju! ... ain't that right, Skip?
Lessons were learned over time:
Dissimilar material in the rapidly temperature changing weapon ground together at the glue joints causing gas leaks. The launchers all suffered from a very complex and heavy mechanical firing valve selector mechanism that took up room and required exacting metal fabrication techniques and were maintenance heavy. As my weapon and launcher sub-systems evolved they got simpler and easier to manufacture and maintain. Things have finally arrived at the point where, today, the sub-systems are just about ready for commercial sale. It took time.
The recent availability of reliable, small, medium-pressure solenoid valves has brought the launcher state-of-the-art to the point where I can now completely omit the external firing valve distributor mechanism and achieve torpedo tube launch function using components attached directly to the launcher -- permitting me to produce complete torpedo tube units that can be stacked and nested to achieve just about any bow or stern room launcher arrangement the end-user has in mind. We are currently sticking to 1/72nd scale, but plan to produce 1/96 and 1/32nd versions of the weapon and launcher.
As things get better, they invariably get smaller and sometimes cheaper -- the massive mechanical firing valve distributor mechanisms have been replaced by an electronic switch and a tiny solenoid actuated firing valve directly mounted to the launcher.
continued...........
THE Q&A
Well, Your Eminence, I guess you've eventually gotten around to producing a torpedo system that can go commercial. So, my first question to you is, what took you so long? I mean it looks pretty easy to me, and good grief, you WERE a torpedo man in the US Navy weren't you?
"Finally gotten around to producing a torpedo system" ....Finally?!!
You darned well know that I've been busting my tail making product for the Caswell Inc. Empire, you slave-driving, unappreciative, sweat -shop proprietor! I've never been more overworked in my life since I hooked my wagon to yours. Yeah, I'll get to the torpedo-launcher system .... I'm on it, damit!
It's not like I'm jumping into this latest assignment from you cold, Mike; I've been playing with the development, perfection and use of practical weapons and launchers for over twenty-five years now. Sure, that work has not been full time, but without the prospect of commercial gain from that activity, I've had little incentive to engage the job with any meaningful commitment. I am, after all, one who will chase activities that garner the most money -- those things I do just for fun do not get the same attention as those things I sell to the market.
I first became seriously enamored with the idea of outfitting my r/c submarines with practical torpedoes (and their attendant sub-system, a practical launcher/torpedo tube) after observing the great performance of Mike Dory's gas propelled torpedoes -- it was his years of development and use that showed me that these things were do-able, my advancements are simply refinement of the work Mike Dory started.
I finally captured the above shot of a Thor 1/72 ALFA getting off one of my gas propelled torpedoes ... took two rolls of film till I finally caught the moment of launching in the frame -- six hours of work at the pool to get this one good shot, but it was worth it!
Looks easy to you?! ... why don't you build it then?
Mike, I've read so, so many posts by people out there who think they have the brains and talent to come up with a reliable and well performing weapon-launcher system. And of those only a few have transitioned from the Internet babbeling stage and onto completion of viable systems. This very short list of accomplished weaponeer's includes Mike Dory, Gene Berger, Dan Kachur, Simon Smith, the very scary Doctor Drake, and a few others.
Making small, scale-like torpedoes work in the environment is a major engineering feat, and one accomplished by only a few.
Man! Have you thought this through? But, you wave the cash in my puss and I'll grab at it.
Yeah, I was a Torpedoman in the navy. But don't get your hopes up. Little of that training -- other than an appreciation of how dangerous HP air systems, oxygen bearing compounds and explosives can be -- is of use as I transition from 'the real thing' to the model torpedoes we're currently interested in, Mike. The motto of squid's in my rate was this: "I may not be able to spell it, but I can lift it"; In my day TM/Diver's were not bred to be smart, just capable of doing tough jobs. You know, like big, trainable monkeys. And just to make my point, I learn that in the late 80's the navy started pulling TM's off submarines and left the weapons and launchers in the equally capable hands of the A-Gang thread-strippers: another rate populated by nuckle-dragging uni-brow types.
I've seen dusty old photos of some of your previous attempts at this project and it looks like you got a couple of systems to work. So why haven't you marketed them? Eh? Eh? Spending too much time being rude to people on forums?
It's been an evolutionary path for me. But a focused one: from the onset of my weapon and launcher work I confined myself to gas propelled weapons, and launchers that did two basic things -- secured the weapon until time of launch and to make use of the gas within the weapon to be the agent of launcher activation and weapon expulsion from the tube. The objectives were: ease of production, reliability, minimal tasks to re-load weapon and re-set launcher, easy access to all elements of the weapon and launcher sub-systems, safety, and low exposure of lawsuit as a consequence of use.
Over the decades I sent around photos and authored articles on the work as it stood at the time. Some of that appeared in the pages of the SCR. These screeds went out to establish original art as well as to pass on what I learned to others -- an obligation a Master Craftsman has to his peers and understudies.
Before entertaining your suggestion of going commercial with the weapon and launcher I was very free with the dissemination of all details involved in the design, fabrication and use of weapon and launcher. Now, however, as we're going ahead with a commercial version of the weapon and launcher I'm compelled to keep some of the details close to the vest. Once we secure patent pending status all will be revealed. But, for this discussion I have no problem giving out the broad picture as to weapon and launcher configuration and theory of operation.
Initially the weapon body was a length of aluminum tube capped with cast resin warhead and afterbody -- careful selection of weapon materials that would result in an 'empty' weight a bit less than the weapons displacement was a prim design criteria: Though simple and cheap to produce, the weapons are still a pain if you lose one to sinking with each shot -- you want them to float for retrieval and re-use. Also, the early launchers suffered in that they did not provide for the positive retention of the weapon within the tube until the moment of launch -- the result was the inevitable 'cook-off' as a weapon left the launcher, un-commanded. Very embarrassing. Today the launcher mechanically holds the weapon in the tube with the launcher in the 'battery' condition.
What a plumber's nightmare the launcher presents! The majority of this pictured Rube Goldberg involves the plumbing and mechanics of the rotary firing valve distributor. This particular experimental launcher suffered from the lack of a positive means of holding the weapon in the tube until the launcher went to the 'launch' condition. The result was the occasional 'cook off' of a weapon; self-launching without command. Bad ju-ju! ... ain't that right, Skip?
Lessons were learned over time:
Dissimilar material in the rapidly temperature changing weapon ground together at the glue joints causing gas leaks. The launchers all suffered from a very complex and heavy mechanical firing valve selector mechanism that took up room and required exacting metal fabrication techniques and were maintenance heavy. As my weapon and launcher sub-systems evolved they got simpler and easier to manufacture and maintain. Things have finally arrived at the point where, today, the sub-systems are just about ready for commercial sale. It took time.
The recent availability of reliable, small, medium-pressure solenoid valves has brought the launcher state-of-the-art to the point where I can now completely omit the external firing valve distributor mechanism and achieve torpedo tube launch function using components attached directly to the launcher -- permitting me to produce complete torpedo tube units that can be stacked and nested to achieve just about any bow or stern room launcher arrangement the end-user has in mind. We are currently sticking to 1/72nd scale, but plan to produce 1/96 and 1/32nd versions of the weapon and launcher.
As things get better, they invariably get smaller and sometimes cheaper -- the massive mechanical firing valve distributor mechanisms have been replaced by an electronic switch and a tiny solenoid actuated firing valve directly mounted to the launcher.
continued...........
Comment