On hard ground, roughly how much of the track length of the Mk I to V, the Whippet, and the Gun Carrier, was in contact?
Thanking you in advance.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Ta, Charlie. My maths was never much good, and it now seems that I have lost the ability to do the simplest calculation. I worked out that the Whippet was about 4'6" (which I think is about 1.4m), but I got the MkIV to around 7'6". I'm sure it's me that's wrong.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
that is an interesting question I think. Some time ago I posted another one, somehow related to this: what is the angle between the part of the track not touching the ground and the ground itself? Or how can you calculate or figure out the exact shape of the rhomboid, or the rounding of the horns...
Not sure if this helps, but just pulled up my plans and got a diameter of 98' ish to match the curve of the front horns. Also I make it 8 track plates on the ground, but that could easily be 11 due to the shallow curve of the tracks.
Helen x
-- Edited by MK1 Nut on Sunday 1st of January 2012 08:24:37 PM
Ah, Helen. That's a sore point. Someone (I think it might have been Williams-Ellis) started the rumour that the curve was the equivalent of the circumference of a 60' wheel, but I gather Wilson got quite upset about this and said it was just coincidence, not connected with the Big Wheel idea.
However, I've come across an answer. At the very back of the Cannon Books Profile collection there's a set of tables compiled by Duncan Crow that I've never been bothered to read before. Amongst them is a section on technical matters, including "Track Width and Length in Ground Contact Each Side."
He gives figures for "No Sinkage" (i.e. on hard ground), "Sunk to Belly At Rest," and "Sunk to Belly In Motion," (an unpleasant image).
The respective figures are:
Mks I-V: 4' 7", 17' 0", 11' 0".
Mk V*: 10' 7", 22' 0", 17' 0".
Mk V**: 6' 0", 23' 6", 17' 6".
Whippet: 4' 0", 17' 0", 14' 0".
So at least 50% of my earlier calculations were rubbish, but Charlie's seem to be just the job.
-- Edited by James H on Monday 2nd of January 2012 02:36:39 PM
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Your 38' 6" seems to be within experimental error of Tritton's 40 feet dia. "Big Wheel" idea, but, as I say, Wilson was very cross about all this and said such a rumour would bring the derision of other engineers down upon him.
Always nice to discuss bellies in the mud with a member of the opposite sex, btw. I normally pay premium rates for that.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
