Miscellaneous desk
< September 19	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 21 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 20

9mm ammo in .38 caliber gun

On an episode of Dragnet (series), they said that 9mm ammunition can't possibly be fired from a .38 caliber gun. Since 9mm is only a little smaller than 0.38 inch, is that true? Bubba73 ^{(You talkin' to me?)}, 15:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The calibre isn't the only issue - the dimensions of the full round (and the chamber that accommodates it) matter too. As you've only described calibres rather than specific kinds of ammo, lets consider 9x19mm Parabellum (a very common round for 9mm semiautomatic pistols) vs the .38 Special. For those, you'll see that the .38 round is 8mm longer - a .38 round wouldn't fit into the chamber of a 9mm parabellum firearm, and a 9mm pb round would be so loose in the chamber of a .38 special gun that the hammer wouldn't be able to strike it properly. Now two things are possible - it's possible to rechamber a firearm - to replace or remachine the chamber to take a different round. Mostly people seem to do this with old rifles, for which the ammo is no longer made. Secondly you can use an adaptor cartridge - that PDF shows adapters to allow smaller calibre rounds to be fired from a 9mm; I don't know specifically if they exist (or could be made) to adapt a 9mm pb to .38 special. Lastly, these days mostly for much much larger calibres like tank and artillery rounds, a smaller diameter round can be adapted to fit a wider barrel with a sabot. All of this is fairly complicated gunsmithy stuff that you'd surely only really see in some detective thing where someone was trying to conceal which gun had fired what by some elaborate mechanism. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 15:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. On Dragnet they could look at it and tell whether it was from an automatic, and mentioned left and right. I suppose that is the direction of the rifling. Bubba73 ^{(You talkin' to me?)}, 16:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A good forensic ballistics expert can tell all kinds of things by examining a fired bullet, including details of the rifling of the weapon that fired it. If discussing a specific bullet, they could surely say "this specific bullet wasn't fired from a .38", because the marking done to it is wrong. That's not the same as meaning "this type of bullet cannot be fired from a .38", although in both cases the ever ambiguous English language would let one say "this bullet cannot have been fired from a .38". But really, in practice, bar the looneytune stuff I outlined above, guns only ever fire the rounds they're built to fire. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 17:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only thing I can think to add is that 9mm is rimless and thus would not stay in place in a .38 revolver. A moon clip could solve this problem. I would say they stretched the truth by saying "can't possibly" - if someone wanted to rig up a way to do this, they could. (This does not, of course, make it a good idea to attempt to do so.) Friday (talk) 16:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The left and right refer to the rifling direction. There are some guns that can fire different rounds. The most common example is probably the .38 Special that can be fired in some .357 Magnum guns (but not the other way around). Another consideration, other than the geometries, is the pressures involved. Firing an overloaded round is the cause of a lot of firearm accidents; certainly be sure you're using the right round in the right gun. Shadowjams (talk) 19:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And there you have it: just the facts from Friday. dum dee dum dum Clarityfiend (talk) 21:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yrs, thanks everyone. Friday investigated an apparent suicide with a .38, but the slug was a 9mm. Bubba73 ^{(You talkin' to me?)}, 23:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Front Loading Washing Machines Units Sold

Looking for the most recent information on the number of residential front loading washing machines sold in the US annually (not total value of units sold). Couldn't find this information on Census site or yours (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washing_machine#External_links)

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.114.239.4 (talk) 16:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it's not an easy statistic to find. I suggest you send an email to the experts at the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce, bet they can steer you to it. Textorus (talk) 05:23, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Market for the Popemobile?

I was wondering about the picture (File:Popemobile passes the White House.jpg) posted above in the #iconic cars thread. Have any others (royals, celebs, politicians) made any use of a similar vehicle? (I mean something very much just like that: casual, stylish, and visually-accessible such as perhaps the QofE might also prefer at times as useful and convenient; not the sort of heavily-armored vehicles that look formidably protective such as the one that didn't actually function that way too well in the case of Benazir Bhutto. I'm talking about chic and stylish and functional too, like the Popemobile). WikiDao ☯ (talk) 16:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are some presidential vehicles listed under Category:One-off_automobiles, but they don't look as "different" as the Popemobile. (There are also the Monkeemobile, Bluesmobile, and Wienermobile, but not for royals or politicians :) ---Sluzzelin talk 16:53, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A monarch would not want to be seen dead in one, as it is not a dignified way to perambulate one's kingdom.Nor can I see any cabinet in which to store the Dubonnet and gin. It could do with a bit of 21st century pimping though, to make it more attractive to a wider clientèle. Some bullbars to aid speedily cutting a swath through the milling throngs would be a useful addition (have you seen how slow he's driver has to go). As would a descent sound system, for would not Danny Boy at 200 watts bring tears to any traffic cops eyes! They will have to ditch the name Popemobile too. I'd prefer a more modern name like the Papal Carrier MCXXIV --Aspro (talk) 17:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Her Majesty prefers something less aquarium-like[1]. More often, she uses a customised Rolls-Royce Phantom VI and more recently a Bentley State Limousine with a raised roof and interior lighting so that the public can see inside[2]. Her parents were more partial to Daimler Limousines. But if you want stylish, you can't beat a good old horse and cart[3]. Alansplodge (talk) 17:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The elegant royal equivalent is the "Glass Coach" (unfortunately a redlink -- see Template:Royal state coaches of the British monarch)... AnonMoos (talk) 13:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe we're back to Guido Westerwelle (we just had a question at the language desk), but I just thought of the Guidomobil, a not so chic yellow bus in which he toured the country, campaigning for his party before the German federal election, 2002. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Marie Le Pen had to sell of his personalised car. (Various articles in French are more illuminating.) At the time, the papers ran more detailed descriptions of the car, but I can't find any. - Jarry1250 ^{[Who? Discuss.]} 19:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Satin /Silk

My parents were married in 1940 and my mother made her gown out of satin . I think that would have actually been silk . Given the year would I be correct24.72.110.152 (talk) 17:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it was in the UK, it probably would have been from a parachute![4][5] Alansplodge (talk) 17:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The questioner doesn't say where Mother lived at the time. Even in the UK, the dress could have been made from either material that was bought before the war began. Textorus (talk) 17:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that's true - it was a rather facitious answer. 1940 was quite early in the war. Alansplodge (talk) 20:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alansplodge, I mention this not to nitpick, but to let you know you missed out on the opportunity to use a word that, when correctly spelt, is one of the few that contains not only all the vowels, but has them in alphabetic order: facetious. Commiserations. :) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Huh. Never noticed that before, amazing. Textorus (talk) 03:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you're not speaking facetiously... Matt Deres (talk) 13:33, 21 September 2010 (UTC) [reply]

What happened to the 'w'? --Trovatore (talk) 19:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Dim Cymraeg? 109.155.33.219 (talk) 01:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "sometimes y and w" appended to the list of vowels isn't mainly talking about Welsh loanwords like cwm, I think. It's about words like bow. The "w" in bow is as much a vowel letter as the "y" in boy. Now, if you could find a word with aeiouwy in order, all used as vowels, that would really be something. --Trovatore (talk) 03:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neither facetiously nor factitiously. Textorus (talk) 14:08, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's only a couple of dozen such words, most fairly obscure; here's a list. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:33, 21 September 2010 (UTC) [reply]

OM*G. Who knew? Textorus (talk) 19:54, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I first saw it I thought it said factitious, which to be honest is a word of whose meaning I have only a fairly vague idea. I'll link it here: wikt:factitious so that I can go look it up. --Trovatore (talk) 20:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Satin actually refers to the weave of the material, not the material. Also, parachutes where mostly synthetic in WWII. Not a lot of people know that. Here is the first cite I came across. [6]. It was/is called Art silk. Real silk is still used even to day however, for the explosive charges on the big guns of battles ships, because it does not leave a smouldering residue. Not a lot of people know that either. --Aspro (talk) 17:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't believe any navy still uses battleships for anything other then museums, unless they occasionally fire the main guns as a demonstration, perhaps? Googlemeister (talk) 13:28, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources indicating real silk was used in parachutes in the second World War: (silk or nylon)(mentions silk and nylon), [7]. Edison (talk) 19:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

During war time, labour became a scarce resource. Silk worms raised on mulberry required more man-hours (or woman-hours) per square foot. Your sources do not overturn what was used. Rather they displayed war time moral building propaganda which was orchestrated by Edward Bernays,et. al. The use of the word 'silk' helped to give the impression, that we (the tax payer and government), were giving our air crew (your sons and sweet-hearts) the very best equipment. There was a war on! The material and manufacturing methods that provided the most parachutes, on time, was what the factories delivered. That was the reality... Today, the war has been long over. There is no need anylonger to believe Bernays as gospel .--Aspro (talk) 20:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The WP article on Nylon says; "Bill Pittendreigh, DuPont, and other individuals and corporations worked diligently during the first few months of World War II to find a way to replace Asian silk and hemp with nylon in parachutes." The first months of the war in the US would be firmly in 1942. Alansplodge (talk) 20:06, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are references saying WW2 parachutes were made of silk and of nylon, and none stating that only synthetic parachute material was used, correct? Is it asserted that someone decided to destroy all the existing silk parachutes so that only synthetic fabric would be used during the war? There have long been accounts [8], [9], [10], [11] of WW2 wedding dresses made of silk from parachutes, so that might account for the disappearance of a few, I suppose. Edison (talk) 02:31, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear -- in the usual Wiki confusion and babble by people who have relatively little idea of what they are talking about -- that Aspro definitively answered the question! Satin is a pattern of weaving threads, it doesn't have anything to do with a particular material. 76.126.217.195 (talk) 12:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lexington or Park

In the film Madagascar, two characters are discussing the best way to get from Central Park Zoo to Grand Central station. The discussion includes the following lines:

What's the fastest way to Grand Central?
You should take Lexington.
What about Park?
No, Park goes two ways, you can't time the lights.

I think Lexington refers to the Lexington Avenue Subway line, which is what the characters take, but can anybody please help me understand what "Park" is, and what is meant by "goes two ways, you can't time the lights"?

Initially I thought it could be a subway line, where a train in one direction has to wait for one from the other, but the only subway line I can see with Park in the name is the Eastern Parkway Line, which doesn't seem to go to Grand Central Station. I'm wondering if perhaps it is a road, but I can't understand the lights reference. If "goes two ways" means that it is a two-way rather than a one-way street, I don't see why lights are relevant (one-way streets have lights too).

Anyway, I am all guessed out, and would really appreciate any help you can provide. 80.229.115.231 (talk) 18:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure they mean Lexington Avenue vs. Park Avenue. Grand central is on Park Avenue. Lexington Avenue is southbound only, traffic on Park Avenue goes in both directions. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 18:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The issue of the lights is that, for a two way road, the light timing is different to accommodate folks turning ~~right~~ left across the oncoming traffic (either there's a special filter, or the yellow time is longer, to help the junction empty). Their argument centres on whether the light timings for the one-way Lexington Avenue give an advantage that cancels out the slightly longer time to drive to and from it (doing so adds a block's length at either end). -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 18:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Forget turning traffic, it's simpler than that. If you're on a one-way street, the traffic engineers can synchronize all the traffic lights into a green wave progressing at a steady speed. Match that driving speed and you never get stopped at a light. Of course, this is only possible if they're willing to give your street priority over the timing demands of cross streets -- but because Manhattan is a long and narrow island, that's entirely reasonable. With a two-way street, on the other hand, the northbound and southbound traffic have conflicting demands on the timing unless all the traffic lights are spaced at equal intervals. --Anonymous, 22:55 UTC, September 20/10.

Google Maps, incidentally, recommends using 5th Avenue rather than either. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 18:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And as a pedantic note, it is Grand Central Terminal, not Grand Central Station. Googlemeister (talk) 13:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Nazi cap insignia (Eagle with Knight's Cross)

I am in posession of an aluminum cap insignia that I have not been able to identify any further. I would like to find out what branch of the Nazi military it identifies as well as any additional information including the value of this item.Aok1947 (talk) 18:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some photos would be useful. Use this link to upload one. Wikipedia:Upload--Aspro (talk) 18:56, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can't upload a picture (not everyone owns a digital camera), then please give a more detailed description. The more information you give us, the more likely we will be able to help---Sluzzelin talk 18:58, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Place it on a scanner even! Better than nothing.--Aspro (talk) 19:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

you might look through ranks and insignia of the Nazi Party and uniforms and insignia of the Schutzstaffel both of which have a number if images you can compare. --Ludwigs2 23:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Train tracks on north shore of the Harlem?

Resolved

Just to add to the NYC transportation infrastructure quiz today, when I take Metro North commuter rail into Manhattan on the New Haven line, I've noticed some train tracks that go right along the northern shore of the Harlem River. I'm not aware of any passenger lines that use that route, either subway or commuter rail, so I assume it's a freight line -- is that correct? It doesn't look like there's much clearance under the bridges on that track... 96.246.59.38 (talk) 18:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you perhaps means the Hudson Line? If so, that goes to the Highbridge Yard. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 19:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. These tracks are (more or less) perpendicular to the Park Avenue Bridge, which is what the Harlem, Hudson, and New Haven lines take over the river. The tracks in question are directly on the water, following the course of the Harlem. I've never seen a train on them (although I only see them twice a day, usually, so that's probably not unusual), and I'm pretty curious what they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.59.38 (talk) 20:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Based on google maps, it looks like these are tracks for freight trains coming down the Hudson River to connect over to a rail yard over in Port Morris and then up the coast into New England or over Hell Gate Bridge into Long Island. Still don't have a name for them or the name of the company that owns them, but that's good enough for me. 96.246.59.38 (talk) 20:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note also that old port and industrial areas sometimes have private rail lines or private spurs off of public rail lines, that are just there to move volumes of material to and from stocking areas. I'm not saying that's the case here (I have no idea), but it is a possibility. If so, the line may not have a name, or any public record of its existence outside of the company or port authority that constructed it. --Ludwigs2 23:06, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh there are legions of railrfans in New York, and somebody knows exactly what that line is, and the whole history of it. And note that even industrial spurs would be shown and identified on maps and employee timetables of whatever railroads they connected to. I'm thinking, though, that this map might answer the query. If not, I suggest posing the question over at the talk page of the Trains Wikiproject, where someone's bound to have the answer. Textorus (talk) 03:29, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, it sure does sound like it's the Oak Point Link, specially built by the State of New York in 1998 as a freight connection from the Hudson Line (Metro-North) to CSX's Oak Point Yard in the South Bronx. Textorus (talk) 03:41, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is exactly what I was thinking of, thanks a bunch. 96.246.58.133 (talk) 16:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Textorus (talk) 17:07, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's funny. I always thought that railfans were restricted to stodgy old britishers; I had no idea the pastime had American adherents as well. fascinating... --Ludwigs2 17:41, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thousands of us in the U.S., all kinds, all ages, including many renowned photographers. There's magazines and websites too. As usual, they do things a little differently in Britain, but what the hey. Textorus (talk) 18:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also All Aboard WikiProject Trains in the current Signpost. Textorus (talk) 09:01, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]