[HN Gopher] The jerrycan design goes back over 80 years (2020)
___________________________________________________________________
The jerrycan design goes back over 80 years (2020)
Author : louis-paul
Score : 91 points
Date : 2022-03-19 22:37 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.hagerty.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.hagerty.com)
| rob74 wrote:
| "American engineer Paul Pleiss" - with a suspiciously German-
| sounding name however, so it might be no coincidence that he was
| the first to notice this German invention. Unfortunately the only
| info I could find on Mr. Pleiss online was that he invented the
| jerrycan, so I couldn't find anything to confirm my suspicion...
| otherme123 wrote:
| Maybe a bit more info here:
| https://www.thefabricator.com/thewelder/blog/arcwelding/the-...
| formerly_proven wrote:
| > Wehrmacht-Einheitskanister (Armed Forces Unit Canister)
|
| Einheit means standard here
| tialaramex wrote:
| Hence, "Einheitspreis" was the codename for a bombing raid on,
| I think, Wolverhampton because Woolworths was initially a fixed
| price store (everything 5 cents) although modern Brits probably
| remember it as something rather different before it ceased to
| exist.
|
| World War II is about the last point where "clever" codenames
| are allowed before the burgeoning use of signals intelligence
| means everybody realises that you should pick codenames
| randomly so that the codename doesn't reveal anything and so
| you will get shouted out at if anybody can guess what your
| thing does from the name. It's also the last point where people
| who have three military units number them one, two and three,
| because it sure makes life harder for intelligence if your
| third tank group is named group twenty-six...
|
| Manhattan was a pretty good codename by modern standards, but
| Sea Lion is not very subtle at all, and Ultra is hardly subtle
| either (it is referring to being even more secret than Most
| Secret, even if you can't guess _why_ the Ultra secret is so
| secret it 's pretty obvious this is important)
| Archelaos wrote:
| "Hitler made mastery of liquid transport a priority ..."
|
| This is the first time I have read that Hitler himself was
| concerned with such a detail. Does anyone have a source for this
| claim?
| hef19898 wrote:
| This guy was concerned with more details then was good for him,
| or anyone else involved. Accidentally, he also created one of
| the biggest traffic jams in the early days of the offensive
| against the Caucasus and Stalingrad.
| hughw wrote:
| I feel sure it's overextended license by the author.
| usrusr wrote:
| Recent events suggest that if stuff like that isn't considered
| at the top, a hierarchy of yes-men won't fill that gap. Note
| that "made ... a priority" does not necessarily mean "got
| involved in actual decisions"
| Archelaos wrote:
| > Note that "made ... a priority" does not necessarily mean
| "got involved in actual decisions"
|
| But it means, he and nobody else made ... a priority.
| usrusr wrote:
| Not really, because in a hierarchy like that, credit falls
| upwards to the highest level that didn't actively ignore
| the problem. Even if a leader just signs off a suggestion
| to prioritize it's still him making it a priority, not the
| person suggesting.
| Archelaos wrote:
| > if a leader just signs off a suggestion ...
|
| This is what I was asking for: whether there is evidence
| that he himself made a deliberate decision or at least
| consciously acknowledged it.
|
| Such details can be of importance. When Ernst von
| Weizsacker was tried in the last Nuremberg trial, one of
| the most important pieces of evidence was a document
| countersigned by him on the deportation of French jews to
| Auschwitz. Without this evidence it would not have been
| possible to proof his knowledge. And even in the light of
| this evidence it was still debatable to what extent
| personal responsibility arose from this. The presiding
| judge wanted to acquit v. Weizsacker, but was overruled
| by the other two judges.
| senotrusov wrote:
| Maybe due to it's distinct and utility design I still remember my
| granddad's Russian-made jerrycan that he used to fill his
| motorcycle with gasoline, in his remote Siberian village in the
| 80's.
| djaychela wrote:
| Having had many vehicles and also done a drive to Banjul in The
| Gambia from the UK, plus done 10 years of rally driving, I've had
| a great many jerry cans. They are indeed a great design, and the
| triple-handle allowing easy carrying of two empties in one hand
| on either side of the body is only one of their high points.
|
| I'd never given a moment's thought to the name, but as soon as I
| started reading the article, I realised where it came from...
| It's funny how we don't always think of the origins of words
| until prompted by something like this.
| hef19898 wrote:
| A funny side note on that: I'm German, we call those things
| Benzinkanister. My wife is French, they call them jerrycan. I
| never understood what she meant (ultimately I figured it out,
| and then I took me again a long time to connect "Jerry" to the
| Germans in WW2).
|
| And yes, those things _are_ handy!
| ransom1538 wrote:
| If! You are in the market this is the best can you can get on
| amazon. These are the only safe ones I allow in the garage.
|
| https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003PGRR5W/
| zbrozek wrote:
| Man the inflation is real:
| https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B003PGRR5W
| oceanplexian wrote:
| You can actually just buy the real thing on Amazon or eBay, but
| they're labeled not for gasoline use in the USA due to
| environmental regulations (https://fee.org/articles/the-epic-
| failure-of-the-government-...). It was really important the EPA
| saved the planet from the world's number one environmental
| threat... minuscule amount of gas vapors escaping fuel cans,
| thus they haven't legal since 2009.
|
| I have 4 original NATO cans and have thrown them around,
| dropped them, had them slide around in the back of a truck and
| bang into things. They have never once leaked a single drop or
| stopped working.
| lproven wrote:
| Since the site has gone down, here's Google's cache of the text:
|
| http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:D38zJ4x...
| mschuster91 wrote:
| German here. I had _no idea_ that Americans call them "jerry
| cans" for what is likely a bungled "german cans"... thanks!
| riffic wrote:
| yeah it's an antiquated slur.
| hereforphone wrote:
| It's not bungled, it was an intentional, lightweight slur.
| Whoever downvoted you is ignorant. What were some slurs the
| Germans used for Americans in WW2?
| usrusr wrote:
| Emphasis on "lightweight". My impression is that Americans in
| ww2 used up all their slurs and disrespect on the Japanese
| and acted towards Germans almost as if they ("we", I'm
| German) were civilised people, politely agreeing to disagree.
| Even American caricatures of Hitler himself seem strangely
| benign compared to those about ww1's Kaiser.
| mywittyname wrote:
| Yeah, long refused to use the term as it seems like a slur.
| Most people consider military jargon used for enemy
| combatants to be offensive in a civilian context.
| unixhero wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwUkbGHFAhs A nice historical and
| engineering walkthrough of the Jerrycan.
| omegant wrote:
| I was going to post this video, it explains the differences and
| advantages of the original (and british copies) one vs the
| american. Also how most modern reproductions fall short of the
| original. I would say that it is better than the article.
| rflec028 wrote:
| I wonder if they call it a "Jerry" can over in Germany...
| heleninboodler wrote:
| It's called a "Wehrmacht-Einheitskanister" because the Germans
| aren't into the whole brevity thing.
| throw0101a wrote:
| Another discussion of jerrycans (pointing to the Wikipedia
| article) from early January:
|
| * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29787251
|
| If you want old-school design "jerry cans", checkout Wavian for
| metal options:
|
| * https://wavianusa.com/collections/nato-fuel-cans
|
| For plastic (HDPE) options in the same design language see
| Scepter:
|
| * https://www.scepter.com/products/consumer-products/
|
| Comparison discussion between the two:
|
| * https://expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/scepter-mfc-vs-wa...
|
| A lot of folks don't like contemporary nozzles, in which case
| perhaps see:
|
| * https://armysurpluswarehouse.com/wavian-jerry-can-nozzle/
|
| Also do a search for "shaker siphon" and "pump siphon".
| 83 wrote:
| It should be noted that Scepter MFC's are unavailable in the
| United States because they lack the safety features that
| apparently the average American needs. It's a shame, since they
| appear to be far superior to our "safe" gas cans/spouts.
|
| I've also seen multiple reports of the Wavians developing some
| surface rust inside which makes me question how good the
| interior lining is, not sure how prevalent that is though.
| throw0101a wrote:
| That's why I liked to the "consumer" products, which are
| probably more available to the (US-centric) HNers:
|
| * https://www.scepter.com/products/consumer-products/
|
| Non-US folks (EU, UK, CA) have access to the "military"
| products as well AFAICT:
|
| * https://www.scepter.com/products/military-products/
| bradstewart wrote:
| Thank you for this. I have not been able to find a usable
| nozzle for any of my cans--they always break and/or leak
| everywhere.
| jcadam wrote:
| The water cans are the same size and shape, but only have one
| handle. So you can tell whether you're picking up a fuel or a
| water can in the dark. Useful :)
| masklinn wrote:
| "original" jerrycans don't have that distinction, because the
| purpose of the extra handles are even more so for water:
| carrying two empties in one hand doesn't change, but the
| ability to share one can between two people is even more useful
| when carrying 20L water (20kg) than 20L gasoline (15kg).
| jcadam wrote:
| Wonder how many mix ups occurred before they added that
| additional safety factor :)
| syngrog66 wrote:
| modern gas cans are a nightmare in comparison. some genius
| thought they were building a better mousetrap but its objectively
| worse than what I had back in the 80s
|
| it certainly solves some problems -- ones I didnt have before
|
| it adds several new ones -- ones I didnt have before
|
| reminder to self: TODO buy an 80s style the moment I can find
| one. I've had it with this little red 2022 abomination
| dghughes wrote:
| If you like reading about the jerrycan design you may like
| Engineer Guy videos. He discusses pop cans, coffee makers, inkjet
| printers. He even has a four-part series discussing Albert
| Michelson's Harmonic Analyzer.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2bkHVIDjXS7sgrgjFtzOXQ
| everyone wrote:
| Calum just did a video on this a month ago...
| https://youtu.be/XwUkbGHFAhs
| yeetsfromhell wrote:
| The ones usually sold these days with the plastic caps on them
| are worse than useless, they leak all over and the safety nozzle
| on them leaks like hell too.
| wodenokoto wrote:
| As someone who had absolutely no idea what a jerrycan is, I found
| the Wikipedia article much more approachable:
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerrycan
| throw0101a wrote:
| For a good overview on the key role that enginners, scientists,
| and 'technologists' had in helping to win WW2 for the Allies, see
| _Engineers of victory: the problem solvers who turned the tide in
| the Second World War_ by Kennedy:
|
| > _Kennedy recounts the inside stories of the invention of the
| cavity magnetron, a miniature radar "as small as a soup plate,"
| and the Hedgehog, a multi-headed grenade launcher that allowed
| the Allies to overcome the threat to their convoys crossing the
| Atlantic; the critical decision by engineers to install a super-
| charged Rolls-Royce engine in the P-51 Mustang, creating a
| fighter plane more powerful than the Luftwaffe's; and the
| innovative use of pontoon bridges (made from rafts strung
| together) to help Russian troops cross rivers and elude the Nazi
| blitzkrieg. He takes readers behind the scenes, unveiling exactly
| how thousands of individual Allied planes and fighting ships were
| choreographed to collectively pull off the invasion of Normandy,
| and illuminating how crew chiefs perfected the high-flying and
| inaccessible B-29 Superfortress that would drop the atomic bombs
| on Japan._
|
| > _The story of World War II is often told as a grand narrative,
| as if it were fought by supermen or decided by fate. Here Kennedy
| uncovers the real heroes of the war, highlighting for the first
| time the creative strategies, tactics, and organizational
| decisions that made the lofty Allied objectives into a successful
| reality. In an even more significant way, The Turn of the Tide
| has another claim to our attention, for it restores "the middle
| level of war" to its rightful place in history._
|
| * https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/91616/engineers-of-...
|
| * https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13132847-engineers-of-vi...
|
| Lots of references in case you want to dig into more detail on
| the particular inventions he goes over.
|
| I was a bit surprised to learn that the Americans were quite
| reluctant to build Merlin-powered P-51s: they were originally
| designed with Allison engines, but after a test flight the
| British decide to shoehorn a Rolls Royce engine into one and the
| performance went from pretty good to astounding.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| I posted this about 9 days ago
| https://beachpackagingdesign.com/boxvox/inventor-of-the-wehr...
| NDizzle wrote:
| I use Scepter brand cans - different ones for fuel and water. I
| had to buy them from a forum member in Canada, through the Land
| Cruiser forum, as they weren't legal to buy in the US for
| whatever reason. Kind of odd that I had to go black market for a
| darn jerry can. I wanted something that wouldn't ever leak or
| have fumes inside the cabin if I ever had to use them other than
| mounted on my rear bumper. Really odd considering these are the
| exact jerry cans that were used in Iraq, and have stood the test
| of time.
|
| You CAN find the water cans in the US - there's a place in
| Lexington, KY that sells them.
| aaron695 wrote:
| Funny how I've never seen one like that in the real world, yet
| I've seen many fuel cans, at home and in the work place.
|
| I guess in the military
|
| What does Google show from Ukraine -
|
| https://www.alamy.com/bugas-village-ukraine-03rd-mar-2022-se...
|
| Looking pretty different here with the USA military too -
| https://mwi.usma.edu/army-physical-fitness-problem-part-2-to...
|
| I guess HN doesn't have eyes? Does anyone live in the real world?
|
| Even if you have a recent metal jerrycan kinda like those from 80
| years ago, cause they are cool, it will be very different if you
| actually look closely.
|
| No design goes back 80 years. We are not some backwards society
| that can't move forward.
| samatman wrote:
| It's not HN without some confidently wrong statement.
|
| There's a NATO standard for jerry cans and they remain
| ubiquitous.
| https://quicksearch.dla.mil/qsDocDetails.aspx?ident_number=2...
| adrian_b wrote:
| That link shows that the traditional metal cans have been
| replaced in 1994 with plastic cans.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| The plastic containers are available, but in my experience
| 90% of fuel containers are the traditional jerry cans.
| adrian_b wrote:
| I am sure that many of the existing metal jerry cans
| might still be in use 50 years in the future from now.
|
| However the cancellation notice for the military standard
| that was posted above mandated that all military
| procurement after June 1994 must be done only with
| plastic cans.
|
| I have been using a couple of traditional jerry cans for
| several decades, but I have seen the new military plastic
| cans only in photos. They must be obviously much lighter,
| but I have no idea if besides this advantage they have
| disadvantages when compared with the metal cans that they
| have replaced.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| You're mistaken - we still use basically the original jerry can
| design in the Army today.
|
| The first photo I'm not sure exactly what they are - but I'm
| guessing they're 'norgies' - food containers.
|
| The second photo shows water containers, not fuel cans. They
| literally say 'water' on the side.
| hef19898 wrote:
| The US Army ones are single yandle, plastic versions. Same
| dimensions so from what I see on the picture, 30 litres. So
| yes, still, mostly, the same design. Obviously those plastic
| ones are cheaper then proper steel / metal ones.
|
| Ukraine, well, for sure they use different stuff. The western
| allies used jerry cans after North Africa, which continued with
| NATO. Ukraine is, for rather obvious reasons, using Warsaw pact
| spec gear.
| hef19898 wrote:
| EDIT: 20 liters, of course.
| Ancapistani wrote:
| I have a handful of Wehrmacht cans, and they're all I use. New
| ones are very expensive, so I get them at flea markets and
| antique stores every time I see them. I probably have $75 each
| in them total.
|
| VERY much worth it if you use fuel cans often.
| josefresco wrote:
| Related: Bought a "racing" jerrycan or gas can and boy was it
| terrible. I thought because I had seen it at the track it was
| superior in some way. Example:
| https://www.summitracing.com/parts/vpr-3512
|
| The vent it near the spout (impossible to tilt and not spill),
| and the flexible spout (sold separately) is slow and becomes
| stiff and unworkable in the cold.
|
| My 20 year old, cheapo can with flexible accordion spout is
| vastly superior. Live and learn I guess.
| bognition wrote:
| " It had three handles, enabling one man to carry two cans and
| pass one to another man in bucket-brigade fashion. Its capacity
| was approximately five U.S. gallons; its weight filled, forty-
| five pounds. Thanks to an air chamber at the top, it would float
| on water if dropped overboard or from a plane. Its short spout
| was secured with a snap closure that could be propped open for
| pouring, making unnecessary any funnel or opener. A gasket made
| the mouth leakproof. An air-breathing tube from the spout to the
| air space kept the pouring smooth. And most important, the can's
| inside was lined with an impervious plastic material developed
| for the insides of steel beer barrels. This enabled the jerrycan
| to be used alternately for gasoline and water."
|
| Wow, seems like a lot of little design choices went into this
| can.
|
| I love how good UX crops up everywhere.
| jsnodlin wrote:
| specialist wrote:
| > _I love how good UX crops up everywhere._
|
| Me too. Empathetically. These deep dives feed my soul.
|
| The Donald Norman books, obviously. I've read similar accounts
| about forks (the utensil), pencils, shipping containers, etc.
|
| One organizational detail that pops out is the German
| government sponsored a design competition and then seriously
| reviewed everything.
|
| Another data point in favor of broadly applying X-Prize like
| strategy to encourage innovation.
|
| DARPA and a few others are (sometimes) smart this way. The book
| Design Rules: The Power of Modularity uses economic logic
| (based on net present value, aka NPV) to also make the argument
| in favor.
| chaorace wrote:
| Something that I took away was that "good design" can only go
| so far in terms of strategic advantage. The Germans invested
| considerable funding, research, and testing into their
| cans... only to have them copied. Sure, they enjoyed a few
| years of genuine advantage, but that probably stemmed just as
| much from the woefully underdesigned state of allied gas
| cans.
|
| My takeaway here is that they should have iterated until they
| had a "great, but not perfect" design. That way, when the
| design inevitably gets aped... there's still room for the
| opposing side to introduce their own improvements which you
| can steal right back.
| JasonFruit wrote:
| Two problems with that thinking: a) even if you think you
| have a perfect design, you are still at "great, but not
| perfect", and b) there's no strategic advantage to doing
| less well than your opponent. In trying to avoid the later
| state where your enemy catches up to you, you're reducing
| or eliminating the initial advantage, which is probably not
| what you want.
| chaorace wrote:
| I'm more thinking that there are diminishing returns
| which are hard to justify when the cost of stealing a
| design remains fairly flat.
| usrusr wrote:
| You make it sounds as if they wasted years gold-plating
| fuel can design when they should have - done what exactly?
| Not waste 21 years from losing one world war to starting
| another? Deliberately start with inferior logistics to keep
| the next iteration in reserve for when the first version
| gets copied? (not even that far off, considering that weird
| window/duppel stalemate where for a while both sides held
| back the same innovation for fear of the other side copying
| it)
| chaorace wrote:
| I'm not attempting to back-seat drive the third reich
| here -- I make software, not war. I'm just interested in
| gleaning design insight from history.
|
| In any case... I do think that, ultimately, the Jerrycan
| was more useful to the allied forces. The copycat designs
| were instrumental in the invasion of Europe, which pushed
| supply logistics far harder than the blitz ever did.
| tialaramex wrote:
| FWIW "The Blitz" is used exclusively to refer to German
| bombing of towns and cities after they'd lost the Battle
| of Britain (a battle for Air Superiority over England,
| which would have considerably improved prospects for
| German invasion if it came to that), and is never short
| for "Blitzkrieg" (the Germans never called it this) a
| fighting style of very rapid advances allowing German
| forces to overwhelm their European enemy before they were
| properly organised to defend.
|
| So, the Blitz didn't rely on Jerrycans at all, planes
| leave from and, if they aren't destroyed, return to your
| airbases, which have plenty of fuel and refuelling
| apparatus in place.
| chaorace wrote:
| My bad, that's what I get for firing off a response on my
| phone. I appreciate the correction!
| zbrozek wrote:
| Now if only the portable fuel cans I'm able to buy were this
| good. Instead, they have nozzles that require a third hand to
| operate and they don't have breather tubes (by law these days,
| I think), so they make a mess every time. Filling my wood
| chipper's tank is frustrating.
| koofdoof wrote:
| I believe you can buy old style nozzle kits to add to new gas
| cans to restore them to their former glory.
| thrower123 wrote:
| The regulation that made the old-style vented plastic
| gasoline cans illegal to produce is on my Mt Rushmore of
| well-intentioned, catastrophic failures.
| 0xffff2 wrote:
| You can still get good quality fuel cans. Just don't complain
| about the price.
|
| wavianusa.com
| throwaway1777 wrote:
| Sold out like everything these days.
| jcadam wrote:
| Yes, the newer EPA-approved cans are designed to ensure that
| you spill gas all over your hands and/or the ground when
| using them.
| tadfisher wrote:
| The breather is under the plastic button or collar you
| depress while filling (with your third hand). The mechanism
| is easy to break.
| LgWoodenBadger wrote:
| They still come with breather tubes...
|
| https://www.lowes.com/pd/Scepter-USA-5-Gallon-Plastic-
| Gasoli...
|
| This works great for filling my tractor, though I have the
| diesel variant
| kubanczyk wrote:
| > they don't have breather tubes
|
| Just pour from the opposite side, e.g.
| https://youtu.be/LA7IbFzCNC4?t=51
| jcims wrote:
| That only works if there's no fill tube.
| kwhitefoot wrote:
| Surely the nozzle has a breather tube? At least the one that
| I screw on to the plastic petrol can I use to fill my
| lawnmower does. I'm not in the US though; it's probably
| Norwegian but possibly British, can't remember where I bought
| it.
| toast0 wrote:
| There are vendors of real, usable fuel cans. They're kind of
| expensive, but there's a nice feeling of usefulness everytime
| you use one.
|
| From my perspective there's three options:
|
| a) get an old, plastic can with a vent from the before times
|
| b) buy an expensive NATO metal can, and the flexible spout
| 'for amusement purposes only'
|
| c) lobby your government to allow gas cans that don't cause
| actual spills everytime in the pursuit of avoiding fume
| leakage or whatever.
| incomplete wrote:
| you can also buy a hunsaker jug... they don't pack as
| nicely as jerrycans, but they're US legal, have a vent, and
| i can't recommend them enough. i use them for fueling a 24
| hours of lemons race car, and they make my least favorite
| thing in the world relatively safe and drama free. they
| dump 5gal in ~20sec or so.
|
| https://hunsakerusa.com/collections/5-gallon-quikfill-jugs
|
| now, if you illegally modify one by adding a legit breather
| tube... you can dump 5g in ~10 sec or less. :)
| samatman wrote:
| Just last night I was watching a YouTube segment on the jerry
| can. I wonder if OP saw the same video just recently, or if this
| is my Baader-Meinhof for the day.
|
| Edit: it was this one
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwUkbGHFAhs&list=TLPQMTkwMzI...
| throwawayffffas wrote:
| I just got why they are called jerry-cans.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-21 23:01 UTC)