Spudguns on the high seas

[CS]

From what I've seen the pirates approach in the wake of a ship for the shortest detection time. Perhaps a conflict of forward-facing ship design? So firstly the detection could be approved.

Of the non-lethal techniques I like this idea of using a line to tangle the propellers. For the wake based approaches (typical?) could two cannons on the rear of the ship shoot in a 'x' pattern? Although you are dealing with humans, so if you indiviually shoot lines out, they can probably react accordingly. Even better to invoke a frantic reaction use a shotgun technique. What I mean by this is shooting 25-50 100' segment lines, with floats on the ends, directly upon the pirate boat.

Odd ordeal, but all non-lethal techniques only temporarily thwart attacks, the fact these guys are 800 miles off the coast tells me sending them back would take something as directive as a lead rope.

Also every reason to have the high-pressure water cannons as a last defense.

[Moonbogg]

Blah blah. Without firearms, any ship is vulnerable to being seized. Air cannons, even the best, suck for defense against automatic assault rifles and RPGs.

EDIT: The first pirate ship sunk from an air cannon will be the last. They will wrap the boats in metal sheets around the hull and that will solve it and make the air cannons useless.

[CS]

To be an objective critic, the firearms will not be the solution because of the international political climate. Firearms on these ships is pure nostalgia.

Also using pneumatic systems would not warrant a reapproach to ballistic trauma weapons. Rather a means to launch a non-lethal device. For the same reasons I visit spudfiles each time, I'm avid for a pneumatic based solution.

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

The first pirate ship sunk from an air cannon will be the last. They will wrap the boats in metal sheets around the hull and that will solve it and make the air cannons useless.

Assuming anyone lives to tell about it the media will blame Tiger Woods anyway

[kenbo0422]

The Caselman blueprints I have don't have a regulator. It shoots straight from the scuba tank pressure. 250 lbf from a 300psi tank on a 32ACP sized pellet isn't anything to sneeze at...

BUT, I like the ball bearings. Shotgun style. What doesn't hit your target stays on their deck to have to slide around... == cut to Three Stooges scene==

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

The Caselman blueprints I have don't have a regulator. It shoots straight from the scuba tank pressure. 250 lbf from a 300psi tank on a 32ACP sized pellet isn't anything to sneeze at...

3,000 psi it doesn't need a reg, the hammer valve is "self regulating" in a sense because as tank pressure goes down, the hammer encounters less resistance from the valve and so it opens for longer, compensating the lower pressure with higher volume.

BUT, I like the ball bearings. Shotgun style. What doesn't hit your target stays on their deck to have to slide around... == cut to Three Stooges scene==

Good one and I assume the on-board workshop would have reason to have a supply of bearings so they would not look suspicious as a stock item.

[POLAND_SPUD]

so you can't have firearms on ships but they want to arm them with air cannons... well, according to polish law any launcher with a muzzle energy higher than 16J is considered a weapon and requires a licence...

this is true for quite a lot of countries as well

am I missing something?

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

am I missing something?

I think it's about deniability. A 50 calibre machinegun is a 50 calibre machinegun, and 50 calibre cartridges are beyond doubt 50 calibre cartridges. Golf balls, marbles and valves and tubing, the latter two are expected to be found on any decent sized ship, while the former two might be a bit odd if found in large quantities but certainly aren't govered by an weapons laws.

[CS]

"A firearm is a device which projects either single or multiple projectiles at high velocity through a controlled explosion."

Pneumatic launcher use an equalization of pressure, not a controlled explosion. Even at that, lets consider it a firearm on the grounds of a projectile

The traditional firearm has taken the sole evolution of inflicting bodily harm for hundreds of years. Think we might complement humanity at being very good at it as well. (PSI of traditional firearms contest another point)

A pneumatic firearm never having the discourse of ballistic trauma, nor the intent with a non-lethal launcher design, it is different in nature.

Deniability would imply a state of being mis-informed, really? I'll make the assumption that traditional firearms are restricted on grounds of ballistic trauma, not mechanical function. Maybe it is a littering law...

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

"A firearm is a device which projects either single or multiple projectiles at high velocity through a controlled explosion."

Not in all jurisdictions, in the UK an airgun capable of producing more than 12 ft/lbs of muzzle energy is legally a firearm, as is any airgun used to commit a crime, the same goes for replicas.

[D_Hall]

I think it's about deniability. A 50 calibre machinegun is a 50 calibre machinegun, and 50 calibre cartridges are beyond doubt 50 calibre cartridges. Golf balls, marbles and valves and tubing, the latter two are expected to be found on any decent sized ship, while the former two might be a bit odd if found in large quantities but certainly aren't govered by an weapons laws.

Bingo.

Traditional firearms and ammunition are unmistakable. They are what they are and there is no denying their intended use. But ball bearings? Valves? Pipe? A ship can't live without that stuff! So you simply take your (air) gun apart at the end of day. The authorities are free to search your ship for weapons and they'll find nothing but normal industrial equipment onboard.

Personal thoughts:

I'd shy away from scuba/HPA systems and go with a traditional low pressure air approach. Why? Because ships have LPA piped EVERYWHERE. Just plug a hose in and you're sitting top of an effectively unlimited air supply. Use a small accumulator/reservoir and you're golden. Of course, you could still hook such a gun up to a (regulated) scuba set up, but I don't think it would be necessary. [Note: I've been on ships that have 300 psi air piped all over the place as well, but I acknowledge that this may be unusual. If not? Two thumbs up, use that!]

Projectile? I'm thinking plugged 3/4" pipe couplings. Should hit a fair bit harder than a golf ball but isn't too large/dense to get reasonable velocities out of. Also it's still cheap/easy to get in large quanitities. As a bonus, it too may be filed under "normal industrial equipment found on a ship."


As for Moon's statement that the first pirate boat sunk by an air gun would be the last, I disagree. The boats they're using for the assults are tiny with very little displacement. Armor plate such a boat and you've likely made it a death trap. And if by some miracle it's still sea worthy, it will be significantly slower. As it is closing velocity is (from my understanding) a very real issue in these engagements. A significantly slower pirate boat may not even be able to catch a ship. Point being that armoring the skiff would very likely negate it's usefulness for the task at hand. If so, then the pirates hardening their boats would be the best thing ever!

[jeepkahn]

Have you ever been hit by a golfball(hit with a club)??? With DD1 I can send 8 GBs at a time several hundred yards down range with a fairly good spread, and It'll knock baseball sized holes THROUGH cinderblock walls when I launch 2" long pieces of truck axles(hacked up with a bandsaw, saboted by wrapping it in a paper towel)... And that's only with 120psi....

And a pneumatic launcher could easily be classified as a monkeyfist launcher for throwing lead/mooring lines....

[Ragnarok]

The Caselman would only be useful at point blank range.

I wouldn't rule out something that can replicate the performance of a .32 ACP sub machine gun. It could be more impressive if actually adjusted a certain amount.

Anyway, even if it weren't perfect, if you're trying to knock out a boat with a big cannon, it'd be better to have covering fire from them than not have it.

In the end, legal conditions are not a constant concern. Such a thing would be legal in some countries (at least, if disassembled) - if not, do without. Having open flame on deck is another matter.

~~~~~

To add to D_Hall's point about armouring the boats, another important part is that the pirates can get reasonably close without raising alarms, which requires that their boat looks harmless. If someone turns up in an armoured skiff, then they've lost the element of surprise.

Also, as Jack says, for them to start armouring boats, the pirates need to know about it. If the skiff is sunk a LONG way from shore, then the pirates in the boat would be lucky to tell others. Obviously, the media could be a problem (via "leaks" from the boat crew), but it's not necessarily an insurmountable one.

[kenbo0422]

Face it: we're not talking about Pirates of the Carribean. Any and all ships should be carrying the stock to quickly piece together a decent cannon and do so immediately after leaving port. The laws only apply to the country and the waters they claim. International waters are a whole different story.

In that case you must assume you're fighting for your life when someone is aiming assault rifles and rocket propelled grenades at you. I would feel better in that situation to at least be firing the 'truck axles' that Jeepkahn mentioned.

For a company such as the one who contacted PCguy, I kind of take it as an insult that they would charge for this kind of 'expertise' when we all can see it here for nothing. They only have the testosterone of the ex marines and seals to offer to them, legitimately, in my opinion.

A Caselman could use a little improvement, although I don't know where to start. It can also be broken down easily enough to not resemble a weapon at all. You should see the 'spare parts/old parts' bin in some of these engineering areas. You wouldn't be able to tell a legitimate part from something bogus. Makes for a nice hidey hole.

[Ragnarok]

A Caselman could use a little improvement, although I don't know where to start.

Personally, I'd look at the idea of a bullpup design to give a longer barrel length in the same package. A larger calibre than the "standard" .32 wouldn't go amiss either.

Either of those could be used to get the same muzzle energy for more conservative gas use - or more muzzle energy overall.