Have any of the shootingpunks on the list heard of constructing a firearm from something akin to a internal combustion chamber?
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 keyser-soze@hushmail.com wrote:
Have any of the shootingpunks on the list heard of constructing a firearm from something akin to a internal combustion chamber?
Stanley G. Weinbaum "A Martian Odyssey" Tweel, where are you? -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thursday, November 29, 2001, at 04:32 PM, keyser-soze@hushmail.com wrote:
Have any of the shootingpunks on the list heard of constructing a firearm from something akin to a internal combustion chamber?
H&K was a prime contractor on the "caseless ammunition" system being considered for a bullpup rifle to replace the .223 variants. Fired three flechette-like projectiles, no case. (Cases add weight, and in principle one could dispense with them.) In principle one could also do what you are suggesting, by adding the incendiary ingredient, the oxiding ingredient, and the projectile all separately. I don't see a lot of advantages to this, as then running out of any one of the three means the remaining items are useless deadweight. Makes more sense to combine the three, whether in a conventional cartridge or in the caseless system. That guarantees all three are in equal supply, and in the right stoichiometric ratio, and also allows for better quality control (that is, cartridge makers spend a lot of effort fine-tuning the geometries and mixes). If you mean something that runs on fairly conventional fuel, such as diesel or gasoline or alcohol, t's unlikely that enough muzzle velocity will be achievable in a reasonable-length barrel. I did see a GyroJet pistol once. A rocket pistol, firing little rockets. Early 60s. Very expensive. And suffered from the fact that each little rocket had to accelerate up to speed. Lots of chance for the target to move. Chief advantage was next to no recoil. Which is why rocket designs tend to be used with man-fired heavier pieces, e.g., RPGs, Redeyes, Stingers, etc. --Tim May "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship." --Alexander Fraser Tyler
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Tim May wrote:
See srl.org. In particular, the natural gas gun they used in the 97 show here in Austin. It certainly didn't have a problem blowing the tops of the trees out several hundred yards away (and that was with the slug of air it ejected - as it moved through the smoke you could see the donut ring clearly). -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim May wrote:
Cases also have to be ejected. In principle, you can have a simpler mechanism and a higher fire rate if you use caseless ammo. (In practice, the only automatic caseless rifle I've seen (not an H&K) had a mechanism virtually identical to any other gas operated automatice, down to the ejector hook in case of a bad round.)
Right, petrol won't burn fast enough for direct propulsion. You might be able to use a large combustion chamber and then neck down to get a higher gas velocity, but (in the absense of actual calculations) I don't think that would get you enough. I suppose you could use something like space shuttle fuel; that burns pretty fast. Of course, it's volatile, instable, corrosive, and expensive...
Gyrojet rounds burned out in, IIRC, 20 feet, and they covered that first 20 feet in a small fraction of a second. I don't think target dodging is any more of an issue than with conventional bullets. But the burning fuel might be a problem in another way: what if you shoot someone who's less than 20 feet away? The rocket would keep burning after it struck. Would that be viewed as torture, if you were investigated for the shooting, be the shooting ever so justified? (Data points: I've never pointed a pistol at anyone farther than about six feet away. Once was under a foot. (Passenger in a small car tried to rob me with a knife.) This is the norm for people who are actually shot with pistols, as contrasted with being shot at.) -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 04:32:51PM -0800, keyser-soze@hushmail.com wrote:
Have any of the shootingpunks on the list heard of constructing a firearm from something akin to a internal combustion chamber?
You can buy one at Home Depot! It's called a cordless nailer. Powered by "fuel cells" which are probably propane. The Porter-Cable "Bammer" is one model. Eric
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Eric Murray wrote:
Too cool...I love (pseudo/light regulation) free market economics :) How does it go? "The street finds its own uses for technology." W. Gibson ps What kind of bookstore would have books about von Mises' life and economic philosophy in their economic section but wouldn't actually carry any of his work, what's up with that...Barnes & Nobles? -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
At 10:36 PM 11/29/2001 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
von Mises has been dead for a while and his publisher is probably not actively running wholesale specials. Besides, he's like one of those Tedious Dead White Male Classics authors; nobody actually reads him, they just read commentaries or literary criticisms on him, or the Cliff Notes or comic-book "von Mises For Beginners" versions (don't know if they've done him, but the Heidegger one makes it palatable to at least approach Heidegger* :-) or more likely, economics/politics textbooks by people who have occasional references to von Mises but haven't actually read his work, just the commentaries/litcrit/cliffnotes/comics about him. An interesting "why don't bookstores carry ____" event happened a couple of years ago. Some lefties ranting for independent bookstores and against big chain bookstores here in San Francisco commented that "if you look in the big box monoculture bookstores, you won't find Chomsky" (I think this was a Tom Tomorrow cartoon - bookstore droid replies "Politics? We've got lots of Rush Limbaugh over in Aisle 7") A couple weeks later I looked at Borders, and sure enough they had several Chomsky titles in their index and at least one on the shelf. Don't know if they'd always been there, or if it was a rapid response by a very clueful big chain trying to head off bad publicity and zoning hassles. Bill (*One-line summary of Heidegger: You're going to die and be really truly dead. Get used to it and quit bullshitting.)
On Monday, December 3, 2001, at 02:23 AM, Bill Stewart wrote:
Well, "Marx for Dummies" has been the best-selling economics textbook for something like 40 years, through at least 7 or 9 editions. --Tim May "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship." --Alexander Fraser Tyler
At 04:32 PM 11/29/01 -0800, keyser-soze@hushmail.com wrote:
Have any of the shootingpunks on the list heard of constructing a firearm from something akin to a internal combustion chamber?
This is a development of the classic tennisball/tenniscan/volitile aerosol cannon. I think you need very high compression ratio. You would be classed as a firearm, at least in Calif, where combustion is a no-no (but compressed air and springs are ok).
participants (7)
-
Bill Stewart -
David Honig -
Eric Murray -
Jim Choate -
keyser-soze＠hushmail.com -
Steven Furlong -
Tim May