[ EPU Foyer ] [ Lab and Grill ] [ Bonus Theater!! ] [ Rhetorical Questions ] [ CSRANTronix ] [ GNDN ] [ Subterranean Vault ] [ Discussion Forum ] [ Gun of the Week ]

Eyrie Productions, Unlimited

Subject: "GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"     Previous Topic | Next Topic
Printer-friendly copy    
Conferences Gun of the Week Topic #84
Reading Topic #84
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-22-17, 02:56 AM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
"GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
 
   Here's an old friend I've been meaning to cover for a couple of years.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

  Subject     Author     Message Date     ID  
  RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk ebony14 Aug-22-17 1
     RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-22-17 2
     RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Peter Eng Aug-22-17 3
  RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk JFerio Aug-23-17 4
     RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-23-17 5
         RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk zwol Aug-24-17 6
             RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-24-17 9
                 RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk MuninsFire Aug-25-17 12
                 RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk SneakyPete Aug-28-17 16
         RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk JFerio Aug-24-17 7
             RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-24-17 8
                 RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Mercutio Aug-25-17 10
                     RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-25-17 11
                     RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk JFerio Aug-26-17 15
                 RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk CdrMike Aug-25-17 13
                     RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-25-17 14
                         RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk CdrMike Aug-29-17 17
                             RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-29-17 18
                                 RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk CdrMike Aug-29-17 19
                                     RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-29-17 20
                                         RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk ejheckathorn Aug-29-17 21
                                             RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk Gryphonadmin Aug-29-17 23
                                         RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk CdrMike Aug-29-17 22

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic
ebony14
Member since Jul-11-11
418 posts
Aug-22-17, 08:16 AM (EDT)
Click to EMail ebony14 Click to send private message to ebony14 Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
1. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #0
 
   Disclaimer: Dr. Whatgun is not a real doctor.

Ebony the Black Dragon

"Life is like an anole. Sometimes it's green. Sometimes it's brown. But it's always a small Caribbean lizard."


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-22-17, 12:02 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
2. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #1
 
   >Disclaimer: Dr. Whatgun is not a real doctor.
>
>Ebony the Black Dragon

He's not a medical doctor, but he does have a Ph.D. in comparative philology.

--G.
which is of course the study of similarities and differences between dudes named Phil
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Peter Eng
Charter Member
1407 posts
Aug-22-17, 02:24 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Peter%20Eng Click to send private message to Peter%20Eng Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
3. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #1
 
   >Disclaimer: Dr. Whatgun is not a real doctor.
>

And he isn't a real gun, either.

This is why I prefer Dr. Worm.

Peter Eng
--
Insert humorous comment here.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
JFerio
Charter Member
186 posts
Aug-23-17, 08:21 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail JFerio Click to send private message to JFerio Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
4. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #0
 
   Yeah, the damage to the finish is quite dismaying. I'm expecting that what happened was some sort of contaminant got in there and, being stored in the drawer, basically had a chance to interact with the gun and holster together.

Regarding the rebluing and what it "does" to the "value", I group that in with the same sorts that insist that repairing and refinishing antique furniture to make it USABLE is totally problematic and destroys any inherent value it had as an antique, never withstanding that the table would fall over if you sneezed in it's general direction beforehand and was pretty much useless as a table in even the loosest definition of the word. Or the similar idea that certain hobbies can only be enjoyed in certain ways, like old video games only being played on actual CRTs (notwithstanding the bulk, weight and power consumption), or pre-2004 pinball machines not having the bulbs replaced with LEDs in bulb-like connectors.

Oh, sorry, that started turning into a rant.





Jeffrey 'JFerio' Crouch
'It'll be all right... I think.' - Nene Romanova



  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-23-17, 08:36 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
5. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #4
 
   LAST EDITED ON Aug-23-17 AT 08:36 PM (EDT)
 
>Yeah, the damage to the finish is quite dismaying. I'm expecting that
>what happened was some sort of contaminant got in there and, being
>stored in the drawer, basically had a chance to interact with the gun
>and holster together.

Could be. I didn't include a photo of the holster (maybe I should do that as a follow-up the next time I'm doing a photo session), but you can pretty clearly see that all the oxide from those areas is in there now. I'm not storing it in the holster any more, but the damage is done. Beyond the cosmetics, I'm worried about the parts that are now unwittingly in the white rusting. It's beyond me why they haven't already, really.

>Oh, sorry, that started turning into a rant.

Indeed, although it's one with which I agree, for the most part. It is akin, though not identical, to the eternal drive-them-or-just-look-at-them debate over classic cars, or people who don't see why machines on exhibit in museum should be kept in working order. To memory-paraphrase Mark the gunsmith from C&Rsenal's Anvil series, "Somebody tell me when neglect becomes patina, God help us."

Anyway, I've decided to have it professionally cleaned up and hot-salt blued; it's just a question of finding the right provider and making the arrangements. That decision may annoy whoever ends up having to liquidate my estate, but by that point I really won't give a shit. :)

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
zwol
Member since Feb-24-12
205 posts
Aug-24-17, 09:04 AM (EDT)
Click to EMail zwol Click to send private message to zwol Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
6. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #5
 
   >Beyond the cosmetics, I'm worried about the parts that are now
>unwittingly in the white rusting. It's beyond me why they haven't
>already, really.

Most grades of non-"stainless" steel don't rust at any appreciable rate in dry air. If it gets wet, you have a problem, but it's probably safe in that drawer for as long as it takes you to find a professional to do the reblueing. The thing to worry about would be temperature and humidity swings, which might make droplets condense out in the crevices.

(This is why, for instance, an iron pipe left outside will rust where it touches the ground, where it's damp, and not on top, where the sun dries it out.)


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-24-17, 11:24 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
9. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #6
 
   >>Beyond the cosmetics, I'm worried about the parts that are now
>>unwittingly in the white rusting. It's beyond me why they haven't
>>already, really.
>
>Most grades of non-"stainless" steel don't rust at any appreciable
>rate in dry air.

It does get pretty humid here in the summertime, but I've got air conditioning for the worst days. I should probably get some Zerust tabs or silica gel packets for my storage setup, though, just to be that much safer.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
MuninsFire
Member since Mar-27-07
238 posts
Aug-25-17, 04:47 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail MuninsFire Click to send private message to MuninsFire Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
12. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #9
 
   >>>Beyond the cosmetics, I'm worried about the parts that are now
>>>unwittingly in the white rusting. It's beyond me why they haven't
>>>already, really.
>>
>>Most grades of non-"stainless" steel don't rust at any appreciable
>>rate in dry air.
>
>It does get pretty humid here in the summertime, but I've got air
>conditioning for the worst days. I should probably get some Zerust
>tabs or silica gel packets for my storage setup, though, just to be
>that much safer.
>

If you're particularly worried, a light oil coating will keep the oxygen away from the steel and prevent further corrosion - so long as there's no mechanical friction on the piece to wear away the coating, it'll last indefinitely.

Whatever gun oil you have on hand should do just fine until you can talk to your re-blueing person :-)

--
In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure-dome
decree,
Where Alph, the sacred river,
ran
Through caverns measureless to
man
Down to a sunless sea


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
SneakyPete
Member since Jun-30-04
88 posts
Aug-28-17, 11:47 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail SneakyPete Click to send private message to SneakyPete Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
16. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #9
 
   I agree; keep it well oiled, you won't have to worry about rust. I use Three-In-One, myself.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
JFerio
Charter Member
186 posts
Aug-24-17, 08:18 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail JFerio Click to send private message to JFerio Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
7. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #5
 
   >>Oh, sorry, that started turning into a rant.
>
>Indeed, although it's one with which I agree, for the most part. It
>is akin, though not identical, to the eternal
>drive-them-or-just-look-at-them debate over classic cars, or people
>who don't see why machines on exhibit in museum should be kept in
>working order. To memory-paraphrase Mark the gunsmith from C&Rsenal's
>Anvil series, "Somebody tell me when neglect becomes patina,
>God help us."

In a general sense, I prefer to see such things still being used, or failing that, maintained in such a way that they could, if needed, be put back into service.

For instance, I've modded old game consoles to get video signals more compatible with the display gear we now have (projector system with Framemeister external upscaler), and opened 35 year old sealed games to play them.

>
>Anyway, I've decided to have it professionally cleaned up and hot-salt
>blued; it's just a question of finding the right provider and making
>the arrangements. That decision may annoy whoever ends up having to
>liquidate my estate, but by that point I really won't give a shit. :)

And that, indeed, is the correct attitude to have.





Jeffrey 'JFerio' Crouch
'It'll be all right... I think.' - Nene Romanova



  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-24-17, 11:21 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
8. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #7
 
   >In a general sense, I prefer to see such things still being used, or
>failing that, maintained in such a way that they could, if needed, be
>put back into service.

I once witnessed an argument between a visitor and a staffer at the Owls Head Transportation Museum about the museum's habit of operating its vehicles at the various special occasions it hosts during the summer. Well, when I say "argument", it was really the visitor ranting about the irresponsibility of it all and the staffer trying to find polite ways of not engaging.

I kind of let it go on for a while, then ambled over, pointed at the oily drip tray under the engine of the vintage biplane standing nearby, and asked, "Is that there because this engine still runs?"

"Yes it is," the staffer said.

"Awesome," I said, and wandered on to look at the next item.

Mind you, there are certain safety considerations involved in applying that philosophy to firearms (as, indeed, there are with vintage vehicles, though the considers themselves are different). I don't shoot my old Mauser Bolo, for instance, because it's worn out and mismatched and wouldn't be safe, and I have a couple of others that the current working status of is uncertain. There are practical obstacles too, sometimes; I have a couple of other guns in my collection that you just can't get ammunition for any longer. Nobody's made British .380 Revolver ammunition (black powder cartridges, from the 1870s) for quite a long time.

Still, if you can, and it's safe, why not? I've seen people object, "Why ruin it?" but unless you're dealing with some kind of super-elaborate presentation piece with a really fragile embellished finish or something, I don't think that really holds up. It's what they're for.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Mercutio
Member since May-26-13
873 posts
Aug-25-17, 03:19 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Mercutio Click to send private message to Mercutio Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
10. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #8
 
   >Still, if you can, and it's safe, why not? I've seen people object,
>"Why ruin it?" but unless you're dealing with some kind of
>super-elaborate presentation piece with a really fragile embellished
>finish or something, I don't think that really holds up. It's what
>they're for.

It depends a little bit on a persons perspective of "ruin" and what they're there to see and gain enjoyment from.

There seem to be a lot of folks who don't want to see a reproduction, or a re-creation; they want to see the thing as it was when it wasn't an antique or an object of historical significance, but was just a thing.

To them, actually <em>using</em> it, while it may not impact them, personally, it will eventually have an impact down the road. Parts wear out and need replacing, stuff needs to be serviced in a way that's actually often kind of destructive. And that really seems to annoy them, because they don't want to see, say, a 1955 Rolls Royce Silver Cloud with an engine and a body that has reproduced, non-factory-original parts that were machined in the sixties, seventies, eighties, nineties, oughts, and today in it; they want to see the thing in as close to minty fresh condition with all-original parts and finish as humanly possible.

It's about authenticity for them, I think. Like, if they know it isn't "authentic" that diminishes their enjoyment and their perception of the things value.

To an extent, I sympathize. For me, it's going to very much be on a case-by-case basis. The general rule of thumb I have is, if the thing is just a thing, and there are plenty other extant examples of the thing, go nuts. But if the thing is important for reasons other than just being a thing, or there are very few things left, do not use the thing; make a repro and use that.

... that was really confusing. Maybe examples?

I was in Washington DC a few weeks ago, for Otakon. And because this is what you do when you're in DC, I stopped into the various Smithsonians. In the Air and Space Museum, they have a genuine Lilienthal Glider, something Otto Lilienthal actually built with his own two hands and used to fly. That thing? Should not really be flown. Ever. It's still maintained in a functional state but it probably should not actually ever be used, because it's an actually irreplaceable historical artifact that literally cannot be re-created because, you know, the esteemed Herr Lilienthal has been dead for a very long time.

The thing is important for reasons other than just being a thing.

Or, because this is nominally about guns here... there are many hundreds of still-extant examples of Deringer single-shot pistols made in the mid-19th century by Henry Deringer of Philadelphia, who pioneered the form and whose slightly-misspelled name ("derringer") became a generic term. If you have one, there's no reason you shouldn't sometimes use it assuming you can do so safely; they're rare, but there's still plenty of them. Go ahead and load and fire one if you can get the proper components and do so safely.

You know what shouldn't be used? The specific Deringer that John Wilkes Booth used to kill Lincoln. That... that should probably be purely preserved and never actually, you know, fired again.

And once the original ones that aren't important because they killed a president start wearing out, you should probably preserve a few of those as well. At that point, get some repros made and use them instead.

-Merc
Keep Rat


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-25-17, 04:39 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
11. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #10
 
   >And that really seems to
>annoy them, because they don't want to see, say, a 1955 Rolls Royce
>Silver Cloud with an engine and a body that has reproduced,
>non-factory-original parts that were machined in the sixties,
>seventies, eighties, nineties, oughts, and today in it; they want to
>see the thing in as close to minty fresh condition with all-original
>parts and finish as humanly possible.
>
>It's about authenticity for them, I think. Like, if they know it isn't
>"authentic" that diminishes their enjoyment and their perception of
>the things value.

Oh sure, and classic car people are the worst in terms of being obsessive about that kind of thing. Well, some of them. A lot of people restoring a 1955 Chevrolet for at-least-semi-regular use will likely be amenable to making certain updates to the package, for a variety of reasons—to improve safety, or reliability, or quality-of-life for the user, or simply because the original version is no longer available or very hard to find. Only someone truly determined to wear the hairshirt of originality is going to source and equip bias-ply tires or one of the old tar-top car batteries, because they're scarce, they're expensive when you can find them, and—let's not mince words here—they're shit.

The cold, hard fact of the matter is that automobiles in the mid-1950s were dangerous as hell and didn't work very well into the bargain. One band of classic car enthusiasts is about the form factor, and seems to improve everything else to something as close to a modern standard of function and safety as technology and budget will allow. (Jonathan Ward of ICON is probably the most extreme example of this clade I can think of offhand, in terms of the lengths and expenses to which he and his clients are willing to go in service of that ethos. He also has a bangin' YouTube channel if you're into that kind of thing.)

Now, I'm biased in this regard, because I agree very much with that philosophy. Ward's "Derelict" concept is close to my classic-car Platonic ideal, although there are much less elaborate/expensive approaches that are also pretty cool. (Also, heh, in the video I just linked, he specifically mentions pissing off the purists with regards to an upcoming project on a '50s Rolls. :)

On the other extreme, you have the really hardcore fundamentalists, the Wahhabists of car restoration, who accept none of that business. They drive—well, they don't drive, more often than not, but—on bias-ply tires, despite the fact that those are stupidly hard to find and not very safe; they use the original, unreliable electronics; they eschew added convenience or safety features of any kind. They even grudge the use of maintenance parts that aren't original-vintage—it's new-old-stock or nothin'. I... don't get those people. People didn't drive on bias-ply tires in the 1950s because they were good, they did it because nothing better was available. As soon as something better was available, they stopped.

The true extremists in that part of the car scene don't drive their cars, though, anyway. They take them from show to show in climate-controlled trailers, like expensive show horses. Cars that are kept like that are only one step below museum collection items, in that they do at least get to leave the building sometimes, but they aren't really cars any more. And in some cases, I agree, that's fine:

>To an extent, I sympathize. For me, it's going to very much be on a
>case-by-case basis. The general rule of thumb I have is, if the thing
>is just a thing, and there are plenty other extant examples of the
>thing, go nuts. But if the thing is important for reasons other
>than just being a thing, or there are very few things left, do not use
>the thing; make a repro and use that.

Oh, sure. Some things are museum pieces because they have to be. I wouldn't advocate flying the Spirit of St. Louis, for instance, for a couple of different reasons. It's historically precious and the only one of its kind, which checks both of the boxes. If you have an airworthy Waco GXE—an aircraft of a similar vintage, but of which there were more than 1,600—on the other hand...

>You know what shouldn't be used? The specific Deringer that
>John Wilkes Booth used to kill Lincoln. That... that should probably
>be purely preserved and never actually, you know, fired again.

As an aside to this, one of my favorite historical tidbits (which I think I might have mentioned before, and which will almost certainly come up again in a future Gun of the Week) is that Charles Guiteau, the man who assassinated President James Garfield in 1881, gave some thought to how his gun would look in a museum afterward. This was used as evidence of premeditation in his trial, and has amused me in a dark sort of way ever since I first heard about it—particularly since, in a sort of O. Henry twist, the gun was stolen from the Smithsonian and has not been seen since.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
JFerio
Charter Member
186 posts
Aug-26-17, 09:54 AM (EDT)
Click to EMail JFerio Click to send private message to JFerio Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
15. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #10
 
   >>Still, if you can, and it's safe, why not? I've seen people object,
>>"Why ruin it?" but unless you're dealing with some kind of
>>super-elaborate presentation piece with a really fragile embellished
>>finish or something, I don't think that really holds up. It's what
>>they're for.
>
>It depends a little bit on a persons perspective of "ruin" and what
>they're there to see and gain enjoyment from.
>
>There seem to be a lot of folks who don't want to see a reproduction,
>or a re-creation; they want to see the thing as it was when it wasn't
>an antique or an object of historical significance, but was just a
>thing.
>
>To them, actually <em>using</em> it, while it may not impact them,
>personally, it will eventually have an impact down the road. Parts
>wear out and need replacing, stuff needs to be serviced in a way
>that's actually often kind of destructive. And that really seems to
>annoy them, because they don't want to see, say, a 1955 Rolls Royce
>Silver Cloud with an engine and a body that has reproduced,
>non-factory-original parts that were machined in the sixties,
>seventies, eighties, nineties, oughts, and today in it; they want to
>see the thing in as close to minty fresh condition with all-original
>parts and finish as humanly possible.
>
>It's about authenticity for them, I think. Like, if they know it isn't
>"authentic" that diminishes their enjoyment and their perception of
>the things value.

I don't mind the people in a hobby wanting authenticity by their definition, like a video gamer that will only play an Atari 2600 on original hardware, over RF, on a 13" color CRT, with a clunky rotary dial setting the channel. I do mind when they insist on it, to the level that pretty much demands that if you don't do it that way, then get out of the hobby. I think those people have lost sight even more than the people who don't think the things are worth preserving at all because we need to keep looking forward.

>
>To an extent, I sympathize. For me, it's going to very much be on a
>case-by-case basis. The general rule of thumb I have is, if the thing
>is just a thing, and there are plenty other extant examples of the
>thing, go nuts. But if the thing is important for reasons other
>than just being a thing, or there are very few things left, do not use
>the thing; make a repro and use that.

Hence why I do modify consoles, replace incandescent bulbs in a pinball with made to purpose LED fittings, and a few other things. In many cases, there's still enough examples out there I'm not doing permanent damage, and indeed I'm making it more useful for me, myself, and my husband. On the consoles, we have one CRT left in the house, a little 9 incher, everything else is flat panel or projector and we've got things set up to accommodate hooking up to all the options.

>
>... that was really confusing. Maybe examples?
>
>I was in Washington DC a few weeks ago, for Otakon. And because this
>is what you do when you're in DC, I stopped into the various
>Smithsonians. In the Air and Space Museum, they have a genuine
>Lilienthal Glider, something Otto Lilienthal actually built with his
>own two hands and used to fly. That thing? Should not really be flown.
>Ever. It's still maintained in a functional state but it
>probably should not actually ever be used, because it's an actually
>irreplaceable historical artifact that literally cannot be re-created
>because, you know, the esteemed Herr Lilienthal has been dead for a
>very long time.
>
>The thing is important for reasons other than just being a
>thing.

Very much. If it's literally one of a kind, or a very specific historical interest because it was the thing a particular person used, then I'm fine with it sitting and not being put to use.





Jeffrey 'JFerio' Crouch
'It'll be all right... I think.' - Nene Romanova



  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
CdrMike
Member since Feb-20-05
706 posts
Aug-25-17, 08:07 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail CdrMike Click to send private message to CdrMike Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
13. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #8
 
   >I once witnessed an argument between a visitor and a staffer at the
>Owls Head Transportation Museum about the
>museum's habit of operating its vehicles at the various special
>occasions it hosts during the summer. Well, when I say "argument", it
>was really the visitor ranting about the irresponsibility of it all
>and the staffer trying to find polite ways of not engaging.
>
>I kind of let it go on for a while, then ambled over, pointed at the
>oily drip tray under the engine of the vintage biplane standing
>nearby, and asked, "Is that there because this engine still runs?"
>
>"Yes it is," the staffer said.
>
>"Awesome," I said, and wandered on to look at the next item.

You'd absolutely love the Military Aviation Museum down here in Virginia Beach, as their philosophy is every aircraft in their collection be kept in or close to flight-worthy status. They even have their own outfit out at the Virginia Beach Airport (Fighter Factory) whose entire job is to keep the birds in rude health and ready to fire up. You walk around and you see drip trays, you see scuff marks and bits of chipped paint, even oil marks on the Skyraider (a plane famous for throwing oil everywhere). About the only plane in their collection that I personally know is not flight-worthy is their P-63 King Cobra.

--------------------------
CdrMike, Overwatch Reject

"You know, the world could always use more heroes." - Tracer, Overwatch


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-25-17, 08:52 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
14. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #13
 
   >You'd absolutely love the
>Military Aviation Museum down
>here in Virginia Beach, as their philosophy is every aircraft in their
>collection be kept in or close to flight-worthy status.

I mean don't get me wrong, display-only museums have their place too. If nothing else, it can be ravenously expensive keeping vintage aircraft flying, and I've known museums to put themselves out of business trying to go that extra mile, which ultimately does no one any favors. But if they have the wherewithal and the curatorial vision for it, I'm always up for that.

>About the only plane in their collection that I
>personally know is not flight-worthy is their P-63 King Cobra.

Fair enough; not everyone believed the P-63 or its predecessor were airworthy at the time. :)

--G.
don't give me a P-39
with an engine that's mounted behind
it will tumble and roll
and dig a big hole
don't give me a P-39

-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
CdrMike
Member since Feb-20-05
706 posts
Aug-29-17, 09:20 AM (EDT)
Click to EMail CdrMike Click to send private message to CdrMike Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
17. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #14
 
   >I mean don't get me wrong, display-only museums have their place too.
>If nothing else, it can be ravenously expensive keeping vintage
>aircraft flying, and I've known museums to put themselves out of
>business trying to go that extra mile, which ultimately does no one
>any favors. But if they have the wherewithal and the curatorial
>vision for it, I'm always up for that.

I'm of the opinion that aircraft and automobile museums which present their pieces as inoperable static displays rather miss the point. There are exceptions, such as the one-of-a-kind pieces that are so historically relevant that any amount of danger is too much, and I certainly don't expect museum staff to put the USS Intrepid back out to sea anytime soon. But if it can still fly and you can find an insurance company that will agree to sell you a policy, then let her stretch her wings once in awhile.

Of course, it does help that many of the men who maintain the museum as well as the planes are volunteers and the museum is located in a Navy town full of retirees with a lot of time on their hands. Plus they loan out pieces to other museums, such as the replica Me 262 that's presently on loan to a museum in Germany.

>Fair enough; not everyone believed the P-63 or its predecessor were
>airworthy at the time. :)
>
>--G.
>don't give me a P-39
>with an engine that's mounted behind
>it will tumble and roll
>and dig a big hole
>don't give me a P-39

Kobrastochka suffered from that problem that started cropping up as designers moved into designing jet fighters: center-of-gravity. They designed and tested assuming a full load of ammunition in the nose, which is why they could never get it to tumble in a wind tunnel. But remove that ammunition and the COG goes all to hell.

--------------------------
CdrMike, Overwatch Reject

"You know, the world could always use more heroes." - Tracer, Overwatch


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-29-17, 12:52 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
18. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #17
 
   >Plus
>they loan out pieces to other museums, such as the replica Me 262
>that's presently on loan to a museum in Germany.

Well, that's ironic, in the non-classical sense.

It reminds me of a thing: I have a couple of books about U-505, the Type IXC U-boat they have at (of all places) the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago, and one of the things that comes up in both is that when the museum was restoring the submarine in the 1950s, they wrote to the German companies that had made various bits and pieces of it that had gone missing or been destroyed over the years since its capture, asking whether they might still have or know where the museum could get spares. They all sent what bits they had along without charging for them, usually with a note saying something to the effect of "we hate that you're showing off our submarine like some kind of fishing trophy, but we at least want it to be as impressive as possible." Which is sort of peak German. :)

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
CdrMike
Member since Feb-20-05
706 posts
Aug-29-17, 03:49 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail CdrMike Click to send private message to CdrMike Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
19. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #18
 
   >It reminds me of a thing: I have a couple of books about U-505,
>the Type IXC U-boat they have at (of all places) the Museum of Science
>and Industry in Chicago, and one of the things that comes up in both
>is that when the museum was restoring the submarine in the 1950s, they
>wrote to the German companies that had made various bits and pieces of
>it that had gone missing or been destroyed over the years since its
>capture, asking whether they might still have or know where the museum
>could get spares. They all sent what bits they had along without
>charging for them, usually with a note saying something to the effect
>of "we hate that you're showing off our submarine like some kind of
>fishing trophy, but we at least want it to be as impressive as
>possible." Which is sort of peak German. :)

At least she was treated with better care than U-534. If U-505 was the trophy fish put on display, U-534 is the fish the taxidermist didn't think was worth preserving. First she gets pulled off the sea floor because of rumors of Nazi gold, then they shuffle her off to a preservation trust that kept her sitting on a pier for a decade in the open air, before finally she gets chopped into five pieces and put on display at a ferry terminal.

In the UF-verse, her poor Mental Model must have been rather...perturbed by the whole series of events.

--------------------------
CdrMike, Overwatch Reject

"You know, the world could always use more heroes." - Tracer, Overwatch


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-29-17, 04:01 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
20. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #19
 
   >At least she was treated with better care than U-534.

Mm, well, in absolute terms, U-505 fared better than the vast majority of Axis submarines, including those that survived the war. Most of the survivors were caught up in the orgy of waste that was Operation Deadlight, or its Pacific equivalent (like U-511/Ro-500 and I-401), mostly in the name of keeping the Commies from getting their hands on all the lovely technology.

(For that matter, surviving Allied submarines generally didn't do much better either, ultimately. Although at least they mostly got recycled into razor blades or something rather than just being dumped at sea.)

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
ejheckathorn
Member since Aug-9-13
33 posts
Aug-29-17, 05:03 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail ejheckathorn Click to send private message to ejheckathorn Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
21. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #20
 
   >Mm, well, in absolute terms, U-505 fared better than the vast
>majority of Axis submarines, including those that survived the war.
>Most of the survivors were caught up in the orgy of waste that was
>Operation Deadlight, or its Pacific equivalent (like
>U-511/Ro-500 and I-401), mostly in the name of
>keeping the Commies from getting their hands on all the lovely
>technology.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think should have been done with them?

Eric J. Heckathorn


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Gryphonadmin
Charter Member
19037 posts
Aug-29-17, 06:35 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail Gryphon Click to send private message to Gryphon Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
23. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #21
 
   >>Most of the survivors were caught up in the orgy of waste that was
>>Operation Deadlight, or its Pacific equivalent (like
>>U-511/Ro-500 and I-401), mostly in the name of
>>keeping the Commies from getting their hands on all the lovely
>>technology.
>
>Just out of curiosity, what do you think should have been done with
>them?

Leaving aside the fact that many of them were perfectly good submarines that were more advanced than anything the Allies were presently operating (and that operating enemy vessels taken as prizes of war is a course of action that had long, long precedent in the navies of the world), they might at least have been properly scrapped. Thousands upon thousands of tons of high-quality steel, advanced marine engines, powerful electric motors, etc., just thrown away. Waste on top of waste. I suppose it's a fitting coda to history's most destructive war, in a way, but still.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
zgryphon at that email service Google has
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
CdrMike
Member since Feb-20-05
706 posts
Aug-29-17, 05:30 PM (EDT)
Click to EMail CdrMike Click to send private message to CdrMike Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
22. "RE: GotW 53: Ruger Super Blackhawk"
In response to message #20
 
   >Mm, well, in absolute terms, U-505 fared better than the vast
>majority of Axis submarines, including those that survived the war.
>Most of the survivors were caught up in the orgy of waste that was
>Operation Deadlight, or its Pacific equivalent (like
>U-511/Ro-500 and I-401), mostly in the name of
>keeping the Commies from getting their hands on all the lovely
>technology.

The sinking of I-401 makes sense in the context of the Cold War, as I'm sure there were members of the brass who found themselves nervous at the idea of the Soviets putting together a submarine carrier that could launch a surprise attack on vital ports or (as intended) the Panama Canal locks.

But Deadlight has a more mundane explanation: The Brits had had it with the Germans using subs to get the better of the Royal Navy twice in a century and wanted to ensure there would be no third time. It was part of the general mania of destruction that all the Allies engaged in in that short period between the official end of the war and the recognized start of the Cold War. Most of those boats sunk during Deadlight were either worn-out, obsolete, or of no value as anything but scrap.

>(For that matter, surviving Allied submarines generally didn't do much
>better either, ultimately. Although at least they mostly got recycled
>into razor blades or something rather than just being dumped at sea.)

And those girls made out better than the Operation Crossroads crowd.

--------------------------
CdrMike, Overwatch Reject

"You know, the world could always use more heroes." - Tracer, Overwatch


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

[ YUM ] [ BIG ] [ ??!? ] [ RANT ] [ GNDN ] [ STORE ] [ FORUM ] GOTW ] [ VAULT ]

version 3.3 © 2001
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited
Benjamin D. Hutchins
E P U (Colour)