Bodge Deep Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Thats the fellow. Now that would be good fun at Beltring. You would need a whole lot of bicycle spokes to recreate that. Back to the grand panjandrum, wasnt there one on Dads Army? What was the episode called, as i cant find it on Youtube. Tim (too) Not sure of the technical accuracy of the BBC's props dept... I haven't seen any good pics of the originals. I think its called 'Round and Round whent the great big Wheel' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil P Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Never liked Captain Morgan. He was a rum character. I think you will find Antarmike that because the wheels are round that the reaction at the bottom is the same as at the top. The direction the rockets are facing in doesn't matter as they were all round the circumferance. On a steam loco the piston rod when it is at the bottom is pushing to the rear but the loco still goes forwards. Or have I just missed the joke and got serious. There's a first!! Richard, I notice among your vehicles is a QLD. Hmmmm. Perfect. Now I can get hold of rolled steel angle..... . Gee we're half way there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 The bottom of the wheel (panjamdrum) in contact with the ground should be rolling, The lower rockets are trying to make it slide in the wrong direction . In the panjandrum the turning point of the wheel is where it contacts the ground. In a steam loco the turning point of the wheel is at the axle, running in an axle box. The physics is different, and the idea of Panjamdrum is totally flawed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) When soldiers move an artillery piece by hand, they have a rope that fixes to lugs on the rear of a wheel, the rope passes over the top of the wheel. They pull on this rope and it turns the wheel about a pivot point at the ground, where wheel touches ground. The gun moves forward. The panjandrum is in effect fixing the rope to the same lugs, taking the rope over the top of the wheel, right round the front of the wheel, so the rope passes under the wheel, in the process trapping it at the point of ground contact, and eventually the rope emerges on the rear of the wheel at ground level. The loose end is then held by soldiers who pull it in the opposite direction they want the gun to move. Madness! Edited December 17, 2008 by antarmike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormin Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 The bottom of the wheel (panjamdrum) in contact with the ground should be rolling, The lower rockets are trying to make it slide in the wrong direction . In the panjandrum the turning point of the wheel is where it contacts the ground. In a steam loco the turning point of the wheel is at the axle, running in an axle box. The physics is different, and the idea of Panjamdrum is totally flawed. Mike, It's the principle of moments. If you take the turning point as the ground contact point then the rockets at the top have a far greater lever arm relative to this point than those near the contact point, hence the rotation. If the ground contact point is lost (loss of friction) then the thing would tend to spin on it's axis and only travel when contact is restored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.O.S. Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 That is a brilliant idea. ...... Then we need to borrow an insane dog to chase it and we can launch it at Beltring. Brilliant. Tim 9too) Not wishing to push this project forward too fast, but I can supply the dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 (edited) Drawings to follow if you are still persuing this (madcap) scheme..... Edited December 17, 2008 by antarmike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abn deuce Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 If this were constructed even if only as a model would it run afoul of the deac weapons laws ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 If this were constructed even if only as a model would it run afoul of the deac weapons laws ? Deac laws would not apply as it is not a firearms. If you are talking about RIF's then No as it does no resemble any type of Firearm.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Farrant Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Richard, I notice among your vehicles is a QLD. Hmmmm. Perfect. Now I can get hold of rolled steel angle..... . Gee we're half way there. :-D:-D:-D One problem, Phil, it would not fit the shed anymore....and I would have to avoid low bridges Actually, there is only one photo I have ever seen, of this contraption and it is shown with out a body. Now to keep the C of G low, a loaded body would be have to be in the normal position, but then it would get water in the load. The whole project was another waste of time, but I suppose someone was trying to come up with a solution. One of my old work colleagues had been working at REME since the early 1950's and he used to tell of a Bedford 28hp engine that was mounted inside a water tank and run completely submerged, (think it was done for a display), so with the right preparations, it is much better to go for the easier idea. I suppose once the Giraffe had unloaded stores on a beach landing, it could have been be handed over to Recce Corps and used for recconaisance as they would be able to look over the hedgerows :rofl: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abn deuce Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Does anyone have a photo of the Bedford Giraffe as I googled it without success so far . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 If this were constructed even if only as a model would it run afoul of the deac weapons laws ? It would fall foul of everybit of health and safety legislation ever enacted. It is also likely that it would be concidered to be a "mechanically propelled vehicle", so it would have to pass construction and use regulations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great War truck Posted December 17, 2008 Author Share Posted December 17, 2008 Yes, you are quite right. it would be quite insane to make a working one of these. It would be interesting taking one for an MOT though! The film of the one at Instow shows it moving at quite a rapid pace, although i must say that it was quite erratic in its movements. The designer said was the dogs fault apparently! Thanks for the drawing though. Tim (too) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Degsy Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 Hi Phil, According to Bedford's war history, there was only a prototype Giraffe. It would seem that waterproofing techniques negated the extremes of build lorries like that. It would be like driving a double decker bus from the top :shake: Richard we'd be alright for a driver, do I need to say more?:-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil P Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Well damm my best boots. 49years plus in engineering starting in a locomotive design office, then a research & design department of a heavy off road vehicle builder and also designing underground coal cutting equipment and all that time I got it wrong. Shucks. According to physics the Bumble Bee can't fly and isn't it the Albatross that can't take off from land. (I'm not going down that route.) Bloody good job I retire soon! I have only seen a picture of the Bedford Giraffe without a body on it. Perhaps it was never fitted with a cargo body. I remember seeing pictures of it in either in Classic Military or International Military Machines in WH Smiths reading room. There has been a plastic kit (May have been resin or white metal) of it. Can't think who did it. I do recall that the engine and gearbox were mounted up high under the cab with what looked like a chain drive (It was covered by a guard) or Z drive down to normal propshaft level. I believe that the specification for wading vehicles was 4 feet after that they were classed as amphibious. I'm sure somebody will know. I have read hundreds of books and articles on vehicles and odd snippets stay. Strange machine but it was an early attempt to get over a wading problem. Hippo's were designed to wade in 4 feet of water. All the various breathers were manifolded together and pipe into a breather/snorkel pipe that went up to roof level at the back of the cab, The aircleaner is mounted up there as well. The brake exhauster and engine breathers are connected through sealed joints into the air intake pipe. I've just thought of another couple of MV's to recreate. How about the Hydro foil DUKW or the fire brigade version with extending ladder oh and then there's .............. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.O.S. Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Well damm my best boots. 49years plus in engineering starting in a locomotive design office, then a research & design department of a heavy off road vehicle builder and also designing underground coal cutting equipment and all that time I got it wrong. Shucks. According to physics the Bumble Bee can't fly and isn't it the Albatross that can't take off from land. (I'm not going down that route.) Bloody good job I retire soon! :rofl::rofl::rofl::banana::banana::banana: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtistsRifles Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Deac laws would not apply as it is not a firearms. If you are talking about RIF's then No as it does no resemble any type of Firearm.. Yeah - but could you imagine the reaction of the H&SE types at whatever show it was taken to when the rocket motors were ignited!!!!:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Farrant Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Richard we'd be alright for a driver, do I need to say more?:-D Ah yes.........good one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil P Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 If anybody wants to see a picture of a, or the, Bedford Giraffe then there is a good one and a bit of a write up in 'World War Two Military Vehicles Transports & Half tracks by G.N.Georgano. ISBN 1-85532-406-7 page 29. Also there was an article in Classic Military Vehicle Magazine issue 16 September 2002. The engine & gearbox were 7 feet of the ground and it was a chain drive to the transfer box. That made oil changes easier! Nothing on 'tinternet' other than the Corgi Bedford Giraffe transporter. And slightly off the topic there was a posting on what is the oldest MV still or possibly still in service. Apparently the Engineers Department at Swindon had a 'Rectank' wagon still in use around 1998/2000. It may still be around which makes it possibly 80/90 years old. I have been having a tidy up so I can do some wiring on my model railway and spotted a picture of it in a copy of 'Model Rail' magazine. Thanks for the Bananas, I am most of the time. Phil Fyffes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abn deuce Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 yes I saw the Corgi and was very disappointed as it did look military at all ! with or without Giraffe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Yeah - but could you imagine the reaction of the H&SE types at whatever show it was taken to when the rocket motors were ignited!!!!:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: I have already citicised the design principles of the Panjumdrum but another of its failings was the rockets used where designed to give thrust, but their mountings were subjected to centrifugal forces due to the large diameter of the rotating wheel and its rate of rotation, and many promblems were experienced with them breaking away, not due to the thrust they were designed for, but due to the Centrifugal forces the numbnuts had totally failed to recognise as a force that had to be contended with.... and before any one tells me I know there is technically no such thing as Centrifugal force rather it is a lack of Centripetal force, but I am keeping things simple... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtistsRifles Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Well, all said and done, I still reckon for such a project the WW1 era tank is the better topic. It was used in anger, unlike the Great Panjendrum, and a modern build would be a fitting tribute to the crews in that era!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil P Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 abn duece. I looked at the Corgi advert and thought shall I stick my kneck out and buy it? Hmmmm I have just found a picture of a 'Skeleton tank' That looks easy (ier). Doesn't say who made it or anything about it. Just called a 'Skeleton Tank' Phil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abn deuce Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 (edited) they Have or had one of those at the Aberdeen Maryland Military Museum I ll see if I can find a photo of it or another . yes very spiderly contraption I think it was an attempt to reduce weight and a smallerish target to hit . the wikipedia link to the skeleton tank with photo's and story http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeleton_tank Edited December 22, 2008 by abn deuce added link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.