Why did the British continue to use just one synchronised machine gun?

[m9a3r5i7o2n]

Romani
Ruritania Flieger
Quote:
Mister Anderson,
I once studied a course on sounds physics at University and I actually tried to learn the equations involved because I was interested in that question and asdic (sonar for you) because I was interested in the U-boat war.

I have came to the conclusion that any sufficiently advanced technology is undistinguishable from witchcraft!

It's something that evidently works but most people can't really explain why. From what I recall, the liquid in the hydro sonic version of the mechanism is behaving like a solid, and the sound is actually a vibration. Or maybe it has something to do with resonance frequencies? No idea

We should start a new thread to discuss the differences between the various Allied synch systems, Alkan, Sopwith-Kauper, and Constantinesco.

Answer”

I once was a sailor, engine room, aboard the USS Semmes which was a test ship for Radar/Sonar for the U.S. Navy, WW-II.

The reason that you state is the reason for the change from the oil version to the wire as they were having trouble from air pockets in the Oil and there aren’t any air pockets in a wire. Either it breaks or it very likely works. The other versions do not interest me as I am interested in the transmission of the sound and the Generator itself and just what it was and its material construction. To me the transmission of the sound wave is superior to mechanical transmission as to make that it a no point of dispute as to C & C wire superiority.

Yours, M.L. Anderson

[Akaalias]

Sorry to jump in late on this one, but did the SPAD vii have a different interrupter mechanism to the Nieuports (17-27)?

The reason I ask is that the RFC Nieuports replaced the Vickers with a Lewis, yet the SPADS retained the Vickers.

Cheers,
A