推 GilGalad: ˊ_>ˋ 比較好笑的話通常他拿來罵人的話通常都可以拿來 05/11 00:35
→ GilGalad: 套在他自己身上 不過嘛 你知我知大家都知 另外別太介意R 05/11 00:36
推 qlz: 被hgt氣走的人不會比MRZ少上多少(攤手) 05/11 00:54
推 Swallow43: 劣幣驅逐良幣就是這樣的情況啊 (攤手) 05/11 01:10
推 b18902040: 這版就整天吵文章就飽了。每次路過看見都在吵。 05/11 07:28
好吧，某人堅持自己沒說錯，那就來看看是否當真如此。
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrapnel_shell
Shrapnel's innovation was to combine the multi-projectile shotgun effect of
canister shot, with a time fuze to open the canister and disperse the bullets
it contained at some distance along the canister's trajectory from the gun.
咦? 某人不是說shrapnel shell和canister沒有關係嗎?
Initial designs suffered from the potentially catastrophic problem that
friction between the shot and black powder during the high acceleration down
the gun bore could sometimes cause premature ignition of the powder. Various
solutions were tried, with limited if any success. However, in 1852 Colonel
Boxer proposed using a diaphragm to separate the bullets from the bursting
charge, this proved successful and was adopted the following year. As a
buffer to prevent lead shot deforming, a resin was used as a packing material
between the shot. A useful side effect of using the resin was that the
combustion also gave a visual reference upon the shell bursting, as the resin
shattered into a cloud of dust.
鴉片戰爭好像是1839~1842年吼? 某人不是說shrapnel shot此時已經經過改良了嗎?
It took until 1803 for the British artillery to adopt the shrapnel shell (as
"spherical case"), albeit with great enthusiasm when it did.
這點他已經知道說錯了就算了。
話說回來，Armstrong gun是1854年因應克里米亞戰爭中英軍野戰炮的不足的產物，
關英國海軍什麼事，1860年在北塘、1583年在紐西蘭都是上岸後才投入戰鬥，
跟艦砲毫無關係，要用這點來反駁英國海軍的作風也太可笑了吧!
我承認自己有點動氣了，但是這串的起頭可是某人直接人身攻擊我沒念書耶，
而他到現在還堅持自己沒有錯、錯都在所有反對他的人身上，
有沒有這麼自我感覺良好的人啊?
本來有沒有決定性你爽就好，到現在變成即使沒有直接證據也要堅持有投入shell-gun，
並且說清軍因為沒有看過所以只要一接觸到新式火砲立刻就會潰敗，
是有沒有看過鴉片戰爭的介紹啊?
我個人修養不夠，這幾天似乎有讓部分板友感到不快，在此致歉，
也希望日後自己不要再輕易被激怒。
--
The nation which forgets its defenders will be itself forgotten.
～John Calvin Coolidge, Jr.
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 1.171.162.94
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Warfare/M.1431274424.A.124.html