- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 915
Flash in the pan means the flint was working fine. You had others problems with that load.Sharpsman said:
Did you only try it once?
All this rifle needed....
- Thread starter Sharpsman
- Start date
Help Support Modern Muzzleloading Forum:
Did you only try it once?
that vent does sit pretty high up.
Are sparks falling directly into the pan with the flint being set up as it is? Sometimes when you get a high strike on the frizzen, the sparks actually fly forward, away from the pan.
Are sparks falling directly into the pan with the flint being set up as it is? Sometimes when you get a high strike on the frizzen, the sparks actually fly forward, away from the pan.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 915
You don't check the sparks while shooting a load at the range. You do it in a dark room. Did you ever do that with the flint in both positions to see which way the flint worked best?Sharpsman said:
Yep...I'm aware of that! It doesn't seem like an over-abundance of spark creation is being developed but I can see that the rock is striking higher on the frizzen. At the half cock position with these 3/4" rocks and the frizzen closed I can't get any clearance betwixt the frizzen and edge of the rock! I may need a flint of 5/8" or so! :Questuon:Muley said:
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,261
- Reaction score
- 1,557
In the early 1970s i had two nice old original rocklocks. Both were highly unreliable. Then i found the "atomic frizzen" sold by the Hamm Lock Co. Bought five of them. They are made of depleted uranium and do they ever spark.
There are two "atomic frizzens" somewhere in the attic in an ammo can.
There are two "atomic frizzens" somewhere in the attic in an ammo can.
patocazador
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 5,496
- Reaction score
- 17
falcon, I have read that these atomic frizzens are still a potential hazard for radioactivity. Is that true?
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2011
- Messages
- 1,981
- Reaction score
- 34
I did read this on the internet: ???
The facing material of frizzens used in flintlock rifles was made with depleted uranium as uranium can produce sparks by friction (ORAU 2004b). This process began in the early 1970s only to disappear by the mid-1990s because of concerns regarding the fragments of uranium that became airborne after the flintlock was discharged (ORAU 2004b). (ORAU = Oak Ridge Associated Universities)
The facing material of frizzens used in flintlock rifles was made with depleted uranium as uranium can produce sparks by friction (ORAU 2004b). This process began in the early 1970s only to disappear by the mid-1990s because of concerns regarding the fragments of uranium that became airborne after the flintlock was discharged (ORAU 2004b). (ORAU = Oak Ridge Associated Universities)
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,261
- Reaction score
- 1,557
Compared to weapons grade uranium or plutonium, depleted uranium is a slight hazard. The military uses depleted uranium in penetrators for anti-- armor ammunition. Depleted uranium is also used in the shaped charge cones of some TOW missile rounds. When a penetrator consisting of depleted uranoum strikes an armored vehicle, there is a huge fireball.
RonRC
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Messages
- 1,313
- Reaction score
- 205
Depleted uranium has about 60% of the radioactivity of natural uranium. It therefore can be a risk, with the greatest risk being from inhalation.
A depleted uranium frizzen just sitting there is little risk. The primary radiation given off by depleted uranium is alpha, along with a bit of beta and small amounts of gamma. Alpha particles are blocked by skin, while beta particles are blocked by clothing and by the dead layer of the epidermis. While gamma rays are highly-penetrating, the amount of gamma emitted by depleted uranium is very low. Thus, depleted uranium is not a significant external risk.
It is, however, an internal risk as a chemical and as a radiation emitter. If you ingest DU, about 95% is eliminated in your stool and, of what is taken up in your digestive tract, 2/3 is filtered by your kidneys and into the urine in a short time (1 day).
Inhalation poses a larger risk for retention of the particles of DU.
I would be most concerned about the particles generated when the flint hits the frizzen because that is what would be inhaled. There should be no more than 1 micro-gram per cubic meter of air that you breathe. That tells me that DU is not a terrible risk when inhaled, but not a risk to be taken lightly.
Moral of the story: don't eat your frizzen; don't breathe it in, either.
Ron
A depleted uranium frizzen just sitting there is little risk. The primary radiation given off by depleted uranium is alpha, along with a bit of beta and small amounts of gamma. Alpha particles are blocked by skin, while beta particles are blocked by clothing and by the dead layer of the epidermis. While gamma rays are highly-penetrating, the amount of gamma emitted by depleted uranium is very low. Thus, depleted uranium is not a significant external risk.
It is, however, an internal risk as a chemical and as a radiation emitter. If you ingest DU, about 95% is eliminated in your stool and, of what is taken up in your digestive tract, 2/3 is filtered by your kidneys and into the urine in a short time (1 day).
Inhalation poses a larger risk for retention of the particles of DU.
I would be most concerned about the particles generated when the flint hits the frizzen because that is what would be inhaled. There should be no more than 1 micro-gram per cubic meter of air that you breathe. That tells me that DU is not a terrible risk when inhaled, but not a risk to be taken lightly.
Moral of the story: don't eat your frizzen; don't breathe it in, either.
Ron
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,261
- Reaction score
- 1,557
Yep, reminds me that decades ago Pantex Corp. was told to hire a safety officer. Now Pantex is the company that disassembles the obsolete nuclear weapons for the US military.
Turns out the workers were handling weapons grade plutonium and uranium with their bare hands. They were eating without washing their hands; etc, etc, ad nauseum. The new safety officer cracked down on the worker bees. Then a manager took the safety officer to task. "Don't tell them that stuff, they will be filing workers comp claims".
i'm not surprised that Pantex nearly had a multi megaton nuclear blast while tearing apart a bomb.
Turns out the workers were handling weapons grade plutonium and uranium with their bare hands. They were eating without washing their hands; etc, etc, ad nauseum. The new safety officer cracked down on the worker bees. Then a manager took the safety officer to task. "Don't tell them that stuff, they will be filing workers comp claims".
i'm not surprised that Pantex nearly had a multi megaton nuclear blast while tearing apart a bomb.
http://grist.org/article/dept-of-holy/
patocazador
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 5,496
- Reaction score
- 17
Quote :In March 2005, a nuclear warhead almost exploded in Texas. The near miss accident occurred in Amarillo, when workers at the Pantex nuclear weapons plant bungled the dismantling of a W-56 warhead, a weapon 100 times stronger than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima during World War II.
I've been to Amarillo. A nuclear blast might improve it. The cattle at the stockyards may not benefit, however.
I've been to Amarillo. A nuclear blast might improve it. The cattle at the stockyards may not benefit, however.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 915
That's why they invented the caplock.
Similar threads
