Talk:Gunpowder/Archive 16

de wiki link

 * Discussion copied from User_talk:Hugo.arg. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 14:12, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Please change your bot not to alter crosswikilinks when multiple choices exist. Humans are better at making this kind of decision than machine translation. Particularly gunpowerder (UK) or black powder (US) is called Schwarzpulver not Schießpulver in German, which is more generic, meaning something like propellant. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 11:32, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * That was user supervised bot edit. At first change 'wrong' links at de.wiki before undoing and complaining. If de:Schießpulver links to articles about en:Gunpowder then article "Gunpowder" should link to "Schießpulver". But if you add some links to one article, some to other you jut make confusion. Hugo.arg (talk) 12:02, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The de wiki link is not wrong. In modern German Schießpulver means firearm propellant for which there is no exact English Wikipedia article match. Before the advent of smokeless powders and nitrocellulose explosives, Schwarzpulver was sometimes subdivided in Sprengpulver (blasting powder) and Schießpulver (shooting powder, in direct translation) based on intended usage with small variations in formulation.  Since them, Schießpulver became generic to include other kinds of "shooting powder" and Sprengpulver became generic for all kinds of explosives. You should not code your bot or make your edits expecting natural languages to have 1:1 match for all terms. Also, in your post above the English is rather poor, so perhaps you should not be the one engaging in such tasks, bot-assisted or not. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 12:38, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'm not a specialist of things about gunpowder but the "iron rule" of interwiki is that if one page links to another it should be backlink. If Schießpulver isn't an article about "gunpowder/Порох/Pólvora" then it should be removed at all instead of adding another incorrect link to "Schwarzpulver" which has a link to articles about black powder. Of course, we can join article de:Schwarzpulver to articles about gunpowder easly but I don't know if other users wouldn't complain if I'll change current "Schwarzpulver" interwiki links to these about "gunpowder" and make "Schießpulver" interwikiless. Hugo.arg (talk) 13:02, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I have created the redirect gun propellant to propellant and changed the de Schießpulver wikiling to point to it. If you volunteer to write the en.wiki article, be my guest, but I bet it will just be merged back to propellant. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 13:10, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, I see you've got reverted maybe better at first discuss with German users about terminology... Hugo.arg (talk) 13:28, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess they are not concerned that both de:Schwarzpulver and de:Schießpulver wikilink to en gunpowder. I guess they've never heard of your "iron rule" either. I'm not going to be your advocate in this matter because I think it's a bad rule to try enforce uniformly. Good luck convincing them yourself. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 14:06, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Additional comments, not found on his talk page
Given the contents of this article, the most suitable de wiki link to place here is de:Schwarzpulver, and certainly not de:Schießpulver. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 14:16, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Also, I note that it was Hugo.arg's bot that added the wrong wikilink to the de Schießpulver article to begin with, creating the double linking of gunpowder from two different de wiki articles. Now he tries to convince us that because of that dubious change of his bot, this article needs to be changed too. I beg to differ. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 15:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * See also meta:Interwiki synchronization/gunpowder. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 22:45, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Recent expansion of the India section
I have the impression that various bits from other articles were copied in there (e.g. from the fact that the same reference, Partington, has two different names). A lot of that material, like the improvements in matchlocks, is more appropriate for other articles like History of firearms etc. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 20:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Marco?
Didn't Marco Polo bring gunpowder to Europe? 90.2.189.222 (talk) 20:10, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Black powder rifle manufacturers
Perhaps these can be mentioned ? or an article called List of black powder rifle manufacturers can be made. Some manufacturers are: CVA Black Powder Guns, Lyman Black Powder Guns, NAA Black Powder Revolvers, Remington Black Powder Guns, Rossi Black Powder Guns, Savage Black Powder Guns, Thompson Center Black Powder Guns, Traditions Black Powder Guns, Uberti Black Powder Revolvers

ref= http://www.ableammo.com/catalog/thompson-center-black-powder-rifles-sale-online-from-thompson-center-firearms-c-15146_15087_15120.html

91.182.57.75 (talk) 10:11, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

cannot detonate
I don't believe that black powder cannot detonate, and I even think one could argue that this statement could contribute to safety hazards. 1) I have heard that black powder guns can explode if improperly loaded. 2)  I know someone who detonated some (in a remote area) with a high velocity rifle. 3) Just as even the best gasoline-air mixture will detonate under sufficient heat and pressure, so will the most stable explosives.  A powerful detonator can supply the required temperature and pressure to detonate the powder near it, and I find it hard to believe that the shock will not continue to ignite the rest of the charge. 4)  Manure and diesel oil detonates, with a much lower concentration of nitrates and very little sulfur. So I conclude that either the listed source is wrong or else it was misunderstood. David R. Ingham (talk) 04:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "Detonate" is a technical term, different to and distinct from "ignite" and "explode". The passage as written was quite correct. I have linked to the meanings of "detonate" and "low explosive" to make this clear. Jmackaerospace (talk) 21:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Dardanelles gun type


This guns is breech-loading. The right part on this photo is the breech block, combined with the chamber which contained the powder charge - it was unscrewed, filled with gunpowder, and then screwed into the barrel again, after the stone ball was inserted from the breech end. Four circular rows of deep square sockets around the ends of the barrel and the breech block are for the insertion of wooden levers which were used for screwing / unscrewing the two parts. It is notable that it could not be reloaded immediately after being fired, as one had to wait until the gun cooled down enough to unscrew the chamber, due to the thermal expansion of bronze locking the screw.

See also

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/0/1/0/6/6/1/Happy-Ostara-Ostara-History-and-Traditions-46959529116.jpeg

http://www.muslimheritage.com/imagelibrary/cannon_figure_3.gif

and especially

http://muslimheritage.com/topics/default.cfm?ArticleID=369

95.79.107.34 (talk) 12:26, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

The second chemical explosive?
"Gunpowder, also known since the late 19th century as black powder, was the second chemical explosive and the only one known until the mid-1800s". This makes no sense whatsoever. How could it simultaneously be 'second', and 'the only one known'? AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That was a result of a series of vandalism attacks. You obviously did not check the article's history. You could try asking the author who added that statement, or rather the one who changed "first" to "second"; and made other changes. Vandalism often produces nonsense. Pyrotec (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually this statement is not precise. Another chemical explosive, aurum fulminans, was known in 1608, see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemistry and the reference mentioned therein. However, currently aurum fulminans incorrectly redirects to Fulminate. --Fedor Babkin (talk) 15:20, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this information. Having checked elsewhere, I would agree. Tenney L Davis (1943) states that written accounts of fulminating gold (Goldkalck) were published during 1602-1604 and the name aurum fulminans was given by the Belguiness in 1608. It was used in a detonator in 1628 and was mentioned by Pepys on 11 November 1663. It looks like we will need to update the information in this article. Pyrotec (talk) 16:57, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Any source that says mixing it with gelatine will cause superexplosion
Is there any source that backs that up? perhaps its trivia,though certain yahoo answers asked what happens if you mixed gelatine and gunpowder. the song killer queen mention gunpowder and gelatine, so perhaps this is where this suposed thing comes from

is this true or false and any real scientific source to back this up?Bovons (talk) 16:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Signal Flares?
Aside from festival displays, celebrations, and such, weren't fireworks also originally used by the Chinese as military signal flares? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.252.124.184 (talk) 12:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Signal Flares?
Aside from festival displays, celebrations, and such, weren't fireworks also originally used by the Chinese as military signal flares? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.252.124.184 (talk) 12:08, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Minecraft
Gunpowder was an item in Minecraft. It comes from creepers. It explodes. Just like creepers. --Rabbit2012 19:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabbit2012 (talk • contribs)

Spelling?
I don't know Latin, but I noticed that in the 3rd paragraph of the Mainland Europe section "Ignium" and "ingus" appear inconsistent. Is a correction needed? Steve8394 (talk) 17:55, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Bacon Quote [with dubious insertions]
What is the point of the additions, in square brackets, in the Roger Bacon quote?

"We have an example of these things (that act on the senses) in [the sound and fire of] that children's toy which is made in many [diverse] parts of the world; i.e., a device no bigger than one's thumb. From the violence of that salt called saltpeter [together with sulfur and willow charcoal, combined into a powder] so horrible a sound is made by the bursting of a thing so small, no more than a bit of parchment [containing it], that we find [the ear assaulted by a noise] exceeding the roar of strong thunder, and a flash brighter than the most brilliant lightning."


 * These additions aren't in the Opus Majus.
 * Presumably they were added by the intermediate source.
 * Several of them aren't necessary. The mention of the sound, roar and flash make "the sound and fire of" redundant. There's no need to insert "diverse" into "many parts of the world". The addition of "the ear assaulted by a noise" is just making Bacon repeat himself.
 * Most importantly, the sulfur and charcoal (and specifically willow charcoal!) are added to make it seem as if Bacon had revealed the recipe for gunpowder, when in reality he only mentions saltpeter.

That last one is just plain misleading. It's all very well using square brackets to clarify the meaning of a source by adding things that can be assumed, or resolving ambiguities, but that particular clarification is way too creative. (The others are just prolix.) Card Zero  (talk) 15:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

protagonist
I believe that the usage of protagonist in reference to the scholars backing the idea of a Hindu origin of black powder should be replaced by "proponent" as in "proponent of the theory". I might do the edit myself if I was confident of the original writer's meaning.Ealtram (talk) 03:57, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gunpowder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761576898_2/Fireworks.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101004180951/http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/industrial/masterblaster-system.aspx to http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/industrial/masterblaster-system.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gunpowder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071114215300/http://www.ngpc.state.ne.us/nebland/articles/history/shotshells.asp to http://www.ngpc.state.ne.us/nebland/articles/history/shotshells.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715074434/http://philipmcgaw.com/medieval-siege-society/gun-powder-demonstration/ to http://philipmcgaw.com/medieval-siege-society/gun-powder-demonstration/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:44, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gunpowder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070701172502/http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/cannon.htm to http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/cannon.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:52, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Adding water to the mix may remove the highly soluble nitrates?
The article states:


 * Around the late 14th century AD, European powdermakers first began adding liquid during grinding to improve mixing, reduce dust, and with it the risk of explosion.[71] The powdermakers would then shape the resulting paste of dampened gunpowder, known as mill cake, into corns, or grains, to dry. Not only did corned powder keep better because of its reduced surface area, gunners also found that it was more powerful and easier to load into guns. Before long, powdermakers standardized the process by forcing mill cake through sieves instead of corning powder by hand.

I would have thought that water would dissolve the highly soluble potassium nitrate. If any of the liquid were allowed to drain away (as the article mentions later by squeezing in a press) the gunpowder would loose part of its ingredients.

Did early or current manufacturers have a method of adjusting the ratio of ingredients to account for nitrate solubility and removal? 194.176.105.153 (talk) 12:00, 15 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Dissolving the potassium nitrate into a paste or sludge with water allows the thorough mixing of the nitrate with the carbon and sulphur (and reduces the likelihood of disasterous sparks in the mixing process). The wet paste was then compressed in to cakes. The water is allowed to evaporate, dry off not run off. I have read discription of the recreation of Colonial era backwoods manufacture of gunpowder; extracting nitrates was a lot of work and that resource was not wasted by allowing it to run off. -- Naaman Brown (talk) 12:46, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Ealtram contribution starts here. I apparently don't know how to add something without using "edit". The pressing may have the effect of accelerating drying. If the water (containing saltpeter) is then allowed to evaporate, the dissolved saltpeter would be left behind. As with many other materials, the pressed cake would not reabsorb the water and the saltpeter would remain behind as a film on the cake. See articles about McAdamized roads where soil is compacted and becomes impervious to rain and flooding etc.Ealtram (talk) 04:24, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Battery-ignited firearms
Shouldn't we mention the battery-ignited firearms too ? For example, Henry Pieper made one in 1883, see here and here. Also, there are some experimenters that have modified existing black powder rifles, see here and here KVDP (talk) 12:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Details like that are more relevent to the subject of fireams than to the subject of gunpowder. -- Naaman Brown (talk) 12:49, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Modern military use
Regarding the statement Gunpowder is no longer used in modern weapons..., isn't black powder used in (at least Soviet-era) RPG(e.g. RPG-7) as the non-rocket propellant? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.1.89 (talk • contribs) 17:30, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

That statement is too absolute. Gunpowder (called black powder to distinguish it from modern smokeless powder) was used as an ignitor for the main charge of smokeless powder in the main guns of WWII battleships. Saltpeter + sugar (chemically similar to gunpowder) is used as propellant in improvised rockets used by insurgents. There are modern propellants and explosives that are more powerful, less moisture sensitive, and less likely by ignited by sparks than gunpowder but I suspect there are some modern weapons systems that still utilize the ease of ignition of gunpowder as part of the priming chain. From the 1999 Texas Rangers description of the FBI M651 40mm flash and sound grenade, the fuse ignited by firing the grenade "... burns at a consistent rate and then ignites a column of pressed black powder. This in turn ignites the report compound ...." In military applications gunpowder (black powder) is used less today after the invention of modern explosives but it still has its uses, especially if sealed from moisture and unwanted ignition. The absolute "no longer" is not true. -- Naaman Brown (talk) 13:33, 6 August 2018 (UTC)