Eggs are perhaps the most beloved staple of breakfast. However, they come with a flaw, they are incredibly messy to work with. Cracking in particular leaves egg on one’s hands and countertop, requiring frequent hand washing. This fundamental flaw of eggs inspired [Stuff Made Here] to fix it with an over-engineered egg cracking robot.

The machine works on the principle of scoring a line along an egg shell to weaken it, then gently tapping it to fracture the shell. A simple theory that proved complex to build into a machine. The first challenge was merely holding an egg as eggs come in all shapes and sizes. [Stuff Made Here] ended up settling on silicone over-molded with a 3D printed structure. After numerous prototypes, this evolved into including over-molded arms for added stiffness, and a vacuum seal for added rigidity.

After making two of these holders, [Stuff Made Here] added them to a roughly C shaped holder, which could spin the egg around, and slide the holders to allow fitting any egg shape. To this was added an arm which included a scoring blade and tiny hammer to crack the egg. The hammer can even be turned off while the blade is in use.
The over-molded egg holder
The mechanism runs off a sequence of score, hammer, dump, eject. It was attempted to run this sequence off a single crank, but ended up not working for a number of reasons, not least of which being some eggs required more scoring then others. Nonetheless, we love the mechanical computational mechanism used. Ultimately, while frivolous, the project provides a wonderful look at the highs and lows of the prototyping process with all its numerous broken eggs.

If you like over-engineered solutions to simple problems, [Stuff Made Here] has you covered. Make sure to check out this automatic postcard machine next!

youtube.com/embed/vJ43DjwLPGA?…

hackaday.com/2025/09/03/over-e…

A mule isn’t just a four-legged hybrid created of a union betwixt Donkey and Horse; in our circles, it’s much more likely to mean a testbed device you hang various bits of hardware off in order to evaluate. [Jenny List]’s 7″ touchscreen camera enclosure is just such a mule.

In this case, the hardware to be evaluated is camera modules– she’s starting out with the official RPi HQ camera, but the modular nature of the construction means it’s easy to swap modules for evaluation. The camera modules live on 3D printed front plates held to the similarly-printed body with self-tapping screws.

Any Pi will do, though depending on the camera module you may need one of the newer versions. [Jenny] has got Pi4 inside, which ought to handle anything. For control and preview, [Jenny] is using an old first-gen 7″ touchscreen from the Raspberry Pi foundation. Those were nice little screens back in the day, and they still serve well now.

There’s no provision for a battery because [Jenny] doesn’t need one– this isn’t a working camera, after all, it’s just a test mule for the sensors. Having it tethered to a wall wart or power bank is no problem in this application. All files are on GitHub under a CC4.0 license– not just STLs, either, proper CAD files that you can actually make your own. (SCAD files in this case, but who doesn’t love OpenSCAD?) That means if you love the look of this thing and want to squeeze in a battery or add a tripod mount, you can! It’s no shock that our own [Jenny List] would follow best-practice for open source hardware, but it’s so few people do that it’s worth calling out when we see it.

Thanks to [Jenny] for the tip, and don’t forget that the tip line is open to everyone, and everyone is equally welcome to toot their own horn.

hackaday.com/2025/09/03/one-ca…

Il gruppo di hacker LunaLock ha aggiunto un nuovo elemento al classico schema di estorsione, facendo leva sui timori di artisti e clienti. Il 30 agosto, sul sito web Artists&Clients, che mette in contatto illustratori indipendenti con i clienti, è apparso un messaggio: gli aggressori hanno segnalato il furto e la crittografia di tutti i dati della risorsa.

Gli hacker hanno promesso di pubblicare il codice sorgente del sito e le informazioni personali degli utenti nelle darknet se il proprietario non avesse pagato 50.000 dollari in criptovaluta. Ma la principale leva di pressione era la prospettiva di trasferire le opere e le informazioni rubate ad aziende che addestrano le reti neurali per includerle in set per modelli di addestramento.

Il sito ha pubblicato una nota con un timer per il conto alla rovescia, in cui si informava che se la vittima si fosse rifiutata di pagare, i file sarebbero stati resi pubblici. Gli autori hanno avvertito di possibili sanzioni per violazione del GDPR e di altre leggi. Il pagamento era richiesto in Bitcoin o Monero. Screenshot della notifica sono stati diffusi sui social network e persino Google è riuscito a indicizzare la pagina con il messaggio, dopodiché Artists&Clients ha smesso di funzionare: quando si tenta di accedere, gli utenti visualizzano un errore di Cloudflare.

La maggior parte del testo sembra un messaggio standard negli attacchi ransomware. La novità è l’accenno all’intenzione di consegnare i disegni e i dati rubati agli sviluppatori di intelligenza artificiale. Gli esperti hanno osservato che questa è la prima volta che vedono l’argomento relativo all’accesso ai set di addestramento utilizzato come metodo di pressione. Finora, tale possibilità era stata discussa solo teoricamente: ad esempio, che i criminali potessero analizzare i dati per calcolare l’importo del riscatto.

Non è ancora chiaro come gli aggressori trasferiranno esattamente i materiali artistici agli sviluppatori dell’algoritmo. Possono pubblicare le immagini su un sito normale e attendere che vengano rilevate dai crawler dei modelli linguistici. Un’altra opzione è caricare le immagini tramite i servizi stessi, se le loro regole consentono l’utilizzo dei contenuti degli utenti per l’addestramento. In ogni caso, la minaccia stessa spinge la comunità di artisti e clienti a fare pressione sull’amministrazione delle risorse chiedendo il pagamento di un riscatto per mantenere il controllo sulle proprie opere.

Al momento, il sito web di Artists&Clients rimane irraggiungibile. Nel frattempo, gli utenti continuano a discutere della minaccia e a condividere online screenshot acquisiti, il che non fa che aumentare la visibilità dell’attacco.

L'articolo Nuovi ricatti: se non paghi, daremo tutti i tuoi dati in pasto alle intelligenze artificiali! proviene da il blog della sicurezza informatica.

La casa automobilistica Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) ha annunciato di essere stata costretta a disattivare diversi sistemi a causa di un attacco hacker. L’incidente sembra aver avuto ripercussioni sulle attività produttive e di vendita al dettaglio della casa automobilistica.

“JLR è stata colpita da un incidente informatico. Abbiamo preso misure immediate per mitigare l’impatto spegnendo preventivamente i nostri sistemi”, ha dichiarato l’azienda in una nota. “Al momento non ci sono prove di furto di dati dei clienti, tuttavia le nostre attività di vendita al dettaglio e produzione hanno subito notevoli interruzioni”.

JLR ha inoltre affermato di essere attualmente al lavoro su un riavvio controllato di tutte le applicazioni globali. L’azienda non ha fornito una tempistica specifica per il ritorno alla normalità né dettagli sull’attacco subito.

Le prime segnalazioni di disagi alla JLR sono arrivate dai concessionari del Regno Unito, che si sono lamentati di non riuscire a immatricolare le nuove auto e a fornire i pezzi di ricambio ai centri di assistenza.

Secondo il Liverpool Echo, l’attacco è avvenuto nel fine settimana e l’incidente ha costretto la JLR a disattivare diversi sistemi, tra cui quelli utilizzati nello stabilimento produttivo di Solihull (dove vengono costruiti i modelli Land Rover Discovery, Range Rover e Range Rover Sport).

Secondo quanto riportato dai media, lunedì i lavoratori dello stabilimento di Halewood hanno ricevuto un’e-mail in cui si chiedeva loro di non presentarsi al lavoro, mentre altri membri dello staff sono stati mandati a casa.

Al momento, nessun gruppo di hacker ha rivendicato la responsabilità dell’attacco alla Jaguar Land Rover.

L'articolo Jaguar Land Rover vittima di attacco hacker: produzione interrotta! proviene da il blog della sicurezza informatica.

This week Jonathan and Randal talk Flutter and Dart! Is Google killing Flutter? What’s the challenge Randal sees in training new senior developers, and what’s the solution? Listen to find out!

youtube.com/embed/HzZQacDIxZg?…

Did you know you can watch the live recording of the show right on our YouTube Channel? Have someone you’d like us to interview? Let us know, or contact the guest and have them contact us! Take a look at the schedule here.

play.libsyn.com/embed/episode/…

Direct Download in DRM-free MP3.

If you’d rather read along, here’s the transcript for this week’s episode.

Places to follow the FLOSS Weekly Podcast:

• Spotify
• RSS

Theme music: “Newer Wave” Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)

Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License

hackaday.com/2025/09/03/floss-…

Something which may well unite Hackaday readers is the experience of being “The computer person” among your family or friends. You’ll know how it goes, when you go home for Christmas, stay with the in-laws, or go to see some friend from way back, you end up fixing their printer connection or something. You know that they would bridle somewhat if you asked them to do whatever it is they do for a living as a free service for you, but hey, that’s the penalty for working in technology.

Bad Laws Just Make People Avoid Them

There’s a new one that’s happened to me and no doubt other technically-minded Brits over the last few weeks: I’m being asked to recommend, and sometimes install, a VPN service. The British government recently introduced the Online Safety Act, which is imposing ID-backed age verification for British internet users when they access a large range of popular websites. The intent is to regulate access to pornography, but the net has been spread so wide that many essential or confidential services are being caught up in it. To be a British Internet user is to have your government peering over your shoulder, and while nobody’s on the side of online abusers, understandably a lot of my compatriots want no part of it. We’re in the odd position of having 4Chan and the right-wing Reform Party alongside Wikipedia among those at the front line on the matter. What a time to be alive.

VPN applications have shot to the top of all British app download charts, prompting the government to flirt with deny the idea of banning them, but as you might imagine therein lies a problem. Aside from the prospect of dodgy VPN apps to trap the unwary, the average Joe has no idea how to choose from the plethora of offerings. A YouTuber being paid to shill “that” VPN service is as close of they’ve ever come to a VPN, so they are simply unequipped to make a sound judgement when it comes to trusting a service with their web traffic. They have no hope of rolling their own VPN; setting up WireGuard and still further having a friend elsewhere in the world prepared to act as their endpoint are impractical.

It therefore lies upon us, their tech-savvy friends, to lead them through this maze. Which brings me to the point of this piece; are we even up to the job ourselves? I’ve been telling my friends to use ProtonVPN because their past behaviour means I trust Proton more than I do some of the other well-known players, but is my semi-informed opinion on the nose here? Even I need help!

Today Brits, Tomorrow The Rest Of You

At the moment it’s Brits who are scrambling for VPNs, but it seems very likely that with the EU yet again flirting with their ChatControl snooping law, and an American government whose actions are at best unpredictable, soon enough many of the rest of you will too. The question is then: where do we send the non-technical people, and how good are the offerings? A side-by-side review of VPNs has been done to death by many other sites, so there’s little point in repeating. Instead let’s talk to some experts. You lot, or at least those among the Hackaday readership who know their stuff when it comes to VPNs. What do you recommend for your friends and family?

Header image: Nenad Stojkovic, CC BY 2.0.

hackaday.com/2025/09/03/ask-ha…

Retrocomputers need ROMs, but they’re just so read only. Enter the latest incarnation of [Piers]’s One ROM to rule them all, now built with a RP2350, because the newest version is 5V capable. This can replace the failing ROMs in your old Commodore gear with this sweet design on a two-layer PCB, using a cheap microcontroller.

[Piers] wanted to use the RP2350 from the beginning but there simply wasn’t space on the board for the 23 level shifters which would have been required. But now that the A4 stepping adds 5 V tolerance [Piers] has been able to reformulate his design.

The C64 in the demo has three different ROMs: the basic ROM, kernel ROM, and character ROM. A single One ROM can emulate all three. The firmware is performance critical, it needs to convert requests on the address pins to results on the data bus just as fast as it can and [Piers] employs a number of tricks to meet these requirements.

The PCB layout for the RP2350 required extensive changes from the larger STM32 in the previous version. Because the RP2350 uses large power and ground pads underneath the IC this area, which was originally used to drop vias to the other side of the board, was no longer available for signal routing. And of course [Piers] is constrained by the size of the board needing to fit in the original form factor used by the C64.

The One ROM code is available over on GitHub, and the accompanying video from [Piers] is an interesting look into the design process and how tradeoffs and compromises and hacks are made in order to meet functional requirements.

youtube.com/embed/Zy8IMe6fMI4?…

Thanks to [Piers] for writing in to let us know about the new version of his project.

hackaday.com/2025/09/03/one-ro…

LockBit rappresenta una delle più longeve e strutturate ransomware gang degli ultimi anni, con un modello Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS)che ha segnato in maniera profonda l’ecosistema criminale.

A seguito dell’operazione internazionale Operation Cronos, condotta a febbraio 2024 e che ha portato al sequestro di numerose infrastrutture e alla compromissione dei pannelli di gestione affiliati, il gruppo sembrava destinato a un declino irreversibile. Tuttavia, nelle ultime settimane, nuove evidenze in rete onion stanno alimentando ipotesi di una resurrezione del brand LockBit, sotto la sigla LockBit 5.0.

Breve storia del gruppo

• 2019– Comparsa delle prime varianti di LockBit, caratterizzate da automatismi di propagazione rapida in ambienti Windows e tecniche avanzate di cifratura.
• 2020-2021– Consolidamento del modello RaaS e forte espansione nella scena del cybercrime; introduzione dei data leak site come strumento di doppia estorsione.
• 2022– LockBit diventa uno dei gruppi più attivi a livello globale, rilasciando le versioni LockBit 2.0 e 3.0, con implementazioni in linguaggi multipli e payload cross-platform.
• 2023– Ulteriore diversificazione con payload in Go e Linux, e campagne mirate verso supply chain e settori critici.
• 2024 (Operazione Cronos)– Coordinata da Europol e FBI, l’operazione porta al sequestro di oltre 30 server, domini onion e strumenti interni. Per la prima volta viene distribuito un decryptor pubblico su larga scala.

Evidenze recenti

Analizzando il loro sito underground, viene mostrato un portale accessibile tramite rete onion con brand LockBit 5.0, che adotta lo stesso schema di queue panel già osservato in precedenti versioni del gruppo. L’interfaccia ripropone loghi riconducibili a Monero (XMR), Bitcoin (BTC) e Zcash (ZEC) come metodi di pagamento, indicando che il modello di estorsione rimarrebbe centrato su criptovalute ad alto grado di anonimato.

Il messaggio“You have been placed in a queue, awaiting forwarding to the platform”richiama i meccanismi classici dei pannelli di affiliazione LockBit, dove l’utente (o affiliato) viene instradato verso il backend operativo.

Analisi tecnica e possibili scenari

L’apparizione di LockBit 5.0 può essere interpretata secondo tre scenari principali:

1. Tentativo di resurrezione reale: una parte del core team non colpita da Operation Cronos potrebbe aver ricostruito un’infrastruttura ridotta, puntando a reclutare nuovamente affiliati.
2. Operazione di inganno (honeypot): non si esclude la possibilità che si tratti di un’esca creata da ricercatori o forze dell’ordine per monitorare traffico e identificare affiliati superstiti.
3. Rebranding opportunistico: attori terzi, approfittando del “marchio” LockBit, potrebbero riutilizzarlo per ottenere visibilità e autorevolezza immediata nella scena underground.

Conclusioni

Sebbene al momento non vi siano prove concrete di nuove compromissioni riconducibili a LockBit 5.0, la presenza di un portale onion con brand ufficiale alimenta speculazioni su una possibile rinascita del gruppo. Sarà cruciale monitorare:

• eventuali nuove campagne di intrusione con TTP riconducibili al passato di LockBit,
• leak site attivi con pubblicazione di vittime,
• segnali di reclutamento nel dark web.

La vicenda dimostra ancora una volta la resilienza e la capacità di adattamento delle cyber-gang, che spesso riescono a rigenerarsi anche dopo operazioni di law enforcement di portata globale.

L'articolo LockBit 5.0 : segnali di una nuova e possibile “Rinascita”? proviene da il blog della sicurezza informatica.

Human existence boils down to one brutal fact: however much food you have, it’s enough to last for the rest of your life. Finding your next meal has always been the central organizing fact of life, and whether that meal came from an unfortunate gazelle or the local supermarket is irrelevant. The clock starts ticking once you finish a meal, and if you can’t find the next one in time, you’ve got trouble.

Working around this problem is basically why humans invented agriculture. As tasty as they may be, gazelles don’t scale well to large populations, but it’s relatively easy to grow a lot of plants that are just as tasty and don’t try to run away when you go to cut them down. The problem is that growing a lot of plants requires a lot of water, often more than Mother Nature provides in the form of rain. And that’s where artificial irrigation comes into the picture.

We’ve been watering our crops with water diverted from rivers, lakes, and wells for almost as long as we’ve been doing agriculture, but it’s only within the last 100 years or so that we’ve reached a scale where massive pieces of infrastructure are needed to get the job done. Above-ground irrigation is a big business, both in terms of the investment farmers have to make in the equipment and the scale of the fields it turns from dry, dusty patches of dirt into verdant crops that feed the world. Here’s a look at the engineering behind some of the more prevalent methods of above-ground irrigation here in North America.

Crop Circles

Center-pivot irrigation machines are probably the most recognizable irrigation methods, both for their sheer size — center-pivot booms can be a half-mile long or more — and for the distinctive circular and semi-circular crop patterns they result in. Center-pivot irrigation has been around for a long time, and while it represents a significant capital cost for the farmer, both in terms of the above-ground machinery and the subsurface water supply infrastructure that needs to be installed, the return on investment time can be as low as five years, depending on the crop.
Pivot tower in an alfalfa field in Oregon. You can clearly see the control panel, riser pipe, swivel elbow, and the boom. The slip rings for electrical power distribution live inside the gray dome atop the swivel. Note the supporting arch in the pipe created by the trusses underneath. Source: Tequask, CC BY-SA 4.0.
Effective use of pivot irrigation starts with establishing a water supply to the pivot location. Generally, this will be at the center of a field, allowing the boom to trace out a circular path. However, semi-circular layouts with the water supply near the edge of the field or even in one corner of a square field are also common. The source must also be able to supply a sufficient amount of water; depending on the emitter heads selected, the boom can flow approximately 1,000 gallons per minute.

The pivot tower is next. It’s generally built on a sturdy concrete pad, although there are towable pivot machines where the center tower is on wheels. The tower needs to stand tall enough that the rotating boom clears the crop when it’s at its full height, which can be substantial for crops like corn. Like almost all parts of the machine, the tower is constructed of galvanized steel to resist corrosion and to provide a bit of anodic protection to the underlying metal.

The tower is positioned over a riser pipe that connects to the water supply and is topped by a swivel fitting to change the water flow from vertical to horizontal and to let the entire boom rotate around the tower. For electrically driven booms, a slip ring will also be used to transfer power and control signals from the fixed control panel on the tower along the length of the boom. The slip ring connector is located in a weather-tight enclosure mounted above the exact center of the riser pipe.

The irrigation boom is formed from individual sections of pipe, called spans. In the United States, each span is about 180 feet long, a figure that makes it easy to build a system that will fit within the Public Land Survey System (PLSS), a grid-based survey system based on even divisions called sections, one mile on a side and 640 acres in area. These are divided down into half-, quarter-, and finally quarter-quarter sections, which are a quarter mile on a side and cover 40 acres. A boom built from seven spans will be about 1,260 feet long and will be able to irrigate a 160-acre quarter-section, which is a half-mile on a side.

The pipe for each span is usually made from galvanized steel, but aluminum is also sometimes used. Because of the flow rates, large-diameter pipe is used, and it needs to be supported lest it sag when filled. To do this, the pipe is put into tension with a pair of truss rods that run the length of the span, connecting firmly to each end. The truss rods and the pipe are connected by a series of triangular trusses attached between the bottom of the pipe and the truss rods, bending the pipe into a gentle arch. The outer end of each span is attached to a wheeled tower, sized to support the pipe at the same height as the center tower. The boom is constructed by connecting spans to each other and to the center pivot using flexible elastomeric couplings, which allow each span some flexibility to adjust for the terrain of the field. Sprinkler heads (drops) are attached to the span by elbows that exit at the top of the pipe. These act as siphon breakers, preventing water from flowing out of the sprinkler heads once water flow in the boom stops.

Different sprinkler heads are typically used along the length of the boom, with lower flow rate heads used near the center pivot. Sprinkler heads are also often spaced further apart close to the pivot. Both of these limit the amount of water delivered to the field where the boom’s rotational speed is lower, to prevent crops at the center of the field from getting overwatered. Most booms also have an end gun, which is similar to the impulse sprinklers commonly used for lawn irrigation, but much bigger. The end gun can add another 100′ or more of coverage to the pivot, without the expense of another length of pipe. End guns are often used to extend coverage into the corners of square fields, to make better use of space that otherwise would go fallow. In this case, an electrically driven booster pump can be used to drive the end gun, but only when the controller senses that the boom is within those zones.
Many center-pivot booms have an end gun, which is an impulse sprinkler that extends coverage by 100 feet or more without having to add an extra span. They can help fill in the corners of square fields. Source: Ingeniero hidr., CC BY-SA 3.0.
Most center-pivot machines are electrically driven, with a single motor mounted on each span’s tower. The motor drives both wheels through a gearbox and driveshaft. In electrically driven booms, only the outermost span rotates continuously. The motors on the inboard spans are kept in sync through a position-sensing switch that’s connected to the next-furthest-out span through mechanical linkages. When the outboard span advances, it eventually trips a microswitch that tells the motor on the inboard span to turn on. Once that span catches up to the outboard span, the motor turns off. The result is a ripple of movement that propagates along the boom in a wave.
Electrically driven pivots use switches to keep each span in sync. The black cam is attached to the next-further span by a mechanical linkage, which operates a microswitch to run the motor on that span. Source: Everything About Irrigation Pivots, by SmarterEveryDay, via YouTube.
While electrically driven center-pivot machines are popular, they do have significant disadvantages. Enterprising thieves often target them for copper theft; half a mile of heavy-gauge, multi-conductor cable sitting unattended in a field that could take hours for someone to happen upon is a tempting target indeed. To combat this, some manufacturers use hydrostatic drives, with hydraulic motors on each wheel and a powerful electric- or diesel-driven hydraulic pump at the pivot. Each tower’s wheels are controlled by a proportioning valve connected to the previous span via linkages, to run the motors faster when the span is lagging behind the next furthest-out tower.

Aside from theft deterrence, hydrostatic-drive pivots tend to be mechanically simpler and safer to work on, although it’s arguable that the shock hazard from the 480 VAC needed for the motors on electrically driven pivots is any less dangerous than hydraulic injection injuries from leaks. Speaking of leaks, hydrostatic pivots also pose an environmental hazard that electric rigs don’t; a hydraulic leak could potentially contaminate an entire field. To mitigate that risk, hydrostatic pivots generally use a non-toxic hydraulic fluid specifically engineered for pivots.

Occasionally, you’ll see center-pivot booms in fields that aren’t circular. Some rectangular fields can be irrigated with pivot-style booms that are set up with drive wheels at both ends. These booms travel up and down the length of a field with all motors running at the same speed. Generally, water is supplied via a suction hose dipping down from one end of the boom into an irrigation ditch or canal running alongside the field. At the end of the field, the boom reverses and heads back down the way it came. Alternatively, the boom can pivot 180 degrees at the end of the field and head back to the other end, tracing out a racetrack pattern. There are also towers where the wheels can swivel rather than being fixed perpendicularly to the boom; this setup allows individual spans or small groups to steer independently of the main boom, accommodating odd-shaped fields.
While pivot-irrigation is labor-efficient, it leaves quite a bit of land fallow. Many of these pivots use the end gun to get a few extra rows in each of the corner quadrants, increasing land use. Source: go_turk06, via Adobestock.

Rolling, Rolling, Rolling

While center-pivot machines are probably the ultimate in above-ground irrigation, they’re not perfect for every situation. They’re highly automated, but at great up-front cost, and even with special tricks, it’s still not possible to “square the circle” and make use of every bit of a rectangular field. For those fields, a lower-cost method like wheel line irrigation might be used. In this setup, lengths of pipe are connected to large spoked wheels about six feet in diameter. The pipe passes through the center of the wheel, acting as an axle. Spans of pipe are connected end-to-end on either side of a wheeled drive unit, forming a line the width of the field, up to a quarter-mile long, with the drive unit at the center of the line.
Wheel-line system in action on alfalfa in British Columbia. The drive unit at the center powers the whole string, moving it across the field a few times a day. It’s far more labor-intensive than a pivot, but far cheaper. Source: nalidsa, via Adobestock.
In use, the wheel line is rolled out into the field about 25 feet from the edge. When the line is in position, one end is connected to a lateral line installed along the edge of the field, which typically has fittings every 50 feet or so, or however far the sprinkler heads that are attached at regular intervals to the pipe cover. The sprinklers are usually impulse-type and attached to the pipe by weighted swivel fittings, so they always remain vertical no matter where the line stops in its rotation. The heads were traditionally made of brass or bronze for long wear and corrosion resistance, but thieves attracted to them for their scrap value have made plastic heads more common.

Despite their appearance, wheel lines do not continually move across the field. They need to be moved manually, often several times a day, by running the drive unit at the center of the line. This is generally powered by a small gasoline engine which rotates the pipe attached to either side, rolling the entire string across the field as a unit. Disconnecting the water, rolling the line, and reconnecting the line to the supply is quite labor-intensive, so it tends to be used only where labor is cheap.

Reeling In The Years

A method of irrigation that lives somewhere between the labor-intensive wheel line and the hands-off center-pivot is hose reel irrigation. It’s more commonly used for crop irrigation in Europe, but it does make an occasional appearance in US agriculture, particularly in fields where intensive watering all season long isn’t necessary.

As the name suggests, hose reel irrigation uses a large reel of flexible polyethylene pipe, many hundreds of feet in length. The reel is towed into the field, typically positioned in the center or at its edge. Large spades on the base of the reel are lowered into the ground to firmly anchor the reel before it’s connected to the water supply via hoses or pipes. The free end of the hose reel is connected to a tower-mounted gun, which is typically a high-flow impulse sprinkler. The gun tower is either wheeled or on skids, and a tractor is used to drag it out into the field away from the reel. Care is taken to keep the hose between rows to prevent damage to the crops.

Once the water is turned on, water travels down the hose and blasts out of the gun tower, covering a circle or semi-circle a hundred feet or more in diameter. The water pressure also turns a turbine inside the hose reel, which drives a gearbox that slowly winds the hose back onto the reel through a chain and sprocket drive. As the hose retracts, it pulls the gun back to the center of the field, evenly irrigating a large rectangular swath of the field. Depending on how the reel is set up, it can take a day or more for the gun to return to the reel, where an automatic shutoff valve shuts off the flow of water. The setup is usually moved to another point further down the field and the process is repeated until the whole field is irrigated.
Hose reel system being deployed for potatoes in Maine. The end gun on the right is about to be towed into the field, pulling behind it the large-diameter hose from the reel. The reel’s turbine and gearbox will wind the hose back up, pulling the gun in over a day or two. Source: Irrigation Hustle Continues, Bell’s Farming, via YouTube.
Although hose reels still need tending to, they’re nowhere near as labor-intensive as wheel lines. Farmers can generally look in on a reel setup once a day to make sure everything is running smoothly, and can often go several days between repositioning. Hose reels also have the benefit of being much easier to scale up and down than either center-pivot machines or wheel line; there are hose reels that store thousands of feet of large-diameter hose, and ones that are small enough for lawn irrigation that use regular garden hose and small impulse sprinklers.

hackaday.com/2025/09/03/field-…