From: David Cole (DavidCole@tk7.net)
Date: Mon Nov 10 2003 - 10:36:17 PST
I'll cross brace the pipes somewhat - ala ladder bracing. The bracing is
the key.
You'd be amazed at how much a 2.5 inch pipe will hold if braced. The roof
of my 50' x 30' barn is supported by 10 - 2.5" schedule 80 pipes. With
cross bracing it is extremely ridgid.
A lot of those heavy lifting cranes are made out of tube also, but the
bracing minimizes the ability for the tubes to deflect under load.
I was wondering what the official procedure was to get the US issue A frame
in the air. Perhaps they utilize 3 guys and a pole to push it up and then
connect the guy wire?
Dave
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:04:48 -0500, m35products <m35prod@optonline.net>
wrote:
> Without seeing what it is you are talking about, and with the
> understanding
> that I am not an expert at anything in the world, it seems that a couple
> of
> 2.5" pipes, 20 feet in length, are not going to hold much of anything,
> before deflecting and turning into a pretzel.
>
> Raising a boom is never a problem, assuming the lift point is above the
> pivot point, even by a few inches. I have often marvelled at the very
> large
> construction cranes that are transported into a city on flatbed trailers.
> When they arrive and are assembled horizontally along the street,
> erecting
> them is a quick job, because the hoisting cables are just a little higher
> than the boom itself, and our friend Mr. Leverage is at work..
>
> APB
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Cole" <DavidCole@tk7.net>
> To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 11:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [MV] A Frame crane setup for front end of 5 ton truck?
>
>
>> Thanks, I found it in a newer copy of that TM I pulled off Logsa. The
> 1963
>> version I had didn't have it in it.
>>
>> Does anyone have more info on this kit? I would like to make one up,
>> but
>> obviously the military did some engineering on this setup and I don't
>> want
>> to reinvent the wheel. Any idea how long those poles are they used for
> the
>> A frame? Does anyone else have any details on this rig? If anyone is
>> interested, I'll put a drawing of the rig on my website once I get it
> done.
>> I think I have most of the materials already. I'm thinking of using
>> some
>> 2 1/2" diameter pipe - 20 feet long for the uprights. Has anyone
>> actually
>> used this rig? I'm thinking that actually getting the rig in the air
> might
>> be a challenge in itself. But it sure would be useful.
>>
>> I've been sand blasting my dump truck box and I might weld in some
> brackets
>> to accomodate this rig if I can figure it out and get it done before it
>> gets excessively cold. I was spraying paint while the temp hovered
>> around
>> 38 this weekend. If it wasn't for hardener, this would not be possible!
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 13:47:06 -0800 (PST), Joe Foley
>> <redmenaced@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Page 2-146 of TM 9-2320-211-10.
>> >
>> > One caution, they appear to have neglected to invert
>> > the pintle hook, I would think the cable should be
>> > pulling on the larger part of the hook/hitch, not on
>> > the "latch".
>> >
>> > Joe
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --- David Cole <DavidCole@tk7.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Does anyone know the TM that would have info on the
>> >> A Frame crane setup that I have heard about for the 5 ton M54 series?
> Or
>> >> does anyone have picts of this rig in action?
>> >>
>> >> Has anyone on the list used this setup before? I'd
>> >> like to put one together.
>> >>
>> >> Dave
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:34:43 -0500, David Cole
>> >> <DavidCole@tk7.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > How do we know that these pictures were
>> >> classified? Or is this opinion > that they "should" have been
>> >> classified.
>> >> >
>> >> > Dave
>> >> >
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 00:55:36 -0600, Doc Bryant
>> >> <rbhonk1@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> What hit the Abrams has not been verified and
>> >> came as a surprise to our
>> >> >> forces. I'm therefore puzzled why you are so
>> >> sure you know what it was.
>> >> >> Plus, that doesn't change anything... the pics
>> >> were classified and they
>> >> >> were leaked. Classified is classified even if it
>> >> doesn't make sense to
>> >> >> the individual for such a designation.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> < I saw where the report is sensitive. Not
>> >> classified. I also did not
>> >> >> notice any great uproar anywhere else over these
>> >> pictures being bandied
>> >> >> about.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The Abrahms has been sold to foreign countries. One can easily
> assume
>> >> >> other
>> >> >> nations intelligence outfits have looked at the
>> >> tank very carefully. >> And
>> >> >> that is an assumption that I could take to any
>> >> bank and cash.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In testing weapons, if you have a good idea the
>> >> composition of the armor >> you
>> >> >> are trying to breech, its a standard practice to
>> >> be able to establish a >> test
>> >> >> material and then extrapolate that data to give
>> >> you an idea how it would
>> >> >> perform if that weapon hit the real McCoy. Obviously, you can not
>> >> plan >> in
>> >> >> that test for Clausewitz's fog of war, but you
>> >> can understand what the
>> >> >> projectile will do to a roughly equivelent armor
>> >> shield. Then, if you >> are
>> >> >> worried about any fudge factors, just dial up the
>> >> performance a notch or
>> >> >> two. Overkill is never a bad idea.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The weapon wasn't thought to be effective but the
>> >> gunner got a lucky
>> >> >> hit and found something that wasn't planned on.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The Golden BB theory? No. Although its done,
>> >> and we all know it, one
>> >> >> should never field a weapons system based on the
>> >> hope for lucky shot.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Never assume that the enemy knows what they are
>> >> doing
>> >> >> and give them intel they didn't have on a silver
>> >> platter.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> True. We should have not then allowed FMS of
>> >> these tanks to other >> nations.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Doc Bryant
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> >> >> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
>> >> <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> >> >> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
>> >> <mil-veh-digest@mil->> veh.org>
>> >> >> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -- Dave
>> >>
>> >> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> >> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
>> >> <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> >> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
>> >> <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
>> >> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>> >
>> >
>> > __________________________________
>> > Do you Yahoo!?
>> > Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
>> > http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
>> >
>> > ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> > To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> > To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
> <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
>> > To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Dave
>>
>> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-
>> veh.org>
>> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
-- Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:26:26 PDT