Welcome to the Inert Ordnance Collectors.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Pom-1s

  1. #11
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    612
    Thanks
    312
    Thanked 313 Times in 150 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by frogman View Post
    This is a diagram for tilt ball switch of POM-1S. A is plastic container, B is a metallic ring with metallic tilt ball inside and C are two metallic rings. Regardless of what position the mine lands, B is going to make a contact with C. This 'make and break' contact action doesn't matter during the arming delay period. But, after the expiration of arming delay, any movement of mine causes the contact between B and C to break momentarilly and the sensing electronics detect the current interruption and send a signal to a transistor or SCR which open the patch for discharging of firing capacitor to detonator. I'd really like to see sensing electronic diagram for POM-1S or BLU-42B, but there is no publication that I can find. One curious collector could easily trace the components and produce a diagram though, if he is inclined.
    I have manual for BKF-POM-1S. Made for Air Forces.

  2. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    united kingdom
    Posts
    6
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivashkin View Post
    I have manual for BKF-POM-1S. Made for Air Forces.
    Does that include electronic diagrams? They are very hard to come by. I am looking for electronic diagrams of POM-1, МВЭ-92, and МВЭ-72. I think the only way is to draw them manually from the deactivated items. I have made one for type 72b AP mine. It's not really hard as they contain few components.

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Dunstable.
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    407
    Thanked 19 Times in 9 Posts
    Frogman-sorry about delay. The "fleeting Contact" anti-disturbance ball switches used in the POM-1S and BLU-42/B work in a slightly different way to your surmise. They are designed, after the weapon comes to rest, to have the ball come to rest in a depression in the track, where it does not close the circuit. Only upon movement is the ball dislodged from the stable position, and then makes contact, before rolling into the next depression. However, contact has been made. Thus there is no need for a transistor. U S patent 3372253 has a good exposition of one design, which looks very like the BLU-42/B. Earlier fleeting contact switches were sometimes of the mercury type, where a small amount of mercury, in passing through a narrow constriction, bridged contacts at the point. However, the mercury could not remain at this point, as the constriction had tapered lead-ins and outs. A Vickers patent in the twenties just used a pendulum, accepting that the device might sometimes explode on ground contact!

  4. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Dunstable.
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    407
    Thanked 19 Times in 9 Posts
    A point about the device that has puzzled me is the "Pyrotechnic Lock", combined with a safety wire. This Pyro lock has an advantage over the use of spin to arm, as a fast moving plane would cause it to arm more rapidly, whereas the pyr lock is purely time. A flash tube from the dispenser lights the pyrotechnic pellet before the ejection charge functions, so that it is still burning after the safety pin is extracted. The munition is prevented from activation while it might be jostled by other subs. When the blowing part of the pyro pellet is reached, the metallic sleeve containing the pellet is ejected (I think the end of same may be split and expanded, to ensure it grips the bore strongly in which it is housed.) If the safety pin should be in position, the blowing charge cannot eject the sleeve, so the pressure exits via the ignition hole, and the device remains inactive.

    If a stored container should be in a dump fire, being made of plastic, the pyro pellet is probably likely to be ignited before the ejection charge ignites, as this is well insulated in two metallic castings? Thus, the pyro may have burnt out, igniting the blowing charge before the safety wire is ejected, so no arming again takes place. Has anybody any other thoughts-no mention of the exact functioning of this lock is available! I am not too convinced by this argument! Perhaps, but unlikely, that safety for a Dump Fire could be relaxed, due to the small size of the explosions!
    I am pretty sure that this weapon uses an electrochemical timer, as did the U S BLU 42A (On the Drawings, there is a canister which is not identified) I think that the trip-line spools are mounted in the base of the cups housing the trip-line ejectors, but the US version appears to mount the spool in the ejected cap.
    Who disagrees?
    Martin.

 

 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top