Quotulatiousness

December 14, 2020

Hall Model 1819: A Rifle to Change the Industrial World

Forgotten Weapons
Published 7 Sep 2020

http://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons

https://www.floatplane.com/channel/Fo…

Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! http://shop.bbtv.com/collections/forg…

John Hall designed the first breechloading rifle to be used by the United States military, and the first breechloader issued in substantial numbers by any military worldwide. His carbines would later be the first percussion arms adopted by any military force. Hall developed a breechloading flintlock rifle in 1811, had it tested by the military in 1818, and formally adopted as a specialty arm in 1819.

Hall’s contribution actually goes well beyond having a novel and advanced rifle design. He would be the first person to devise a system of machine tools capable of producing interchangeable parts without hand fitting, and this advance would be the foundation of the American system of manufacturing that would revolutionize industry worldwide. Hall did this work at the Harpers Ferry Arsenal, where he worked from 1819 until his death in 1841.

I plan to expand on the details of a variety of Hall rifle models in future videos, and today is meant to be an introduction to the system. Because it was never a primary arm in time of major war, Hall is much less well recognized than he should be among those interested in small arms history.

Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
6281 N. Oracle #36270
Tucson, AZ 85740

November 24, 2020

The History of Fabric Is the History of Civilization

Filed under: Americas, Books, Economics, Europe, History, India — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

ReasonTV
Published 23 Nov 2020

Virginia Postrel’s new book explores economics, politics, and technology through textiles.

——————
Full text and links: https://reason.com/video/2020/11/23/t…

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/reason

Reason is the planet’s leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of view you won’t get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.
—————-

The Fabric of Civilization: How Textiles Made the World, a new book by former Reason editor in chief Virginia Postrel, is a rich, endlessly fascinating history of the remarkable luck, invention, and innovation that made our fabric-rich world possible.

The book aims to make the mundane miraculous. Consider cotton. Most of the cotton we grow today is descended in part from a plant species that evolved in Africa and somehow got over to what is now Peru, where it mixed with New World strains.

“The fact that we have cotton at all, that it exists anywhere, is amazing,” says Postrel. “It happened long before there were human beings, but much more recently than when the continents were together. So we don’t know. It could have gotten caught up in a hurricane. It could have floated on a piece of pumice. So it’s this random, very unlikely happening that had tremendous world-changing consequences.”

The story of textiles is rife with attempts at protectionism and prohibition. In 17th and 18th century Europe, countries banned the importation of super-soft, super-colorful cotton prints from India known as calicos because they threatened domestic producers of everything from lower-quality cotton fabric to luxury silks. “For 73 years, France treated calico the way the U.S. treats cocaine,” Postrel says. “There was this huge amount of smuggling, and they were constantly ratcheting up the penalties [so] that they got quite grotesque, at least for the major traffic.” Some of “the earliest writings of classical liberalism are in this context, people saying not only is this not working, but … it is unjust to be sentencing people to the galleys in order to protect silk makers’ profits.”

Postrel also documents how the Luddites, the 19th century English textile workers famous for smashing the power looms threatening to put them out of work, owed their jobs to an earlier technological breakthrough: the spinning machines that emerged in the late 1700s.

“If you go back to that earlier period, when spinning machines were introduced, the same thing happened,” she says. “They had their own period of rebelling against the new technologies and saying they’re putting people out of work.”

The book also upends some contemporary myths, such as the claim that commercial production of hemp for clothing was a casualty of the war on drugs. “Hemp historically was a very coarse kind of fabric for poor people who didn’t have an alternative,” says Postrel. “It was replaced by cotton for good reasons. Cotton was also affordable, but it was soft and washable and just a much better fabric.”

“Human beings live in history and we inherit the legacies, positive and negative, of that history,” says Postrel, whose previous books include The Power of Glamour, The Substance of Style, and The Future and Its Enemies. Discussing the large themes of her work she says, “All you can do is start from where you are and try to do better from where you are.”

Narrated by Nick Gillespie. Edited by Isaac Reese.

Music: “Thoughts,” by ANBR

Photos: World History Archive/Newscom; The Print Collector Heritage Images/Newsroom; The “Réale” returning to port, Med/CC BY-SA 3.0; Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture/CC0; Battle of Grand Port, Rama/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 2.0 FR; Fine Art Images Heritage Images/Newscom; Seton, M., Müller, R., Zahirovic, S., Gaina, C., Torsvik, T., Shephard, G., Talsma, A., Gurnis, M., Turner, M., Maus, S., and Chandler, M., 2012, Global continental and ocean basin reconstructions since 200 Ma: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 113, no. 3-4, p. 212-270

November 15, 2020

London’s wool and cloth trade fuelled massive growth in the city’s population after 1550

In the latest Age of Invention newsletter, Anton Howes traces the rise and fall of the late Medieval wool trade and its rebirth largely thanks to an influx of Dutch and Flemish clothmakers fleeing the wars in the Low Countries after 1550:

The Coat of Arms of The Worshipful Company of Woolmen — On a red background, a silver woolpack, with the addition of a crest on a wreath of red and silver bearing two gold flaxed distaffs crossed like a saltire and the wheel of a gold spinning wheel.
The Worshipful Company of Woolmen is one of the Livery Companies in the City of London. It is known to have existed in 1180, making it one of the older Livery Companies of the City. It was officially incorporated in 1522. The Company’s original members were concerned with the winding and selling of wool; presently, a connection is retained by the Company’s support of the wool industry. However, the Company is now primarily a charitable institution.
The Company ranks forty-third in the order of precedence of the Livery Companies. Its motto is Lana Spes Nostra, Latin for Wool Is Our Hope.
Wikipedia.

… it was one thing to be able to reach these new southern markets, and another thing to have something to sell in them. For the shift in the markets for wool cloth exports also required major changes in the kinds of cloth produced. In this regard, London may well have been a direct beneficiary of the 1560s-80s troubles in the Low Countries that had caused Antwerp’s fall, because thousands of skilled Flemish and Dutch clothmakers fled to England. In particular, these refugees brought with them techniques for making much lighter cloths than those generally produced by the English — the so-called “new draperies”, which could find a ready market in the much warmer Mediterranean climes than the traditional, heavy woollen broadcloths.

The introduction of the new draperies was no mere change in style, however. They were almost a completely different kind of product, involving different processes and raw materials. The traditional broadcloths were “woollens”. That is, they were made from especially fine, short, and curly wool fibres — the type that English sheep were especially famous for growing — which were then heavily greased in butter or oil in preparation for carding, whereby the fibres were straightened out and any knots removed (because of all the oil, in the Low Countries the cloths were known as the wet, or greased draperies). The oily, carded wool was then spun into yarn, and typically woven into a broad cloth about four metres wide and over thirty metres long. But it was still far from ready. The cloth had to be put in a large vat of warm water, along with some urine and a particular kind of clay, and was then trodden by foot for a few days, or else repeatedly compacted by water-powered machinery. This process, known as fulling, scoured the cloth of all the grease and shrunk it, compacting the fibres so that they began to interlock and enmesh. Any sign of the cloth being woven thus disappeared, leaving a strong, heavy, and felt-like material that was, as one textile historian puts it, “virtually indestructible”. To finish, it was then stretched with hooks on a frame, to remove any wrinkles and even it out, and then pricked with teasels — napped — to raise any loose fibres, which were then shorn off to leave it with a soft, smooth, sometimes almost silky texture. Woollens may have been made of wool, but they were no woolly jumpers. They were the sort of cloth you might use today to make a thick, heavy and luxuriant jacket, which would last for generations.

Yet this was not the sort of cloth that would sell in the much warmer south. The new draperies, introduced to England by the Flemish and Dutch clothworkers in the mid-sixteenth century, used much lower-quality, coarser, and longer wool. Later generally classed as “worsteds”, after the village of Worstead in Norfolk, they were known in the Low Countries as the dry, or light draperies. They needed no oil, and the long fibres could be combed rather than carded. Nor did they need any fulling, tentering, napping, or shearing. Once woven, the cloth was already strong enough that it could immediately be used. The end product was coarser, and much more prone to wear and tear, but it was also much lighter — just a quarter the weight of a high-quality woollen. And the fact that the weave was still visible provided an avenue for design, with beautiful diamond, lozenge, and other kinds of patterns. The new draperies, which included worsteds and various kinds of slightly heavier worsted-woollen hybrids, as well as mixes with other kinds of fibre like silk, linen, Syrian cotton, or goat hair, thus came in a dazzling number of varieties and names: from tammies or stammets, to rasses, bays, says, stuffs, grograms, hounscots, serges, mockadoes, camlets, buffins, shalloons, sagathies, frisadoes, and bombazines. To escape the charge that the new draperies were too flimsy and would not last, some varieties were even marketed as durances, or perpetuanas.

Curiously, however, while the shift from woollens to worsted saved on the costs of oiling, fulling, and finishing, it was significantly more labour-intensive when it came to spinning — even resulting in a sort of technological reversion. Given the lack of fulling, the strength of the thread mattered a lot more for the cloth’s durability, and the yarn had to be much finer if the cloth was to be light. The spinning thus had to be done with much greater care, which made it slower. Spinners typically gave up using spinning wheels, instead reverting to the old method of using a rock and distaff — a technique that has been used since time immemorial. Albeit slower, the rock and distaff gave them more control over the consistency and strength of the ever-thinner yarn. For the old, woollen drapery, processing a pack of wool into cloth in a week would employ an estimated 35 spinners. For the new, lighter worsted drapery it would take 250. As spinning was almost exclusively done by women, the new draperies provided a massive new source of income for households, as well as allowing many spinsters or widows to support themselves on their own. Indeed, an estimated 75% of all women over the age of 14 might have been employed in spinning to produce the amounts of cloth that England exported and consumed. Some historians even speculate that by allowing women to support themselves without marrying, it may have lowered the national fertility rate.

This spinning, of course, was not done in London. It was largely concentrated in Norfolk, Devon, and the West Riding of Yorkshire. But the new draperies provided employment of another, indirect kind. As a product that was saleable in warmer climes it could be exchanged for direct imports of all sorts of different luxuries, from Moroccan sugar, to Greek currants, American tobacco (imported via Spain), and Asian silks and spices (initially largely imported via the eastern Mediterranean). The English merchants who worked these luxury import trades were overwhelmingly based in London, and had often funded the voyages of exploration and embassies to establish the trades in the first place, putting them in a position to obtain monopoly privileges from the Crown so that they could restrict domestic competition and protect their profits. Unsurprisingly, as they imported everything to London, it also made sense for them to export the new draperies from London too.

Thus, despite losing the concentrating influence of nearby Antwerp, London came to be the principal beneficiary of England’s new and growing import trades, allowing it to grow still further. The city began to carve out a role for itself as Europe’s entrepôt, replacing Antwerp, and competing with Amsterdam, as the place in which all the world’s rarities could be bought (and from which they could increasingly be re-exported). Indeed, English merchants were apparently happy to sell wool cloth at below cost-price in markets like Spain or Turkey — anything to buy the luxury wares that they could monopolise back home.

November 14, 2020

How It’s Made – Combination Squares

Filed under: Technology, Tools, Woodworking — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 02:00

How Its Made
Published 11 Jan 2016

How It’s Made season 27
Combination Squares
#HowItsMade episode 9

October 22, 2020

Are cast-iron vises secretly terrible?

Filed under: History, Tools, Woodworking — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Rex Krueger
Published 21 Oct 2020

Cast-iron vises are convenient and popular, but there might be some much better options.

More video and exclusive content: http://www.patreon.com/rexkrueger
Build my angled Leg Vise: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiwtB…
Get the plans: https://www.rexkrueger.com/store/xngn…

Learn about my Joiner’s Bench: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcq1L…
Get the complete plan bundle WITH the leg vise: https://www.rexkrueger.com/store/join…

Sign up for Fabrication First, my FREE newsletter: http://eepurl.com/gRhEVT

Wood Work for Humans Tool List (affiliate):
*Cutting*
Gyokucho Ryoba Saw: https://amzn.to/2Z5Wmda
Dewalt Panel Saw: https://amzn.to/2HJqGmO
Suizan Dozuki Handsaw: https://amzn.to/3abRyXB
(Winner of the affordable dovetail-saw shootout.)
Spear and Jackson Tenon Saw: https://amzn.to/2zykhs6
(Needs tune-up to work well.)
Crown Tenon Saw: https://amzn.to/3l89Dut
(Works out of the box)
Carving Knife: https://amzn.to/2DkbsnM
Narex True Imperial Chisels: https://amzn.to/2EX4xls
(My favorite affordable new chisels.)
Blue-Handled Marples Chisels: https://amzn.to/2tVJARY
(I use these to make the DIY specialty planes, but I also like them for general work.)

*Sharpening*
Honing Guide: https://amzn.to/2TaJEZM
Norton Coarse/Fine Oil Stone: https://amzn.to/36seh2m
Natural Arkansas Fine Oil Stone: https://amzn.to/3irDQmq
Green buffing compound: https://amzn.to/2XuUBE2

*Marking and Measuring*
Stockman Knife: https://amzn.to/2Pp4bWP
(For marking and the built-in awl).
Speed Square: https://amzn.to/3gSi6jK
Stanley Marking Knife: https://amzn.to/2Ewrxo3
(Excellent, inexpensive marking knife.)
Blue Kreg measuring jig: https://amzn.to/2QTnKYd
Round-head Protractor: https://amzn.to/37fJ6oz

*Drilling*
Forstner Bits: https://amzn.to/3jpBgPl
Spade Bits: https://amzn.to/2U5kvML

*Work-Holding*
Orange F Clamps: https://amzn.to/2u3tp4X
Screw Clamp: https://amzn.to/3gCa5i8

Get my woodturning book: http://www.rexkrueger.com/book

Follow me on Instagram: @rexkrueger

June 27, 2020

QotD: The cost of military equipment

Major military hardware is produced in only limited quantities and involves a massive amount of research, development, and engineering before the first unit goes into service. Because of this, the companies that build it are rarely willing to take the risk of paying for the development themselves and recovering the cost from the units that they sell. What if the customer suddenly decides to cut their buy in half? To avoid this problem, development is paid for by the customer separately from procurement of each item. Well, more or less. The actual answer varies with each particular system, accounting method, and time of the month. But in general, costs break down that way.

So why does this cause so much confusion? Well, it all has to do with what gets reported. Someone who is trying to make the case that some program is outrageously expensive and should be cancelled is going to lump together development and procurement, divide by the number of systems involved, and then publish the resulting number. But, particularly when we’re discussing the cost of a system about to enter production, that’s very different from the actual numbers. To give a well-known example, the B-2 is generally reputed to have cost about $2 billion/plane in the 90s. However, this is the total program cost divided by the 21 airframes. If we’d decided to buy 22 B-2s instead of the 21 we did buy, the extra plane would have cost only $700 million or so. Admittedly, the B-2 is a rather extreme case, and usually the share of R&D cost is less than the procurement (flyaway) cost, but it’s illustrative of the power of this kind of framing.

“bean”, “Military Procurement – Pricing”, Naval Gazing, 2018-03-09.

June 14, 2020

The Iconic American WW2 Thompson: the M1A1

Filed under: History, Military, USA, Weapons, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Forgotten Weapons
Published 15 Oct 2018

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/the-…

http://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons

Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! http://shop.bbtv.com/collections/forg…

While the US Army was satisfied with the Thompson as a fighting weapon in World War Two, it was most certainly not happy with the gun’s exorbitant price tag. The Thompson was a very expensive gun, and the Army wanted to see that change. In March of 1942, engineers at the Savage factory submitted a simplified version for Army consideration, and it was accepted and adopted the very next month. Savage would transition from M1928A1 production to the new M1 pattern in June and July of 1942.

This new M1 Thompson had eliminated at last the unique and unnecessary Blish lock system in favor of a simple blowback action delayed only by bolt mass. In addition to greatly simplifying the production of bolt components, this also allowed the receiver internal shape to be much simplified. A further simplification would follow shortly, as the hammer and floating firing pin were replaced by a fixed firing pin milled into the bolt face in October of 1942 – this new type being designated the M1A1. Another 715,000 M1 and M1A1 Thompsons would be produced by Savage and Auto-Ordnance by February of 1944, when the Thompson was finally replaced by the yet cheaper M3 “Grease Gun”.

This is the fourth in a 5-part series on the development of the Thompson…

Note: I refer to the M1A1 in this video as a transferrable gun; it is actually a pre-May dealer sample. Sorry!

Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
PO Box 87647
Tucson, AZ 85754

If you enjoy Forgotten Weapons, check out its sister channel, InRangeTV! http://www.youtube.com/InRangeTVShow

June 7, 2020

Why determining the Impact of Lend-Lease is so complicated

Filed under: Britain, Cancon, Economics, History, Military, Russia, USA, WW2 — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Military History Visualized
Published 14 Aug 2018

Determining the impact of the Western Aid that was provided to the Soviet Union in the Second World War is quite controversial. This aid was provided under the Lend-Lease act, as such it is usually just called Lend-Lease. The majority of the support was provided by the United States, yet other countries like the United Kingdom and Canada aided the Soviet Union as well.

Thank you to VonKickass for the Thumbnail Design!

»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon – https://www.patreon.com/join/mhv
» paypal donation – https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr…

»» MERCHANDISE – SPOILS OF WAR ««
» shop – https://www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi…

»» SOCIAL MEDIA ««
» twitter – https://twitter.com/MilHiVisualized
» twitch – https://www.twitch.tv/militaryhistory…

» SOURCES «

Boris V. Sokolov: “The role of lend‐lease in Soviet military efforts, 1941–1945”, The Journal of Slavic Military Studies, 7:3 (1994) p. 567-586

Hill, Alexander: The Red Army and the Second World War. Armies of the Second World War. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2017.

Glantz, David M.; House, Jonathan M.: When Titans Clashed. How the Red Army stopped Hitler. Revised and Expanded Edition. University Press of Kansas: USA, 2015

Harrison, Mark: THE SOVIET ECONOMY AND RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES AND BRITAIN, 1941-1945, Draft 25 August, 1993

Hill, Alexander: “British Lend Lease Aid and the Soviet War Effort, June 1941 June 1942”, in: The Journal of Military History, Vol. 71, No. 3 (Jul., 2007), pp. 773-808

Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume 1: Fighting the War. Cambridge University Press: UK (2015)

Broadberry, Stephen; Howlett, Peter: “The United Kingdom: ‘Victory at all costs'”, in: Harrison, Mark (ed.): The Economics of World War II. Cambridge University Press: UK (1998), p. 43-80

Strydwolf: Lend-Lease to Soviet Union, significance, impact and myths

Protocol and Area Information Staff of the U.S.S.R. Branch and the Division of Research and Reports: REPORT ON WAR AID FURNISHED BY THE UNITED STATES TO THE U.S.S.R, November 28, 1945

Harrison, Mark: “The USSR and Total War: Why Didn’t the Soviet Economy Collapse in 1942?” In: Chickering, Roger (ed.); Förster, Stig (ed.); Greiner, Bernd (ed.): A World at Total War: Global Conflict and the Politics of Destruction, 1939-1945, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2005), p. 137-156.

Tooze, Adam: The Wages of Destruction. The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy. Penguin Books: United Kingdom (2006).

Overy, Richard: Why the Allies Won. Pimlico: London, UK (2006).

Higham, Robin (ed.); Kagan, Frederick W. (ed.): The Military History of the Soviet Union. Palgrave: New York, 2002

Havlat, Denis: Western aid for the Soviet Union during World War II, Wien, 2015 (Master Thesis)

» DATA CHAIN «
Made with Natural Earth. Free vector and raster map data @ naturalearthdata.com.

» CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
Song: Ethan Meixsell – “Demilitarized Zone”

May 25, 2020

The Ingenious Design of the Aluminum Beverage Can

Filed under: Food, Technology — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

engineerguy
Published 14 Apr 2015

Bill details the engineering choices underlying the design of a beverage can He explains why it is cylindrical, outlines the manufacturing steps needed to created the can, notes why the can narrows near it lid, show close ups of the double-seam that hold the lid on, and details the complex operation of the tab that opens the can.

May 22, 2020

“Angels Calling” Pt. 2 – Guns, Gas and Steel – Sabaton History 068 [Official]

Filed under: Britain, Europe, France, Germany, History, Media, Military, WW1 — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Sabaton History
Published 21 May 2020

The shadow of trench warfare is a long one. In fact the soldiers at the front did not just rely on their guns and grenades alone, but on a wartime industry to keep them fighting. Everything had to be produced in the millions. Not only rifles, cartridges and shells, but boots, helmets, spades and everything else that was used on a daily basis. The Great War was a war that thrived on a nation-wide war-economy, the likes of which had never been seen or tried before.

We would like to thank the World of Tanks team for their contribution and help with the video filming. If you’re not yet a World of Tanks player, join the game and get your hands on cool in-game stuff for free via the link: https://redir.wargaming.net/w7fwclmx/…

Support Sabaton History on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/sabatonhistory

Listen to “Angels Calling” on the album Attero Dominatus:
CD: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusStore
Spotify: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusSpotify
Apple Music: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusAppleMusic
iTunes: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusiTunes
Amazon: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusAmzn
Google Play: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusGooglePlay
Drücken Sie zum Aktivieren des Screenreaders ⌘+Wahltaste+Z. Informationen zu Tastaturkürzeln erhalten Sie, indem Sie ⌘Schrägstrich drücken.

Watch the Official Video of “Angels Calling” here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyZ8w…

Check out the trailer for Sabaton’s new album The Great War right here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCZP1…

Listen to Sabaton on Spotify: http://smarturl.it/SabatonSpotify
Official Sabaton Merchandise Shop: http://bit.ly/SabatonOfficialShop

Hosted by: Indy Neidell
Written by: Markus Linke and Indy Neidell
Directed by: Astrid Deinhard and Wieke Kapteijns
Produced by: Pär Sundström, Astrid Deinhard and Spartacus Olsson
Creative Producer: Joram Appel
Executive Producers: Pär Sundström, Joakim Broden, Tomas Sunmo, Indy Neidell, Astrid Deinhard, and Spartacus Olsson
Post-Production Director: Wieke Kapteijns
Edited by: Karolina Dołęga
Sound Editing by: Marek Kaminski
Maps by: Eastory – https://www.youtube.com/c/eastory

Archive by: Reuters/Screenocean https://www.screenocean.com
Music by Sabaton.

Sources:
Imperial War Museum: (E(AUS) 1497),(Q 87945), (HU_91107), (Q 109611), (IWM Q 3001), (Q 69229), (Q 14945), (Q 5855), (Q 110355), (Q30009), (Q 9340), (Q 10450), (Q 70680)
Bundesarchive
National Archives NARA
Library of Scotland
Internet Archive Book Images
Bulgarian Archive State Agency
The icons from Noun Project by: Creative Mania, Chanut is Industries, Ben Davis, Vichanon Chaimsuk, Assyifa Art, chiccabubble, Nociconist, Vectors Marke, lastspark, faisal, Nun, Setyo Ari Wibowo, Mohamad Arif Prasetyo, Nibras@design,Creative Stall, Bruno Bosse, ghufronagustian, Karla Design,Gan Khoon Lay, Eucalyp, Anton, Marta Botter, Iconic, Daniel Turner, Naufal Hudallah, Phạm Thanh Lộc, Ruben Vh, Vectorstall, Icon Lauk, Mahmure Alp, Luke Anthony, Deemak Daksina, Sergey Krivoy, Andrejs Kirma, Rflor, Andrejs Kirma, Shovel by David, ProSymbols, Jake Dunham, noSimon Child, Wonmo Kang, Nubaia Karim Barsha, Nikita Kozin, Dolly Holmes, Collicon, Made by Made & Graphic Enginer
Flag of Spain recreated by HansenBCN and SanchoPanzaXXI

An OnLion Entertainment GmbH and Raging Beaver Publishing AB co-Production.

© Raging Beaver Publishing AB, 2019 – all rights reserved.

April 22, 2020

The REAL Heroes of the M1 Carbine – not “Carbine” Williams

Filed under: History, Military, USA, Weapons, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Forgotten Weapons
Published 21 Apr 2020

http://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons

https://www.floatplane.com/channel/Fo…

Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! http://shop.bbtv.com/collections/forg…

The Hollywood-spawned mythos of the M1 Carbine is that it was created by David Marshall “Carbine” Williams. The reality is far different. In real life, Williams was talented, but short-tempered, stubborn, and unable to work effectively as part of a team — and a cohesive, cooperative team is what the M1 Carbine required.

While Williams was off sulking about how the work was being done wrong, a team of Winchester machinists and engineers including William Roemer and Fred Humiston were actually making it happen.

The most impressive anecdote of the whole story, to me, is from when the solitary Winchester prototype broke its bolt in the middle of the final testing. Fred Humiston was representing Winchester at the trials, and he was told that if he could provide a new bolt within 24 hours the gun could continue the trials — but he could not take the gun off the testing ground. So Humiston went back to the Winchester shop and made a new bolt from memory (no drawings yet existed for the gun) and without being able to test-fit it in the gun. When he returned the next day, his new bolt dropped in perfectly, and the gun went on to win the trials. That is an epic feat of skill, and it is really a shame that he does not get more recognition for it.

Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
6281 N. Oracle #36270
Tucson, AZ 85740

April 8, 2020

Debunking the claim that “80% of America’s drugs come from China”

Filed under: Business, China, Health, Media, USA — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Eric Boehm tries to sort out where the startling claim came from … because it’s not true:

While reading about the COVID-19 outbreak, you’ve probably encountered this particularly shocking statistic at one time or another: 80 percent of America’s pharmaceutical drug supply comes from China.

It’s a statistic that has made the rounds in right-wing publications for a while — offered as proof that China-heavy global supply chains are putting Americans at risk — but it has also popped up in mainstream outlets, including in pieces published in Politico and The Atlantic. Wherever it is deployed, the stat carries an unstated implication: What if China decides to cut us off in the middle of a pandemic? Could America face a dramatic shortage of key pharmaceutical drugs at the moment when we are most in need? And that distorted claim that says America has been too reliant on China has been seized by politicians like Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) as evidence that globalization has undermined America’s pandemic response.

[…]

How much is a lot? “In all, 80 percent of the U.S. supply of antibiotics are made in China,” [Politico contributors Doug Palmer and Finbarr Bermingham] wrote, linking back to a press release from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R–Iowa).

But that’s not what the press release says.

Grassley’s statement was publicizing a letter Grassley sent on August 9 to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the FDA, asking them to conduct more inspections of foreign drug manufacturing facilities to make sure they meet American standards.

“Unbeknownst to many consumers … 80 percent of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients are produced abroad, the majority in China and India,” Grassley wrote.

There’s the first bit of context collapse: the authors of the Politico piece merged Grassley’s “80 percent … are produced abroad” into “80 percent … are made in China.”

All of this also raises another question: Where is Grassley getting that information? His letter sources that claim to a 2016 Government Accountability Office report which itself cited FDA data on pharmaceutical manufacturers around the world. And that report makes it clear that the U.S. has a diverse supply chain for drugs that goes well beyond India and China.

“Nearly 40 percent of finished drugs and approximately 80 percent of active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) are manufactured in registered establishments in more than 150 countries,” is how the GAO summed up America’s pharmaceutical supply chain.

In two jumps, we’ve gone from “80 percent of American drugs are manufactured in more than 150 countries around the world” to “80 percent of drugs come from two countries” to “80 percent of drugs come from China.”

Now, a further complication. The FDA only tracks drug manufacturing facilities — not the supply chains of specific drugs.

That “lack of structural transparency and available supply chain data about drugs,” researchers at the University of Minnesota researchers wrote last month, is one of the reasons why making accurate assessments about potential drug shortages is difficult. Indeed, it was this same bit of missing information that Grassley was encouraging the FDA to address back in August.

Source: FDA; Safeguarding Pharmaceutical Supply Chains in a Global Economy, October 2019.

April 1, 2020

The end of US neutrality? The Lend-Lease Act – WW2 Special Episode

Filed under: Britain, History, Military, USA, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 06:00

World War Two
Published 31 Mar 2020

The United States of America aims to remain neutral during World War Two. But they see it in their best interest to aid the British in their fight against Nazism. The Lend-Lease Act is designed to do exactly that.

Join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TimeGhostHistory
Or join The TimeGhost Army directly at: https://timeghost.tv

Follow WW2 day by day on Instagram @World_war_two_realtime https://www.instagram.com/world_war_t…
Between 2 Wars: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list…
Source list: http://bit.ly/WW2sources

Hosted by: Indy Neidell
Written by: Joram Appel
Produced and Directed by: Spartacus Olsson and Astrid Deinhard
Executive Producers: Bodo Rittenauer, Astrid Deinhard, Indy Neidell, Spartacus Olsson
Creative Producer: Joram Appel
Post-Production Director: Wieke Kapteijns
Research by: Scott Grimwood and Joram Appel
Edited by: Mikołaj Cackowski
Map animations: Eastory (https://www.youtube.com/c/eastory)

Colorizations by:
Norman Stewart – https://oldtimesincolor.blogspot.com/
Adrien Fillon – https://www.instagram.com/adrien.colo…
Dememorabilia – https://www.instagram.com/dememorabilia/

Sources:
Plane by Graphic Enginer from the Noun Project
people by ProSymbols from the Noun Project
Allierte soldater under kampene om Narvik, courtesy Arkiv i Nordland https://flic.kr/p/a829tg

Soundtracks from the Epidemic Sound:
Johannes Bornlof – “Deviation in Time”
Rannar Sillard – “March Of The Brave 4”
Phoenix Tail – “At the Front”
Hakan Eriksson – “Epic Adventure Theme 3”
Johannes Bornlof – “The Inspector 4”

Archive by Screenocean/Reuters https://www.screenocean.com.

A TimeGhost chronological documentary produced by OnLion Entertainment GmbH.

From the comments:

World War Two
1 hour ago (edited)
On 11 March, 1941, American President Roosevelt signed the Lend-Lease Act, as Indy has covered in the weekly episode on that week. We wanted to revisit that bill in a special episode since it is arguably one of the most consequential American actions of the war before December 1941. Now, the effects of the bill are not visible immediately, but later in the war we will definitely revisit some of the materiel that entered British service under Lend-Lease. We hope you all remain safe and healthy!
Cheers, Joram

February 9, 2020

The lightbulb conspiracy again

I’ve banged on a few times over the years about lightbulbs, specifically about our government’s passionate desire for us to abandon the tried-and-tested (and cheap) incandescent bulbs to move first to (ultra-expensive, dim, and potentially dangerous) compact fluorescent bulbs and now to (cheaper, but still not living up to longevity promises) LED bulbs instead. Tim Worstall explains how governments were persuaded to enforce this crony capitalist plot over the years (he’s discussing the European market, but Canadian regulators were doing exactly the same thing):

We all recall when we used to use incandescent light bulbs. Simple, cheap, the result of a century’s worth of fiddling with the basic technology to make it around and about right for the use to which it was put.

A spiral compact fluorescent bulb (CFL).
Image by Sun Ladder via Wikimedia Commons.

Then they were banned. Sure, there was that energy and thus planet saving argument but that was always very weak indeed. It was an excuse, not the actual reason itself. The reason was that the big three manufacturers, Phillips, Osram and GE, had invested heavily in the next generation of technology, compact fluorescents. These cost not pennies per bulb but pounds. Rather better profit margins that is. Oh, and also, not subject to that crippling competition from China.

So, we get the EU ban on incandescents, driven entirely by the manufacturers. There’s a lot of the Baptist and Bootlegger in here given the environmentalist support for it.

The problem with the technology being the use of mercury in those bulbs.

An aside, I made my living for a number of years selling weird metals that are added to that mercury. I do actually know quite a bit about the nuts and bolts here. I’m also out of the business and have been for a decade and more. So it’s knowledge driving this, not knife sharpening.

Mercury’s not good stuff to have floating around. So, what happens next? Yep, a decade or a bit more after the incandescents were banned so now they’re coming for the CFLs.

The mercury issue was not as well publicized here in Canada as it was in Australia, for example:

How many of them have looked up the Environment Department’s website to find what its bureaucrats falsely describe as the “simple and straightforward” precautions to take against poisoning should one of these lamps smash:

  • Open nearby windows and doors to allow the room to ventilate for 15 minutes before cleaning up the broken lamp. Do not leave on any air conditioning or heating equipment which could recirculate mercury vapours back into the room.
  • Do not use a vacuum cleaner or broom on hard surfaces because this can spread the contents of the lamp and contaminate the cleaner. Instead scoop up broken material (e.g. using stiff paper or cardboard), if possible into a glass container which can be sealed with a metal lid.
  • Use disposable rubber gloves rather than bare hands.
  • Use a disposable brush to carefully sweep up the pieces.
  • Use sticky tape and/or a damp cloth to wipe up any remaining glass fragments and/or powders.
  • On carpets or fabrics, carefully remove as much glass and/or powdered material using a scoop and sticky tape; if vacuuming of the surface is needed to remove residual material, ensure that the vacuum bag is discarded or the canister is wiped thoroughly clean.
  • Dispose of cleanup equipment (i.e. gloves, brush, damp paper) and sealed containers containing pieces of the broken lamp in your outside rubbish bin – never in your recycling bin.
  • While not all of the recommended cleanup and disposal equipment described above may be available (particularly a suitably sealed glass container), it is important to emphasise that the transfer of the broken CFL and clean-up materials to an outside rubbish bin (preferably sealed) as soon as possible is the most effective way of reducing potential contamination of the indoor environment.

January 18, 2020

Tank Chats #59 Sherman Grizzly | The Tank Museum

Filed under: Cancon, History, Military, USA, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

The Tank Museum
Published 16 Nov 2018

David Willey, Tank Museum Curator, presents a Tank Chat on the Sherman Grizzly.

This version of the Sherman was built in Canada from October 1943. After the fall of France, the Canadians began making their own vehicles, beginning with the Ram tank based on the M3 Lee chassis before moving on to a modified M4 Sherman. Only about 180 were produced.

This vehicle is currently on loan to the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum Wien.

Support the work of The Tank Museum on Patreon: ► https://www.patreon.com/tankmuseum

Visit The Tank Museum SHOP: ► https://tankmuseumshop.org/
Twitter: ► https://twitter.com/TankMuseum
Tiger Tank Blog: ► http://blog.tiger-tank.com/
Tank 100 First World War Centenary Blog: ► http://tank100.com/ #tankmuseum #tanks #tankchats

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress