Thursday, February 3, 2011

Economic Impacts

Both the Pumhart von Steyr and the Mons Meg cannon are classified as superguns. The making of these superguns typically consisted of iron bars forged together and held in place by iron rings. These superguns were developed to help increase the effect of the projectile. To improve on this, master gunners would add larger amounts of powder loads and thus caused the cannon to explode and cause deaths to the gunners and possibly the king. The manufacturing of superguns only had a moderate success in the countries’ economy. The loss of a cannon could grow very expensive due to the materials needed to be created and its financial costs were very pricey.
The RML 17.72 inch gun is a rifled muzzle-loading gun. This type of cannon requires its projectile to be loaded through the muzzle, “rifling” grooves were cut on the inside of the barrel to cause the projectile to spin rapidly when shot. The use of this cannon was average due to the rapid progression of guns at the time around 1877-1906. With only 15 RML 17.72 inch guns made at a price of £16,000 it allowed for a slight economical increase for the United Kingdom and Italy.
The Mallet’s Mortar was a British siege mortal that had little in not any impact on the economy in the United Kingdom. With only 2 built at a price of £4,300 per Mortar this cannon had little effect for the UK, it was built for the Crimean War but it was never used.
Little David was an American 36 inch caliber mortar used in the testing of fire for aerial bombs during World War II. Its only purpose was for testing only, so it had no inherit affect on the United State’s economy.
The BL 16 inch Mk I naval gun was designed as a warship-mounted cannon used in naval warfare. Unfortunately the cannon never made it out of design, so this cannon didn’t affect the UK’s economy whatsoever.

3 comments:

  1. You sure did find TONS of info. I like the description of it, it's very explanitory and interesting. Nice job!

    ReplyDelete
  2. You found tons of information on these cannons, and you described them well, nice job with this

    ReplyDelete
  3. I must agree with comments above lots of info nice and descriptive could have added a picture though

    ReplyDelete