Talk:Magnetic proximity fuze

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Should the title be changed to Magnetic proximity fuze? See Proximity fuze. Biscuittin (talk) 21:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course it should. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your notes, I have made some changes. I agree that "charge carrier" is unclear. I think "primer" or "detonator" would be more appropriate. Reading the patent, I think "charge carrier" refers to the casing of the mine. Biscuittin (talk) 08:46, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I read "charge carrier" in an article on magnetic devices, my first thought is Hall effect.

Overall I find this article to be so patchy on important content (the German naval mines) that the encyclopedia would be better off without it. It probably warrants merging to some other, larger, article somewhere. Even for the scope of land mines, it omits the Soviet off-track mines with magnetic fuzing (and also their anti-handling behaviour, as they don't like to be moved within the Earth's field, once armed). Andy Dingley (talk) 08:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Naval mine isn't a great article and appears to largely omit coverage of the WW2 magnetic mines. It hints at them, but there isn't the detail there ought to be.Andy Dingley (talk) 09:02, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the author of the article has misinterpreted "charge carrier" to mean "detonator". The patent of June 13, 1995 [1] refers to "A magnetic proximity fuse for initiating a charge of a moving charge carrier". The word moving surely means that the charge carrier is the projectile. Biscuittin (talk) 19:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Charge carrier" is surely the main charge, not the detonator or booster. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed "charge carrier" to "detonator" because it is the only thing that makes sense to me. You are welcome to change it again if you disagree. Biscuittin (talk) 20:58, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Magnetic proximity fuze. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612111139/http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5423262/fulltext.html to http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5423262/fulltext.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:59, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]