exploding capacitor rifle

[coppercone2]

well how about puncturing or weakening the bottom so its more like a rocket then something that tends to pop on top?

maybe even 3d print a nozzle for it that glues to the rupture point?

this would very unlikely to work but?

[SiliconWizard]

I guess we would have to drastically strengthen its shell, except the bottom side. Just weakening the bottom of a regular cap might not be enough as a typical cap's shell is not sturdy enough IMO, and weakening the bottom might just prevent enough gas accumulation before its pops out.

[Rick Law]

No doubt what the USN shown is a bit too big to put on your belt, but it clearly shown that rail gun can reach meet and exceed the muzzle velocity of chemical explosion driven velocity.  Now they need to shrink it a bit further and make it a bit easier to use and deploy...  Say another decade or two perhaps.

I doubt major reductions are possible for that size projectile, the power requirements are just so massive. IRRC current power systems on existing ships are not enough, only the Zumwalt-class destroyer has the power system capability in place.

Yeah, I agree with you that the rail gun shown is unlikely to be shrinkable to say rifle size or even bazooka size.  I recall reading an article perhaps a year ago speculating that USN is putting most their chips on direct energy weapon instead of rail guns weapons.  If it does, that may spell the end of rail gun.

But - point is that rail guns can reach and exceed the chemical-explosion muzzle velocity and Physics takes over.  The "air friction being the problem" I quoted from another reply really doesn't matter.

Physics is that it really doesn't matter what drove the projectile out of the muzzle.  Once it left the muzzle of the gun, the air friction issue or any other issue will be no different -- regardless of what created the energy to push it out of the muzzle, muzzle velocity is all that matters.

e = ¹/₂ mv², that is all that matters and rail gun can have as big or bigger v.

That said, technology-wise, I like direct energy weapon.  I think that is where the future is heading.

[edy]

What is basically happening with "physical projectile" weapon is that we are converting either CHEMICAL or ELECTRICAL energy into KINETIC ENERGY of the projectile which in itself is being transported to the target, delivers that KINETIC energy into the target usually by deforming the object, ripping it apart.

With a DIRECT ENERGY weapon we are converting CHEMICAL (chemical laser) or ELECTRICAL energy into a stream of mass-less photons travelling at the speed of light towards the target. Upon interacting with the target, it transfers that energy into increasing kinetic energy of individual atoms/molecules in the target, essentially causing it to vaporize.

For some reason I keep thinking about this movie from the 1980's that I enjoyed watching:

[tautech]

"A government that does not trust it's law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust." -- Jeffrey R. Snyder, 'A Nation Of Cowards'

Tautech, if you turn this into a gun rant thread I'll shut it down.
Please keep on topic.

Gotcha.

My only point was some frustration at recent changes that law abiding firearm owners have unfortunately been turned into criminals by changes to legislation as the result of actions of criminals.
Doesn't affect me but I know a few it does that are involved in sporting competition.

One can clearly see there is an underlying agenda that's UN driven and then covertly implemented by each member country, AU and NZ are good examples of countries that have weakened to the UN's 'global control' designs.
https://www.un.org/disarmament/2018/

But what's next ?
Will we be legislated to all have EV's unless there is good personal reason not to ?
Will traditional protein food sources be outlawed in favor of artificial proteins ?  (allegedly lower CO2 footprint)

Yes I know, OT again....sorry......however this is a General Chat topic.
Lock this if you must but you'll hear no more OT on this matter from me.

[KL27x]

  True but lead fouling in the barrel and failure of the bullet to grip the barrel rifling (called "stripping the rifling") and subsequent bullet tumbling in flight and complete loss of accuracy, occur at much lower velocities than what it takes to make a bullet tear apart so you rarely get to that point.

In most high speed rifles you have to use some sort of gas checks to shoot cast bullets, don't you? This grips the rifling and keeps the bore sealed. The only rifles where you don't "need" some kind of gas check seem to be in calibers like 45-70 which throw giant slugs at low speed.

I think what happens at the higher velocities to cause tumbling and loss of accuracy before the bullet frags is the bullet melts. When the bullet gets pushed that hard/fast down the barrel, the skin of the cast bullet melts and sheds after exiting the muzzle. Depending on the caliber and twist and alloy, one (fragging vs melting/shedding) might occur before the other. I'd say, usually the melting happens, first.

If you have a muzzle brake on your rifle, you might notice the point where you start losing accuracy and getting tumbling with cast bullets coincides pretty closely with the point where the inside of your muzzle break starts to get coated in lead (in a thin even, shiny silver coating; it makes it look a bit like the black oxide coating of your muzzle brake wore off and underneath it was machined out of aluminum.) If the gas seal/check had failed, the entire bore would be plugged with lead.

I've only read about bullets spontaneously exploding. From the description, it seems like this is secondary to the bullet destabilizing, probably because parts of it melted off. If it were strictly due to centrifugal force overcoming the material, the bullet would explode as soon as it left the muzzle. More often, it seems the bullet goes some amount of yards downrange, first. After it destabilizes (after asymmetrically shedding some melted/softened lead) and starts spinning out of balance is perhaps where they usually explode. Well, I mean, if the bullet explodes in any way, it probably also melted would have melted and tumbled at at even lower velocity.

I have never used a chronograph, but according to reloading manuals, I probably get around 1800 fps with cast and checked rifle bullets. It's fast enough you can't shoot steel targets. They don't get dented; the steel vaporizes on impact.

[tautech]

@KL27x
In reply #10 I mentioned this deep rabbit hole, referring to firearm efficiency and ballistics.

All projectiles will display instability when used outside their intended use and even in a worn out rifle.
The target (excuse pun) is to get them to exit the barrel in the best possible condition and various solutions exist for this to happen however the laws of physics apply to projectile stability too and poor selection of components and/or even velocity can result in bullet instability.
Today we have great resources of reloading info online and freely available to help us make a selection of components that will work.
This one is unrelated to any component manufacturer:
http://kwk.us/twist.html

[Cubdriver]

What is basically happening with "physical projectile" weapon is that we are converting either CHEMICAL or ELECTRICAL energy into KINETIC ENERGY of the projectile which in itself is being transported to the target, delivers that KINETIC energy into the target usually by deforming the object, ripping it apart.

With a DIRECT ENERGY weapon we are converting CHEMICAL (chemical laser) or ELECTRICAL energy into a stream of mass-less photons travelling at the speed of light towards the target. Upon interacting with the target, it transfers that energy into increasing kinetic energy of individual atoms/molecules in the target, essentially causing it to vaporize.

For some reason I keep thinking about this movie from the 1980's that I enjoyed watching:

That's a nice looking triple nickel there at about the 3:15 point.  Want!

-Pat

[KL27x]

Tautech, I guess the point of my post is that cast bullets are perhaps limited in max velocity, in practice, by the melting point of the lead alloy as much as anything else. The other things that have been listed are secondary. This is, I think, why a thin copper jacket can make a huge difference regarding maximum velocity. Of course, hardness matters, to resist deformation (and heat) during the high acceleration. But a major reason for the jacket (or paper patching) is so the skin of the bullet doesn't melt due to friction.

Of course another major reason for the jacket may be to affect what happens after impact.

[NiHaoMike]

Will traditional protein food sources be outlawed in favor of artificial proteins ?  (allegedly lower CO2 footprint)

Sustainable farming already has a very low carbon footprint, even negative since plants absorb CO2. Artificially synthesizing proteins has a long ways to go before it can even approach the cost and efficiency of sustainable farming, in fact I can only see that approaching feasible in deserts where almost nothing can grow. But then it would have to compete with transporting food from areas better suited to farming.

Back on topic, I once read some plans (long time ago, in some old book) for a compressed air gun that charges and shoots a high voltage capacitor. The capacitor had some sharpened nails soldered to it in order to embed itself into the target and stun it.

[tautech]

Tautech, I guess the point of my post is that cast bullets are perhaps limited in max velocity, in practice, by the melting point of the lead alloy. The other things that have been listed are secondary. This is, I think, why a thin copper jacket can make a huge difference regarding maximum velocity.

Yes of course. 
However even jacketed projectiles have limitations of velocity and twist rate where copper fouling arises from velocity and twist rates needed to stabilise a projectile may result in too much centrifugal force for it to remain intact at higher velocities. There are always trade-offs. 
Projectile technologies are changing in that some jurisdictions now prohibit the use of any type of lead based projectile for environmental reasons despite a century of proven performance on game. (fast and humane kills)
Typically the move is towards a homogeneous copper projectile and that has introduced more problems for the researchers to solve, namely a much longer projectile for the same weight and the influence this has on twist rates in order to properly stabilize it for long range accuracy.
Of arguably higher importance is the need for better bullet terminal performance so that game does not need to suffer.
Other considerations with a long copper bullet for existing traditional calibers where action and magazine length dominates the choice of options is the requirement to load them deep into the cartridge case and the resultant loss of powder capacity aka performance.
This in time all this will be addressed as new rifle calibers/designs centered around copper projectiles while work still goes on addressing improving their terminal performance for humane kills on game.

This is another whole rabbit hole to venture into:
https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Effective+Game+Killing.html

To use a firearm as an effective tool I strongly recommend https://www.ballisticstudies.com/ as the knowledgebase for all practical and proven field performance with a focus on terminal performance of nearly all available sporting calibers and projectiles.

That today game can be successfully taken at ranges once only dreamed of is testament to the development of the modern sporting rifle and any other technology to challenge it has a century of catching up to do.
We already know of military sniper rifle kills @ 2000+ yds and game kills at similar ranges and I have witnessed kills on rabbits @ 820 yds where one could argue the degree of precision required is equal or better than a 2000 yd shot.

[tautech]

Will traditional protein food sources be outlawed in favor of artificial proteins ?  (allegedly lower CO2 footprint)

Sustainable farming already has a very low carbon footprint, even negative since plants absorb CO2. Artificially synthesizing proteins has a long ways to go before it can even approach the cost and efficiency of sustainable farming, in fact I can only see that approaching feasible in deserts where almost nothing can grow. But then it would have to compete with transporting food from areas better suited to farming.

Don't get me started on this one.....I totally agree !
When the climate protagonists maintain all our ruminant animals that have sustained a large part of the world for centuries are nuthing but methane belching vermin and artificial proteins are the future  well I enjoy my steak or roast, ribs, liver, kidneys, brains........
Yes, totally another topic. 

[KL27x]

This in time all this will be addressed as new rifle calibers/designs centered around copper projectiles while work still goes on addressing improving their terminal performance for humane kills on game.

Lead is a lot cheaper. I think unless it involved killing people, lead will be around forever just because it's cheaper.

Projectile technologies are changing in that some jurisdictions now prohibit the use of any type of lead based projectile for environmental reasons despite a century of proven performance on game.

Lead shot, you mean? I have never heard of a regulation requiring you to hunt with lead free bullets.

ROHS for guns. Brilliant. 

[tautech]

This in time all this will be addressed as new rifle calibers/designs centered around copper projectiles while work still goes on addressing improving their terminal performance for humane kills on game.

Lead is a lot cheaper. I think unless it involved killing people, lead will be around forever just because it's cheaper.

Projectile technologies are changing in that some jurisdictions now prohibit the use of any type of lead based projectile for environmental reasons despite a century of proven performance on game.

Lead shot, you mean? I have never heard of a regulation requiring you to hunt with lead free bullets.

ROHS for guns. Brilliant.

Yep, some European regions have outlawed lead rifle projectiles for hunting and as you may well know many places around the world prohibit lead shot for gamebird hunting too.
In both cases (shot and projectiles) lead is ballistically superior to the alternatives.

[Wigo]

To be fair most projectil jackets are made out of brass. I have a little bit of experience in this field, better said on the topic of shooting with worn out barrells, and it takes a fair ammount of bullets to wear out a barrell till it really has an impact on the accuracy it self (but i am not reffering to shots on targets a few 1000 yards away, that is another story).

In my oppinion for pistols and rifels there is no suitable alternative to bullets. In therms of ammount/kg you can carry. Railguns, or every other electric system would require some type of battery or there off.

But if you get a little bigger that these things would/will be a game changer in a few years time.

[joeqsmith]

Read this...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cupronickel


Another very good source of data for the keyboard kids sitting in mom and dad's basement is the Speer Reloading manual.  This was pretty much my bible on reloading.

[KL27x]

Yep, some European regions have outlawed lead rifle projectiles for hunting and as you may well know many places around the world prohibit lead shot for gamebird hunting too.

It makes sense for bird shot. Ducks eat them where they come to rest on the bottom of a marsh. I wonder what animals are eating bullets.

it takes a fair ammount of bullets to wear out a barrell till it really has an impact on the accuracy it self

For a pistol, yeah, forgot about wearing it out. High velocity rifles wear out, mostly from erosion in the throat, I imagine from the higher pressure = higher temperature spike, vaporizing steel.

the keyboard kids sitting in mom and dad's basement is the Speer Reloading manual.

The keyboard kids probably know as much about the physics as the 70 yr old experts in reloading/ballistics. There's a lot of incorrectly linked cause and effect and bad physics in the field, because rednecks like guns. There's a lot of real world knowledge that works, but the explanations/reasonings of an expert are sometimes quite laughable. When a bunch of [whoever] get together and try to explain/understand stuff above their paygrade, a certain amount of BS can become entrenched into a body of accepted knowledge.

[tautech]

tautech:

Yep, some European regions have outlawed lead rifle projectiles for hunting and as you may well know many places around the world prohibit lead shot for gamebird hunting too.

It makes sense for bird shot. Ducks eat them where they come to rest on the bottom of a marsh. I wonder what animals are eating bullets.

None, again ROHS against a naturally occurring element that for hunting use adds very low levels of lead to the environment.

Wigo:

it takes a fair ammount of bullets to wear out a barrell till it really has an impact on the accuracy it self

For a pistol, yeah, forgot about wearing it out. High velocity rifles wear out, mostly from erosion in the throat, I imagine from the higher pressure = higher temperature spike, vaporizing steel.

This ^^
Plus accelerated wear resulting from lack of barrel maintenance/cleaning.
Stainless barrels are better in this regard as powder deposits and their hygroscopic tendencies don't have the same corrosive effect as they do on steel barrels......rust and pitting.

[joeqsmith]

I doubt their shoot em up video games teach them much about physics.

[tautech]

I doubt their shoot em up video games teach them much about physics.

LOL 

[KL27x]

I doubt their shoot em up video games teach them much about physics.

Ne'er does shooting and reloading. At least the kid knows how to use the internet.

When a bunch of [insert enthusiasts of just about anything] get together and try to explain/understand stuff above their paygrade, a certain amount of BS can become entrenched into a body of accepted knowledge. And/or bits and pieces of info that has been published or explained correctly will get perverted/corrupted into nonsense.

[Red Squirrel]

You're better off just loading a weller with bullets and gun powder and overloading it and waiting to see what happens.   I guess this would be more like a bomb at this point.  A bomb with no fuse. 

[MyHeadHz]

TBH, I would actually like to see more ideas on this, but I don't know much about the topic.

Perhaps just taking a larger cap and dumping it into a smaller one would make all the electrolyte turn to vapor quick enough.

If it can't be done fast enough, something would need to hold back the pressure until it pops, and then somehow direct that energy.

[coppercone2]

inb4 capacitors are banned in england after street youth is found shooting at each other

[tautech]

TBH, I would actually like to see more ideas on this, but I don't know much about the topic.

Perhaps just taking a larger cap and dumping it into a smaller one would make all the electrolyte turn to vapor quick enough.

If it can't be done fast enough, something would need to hold back the pressure until it pops, and then somehow direct that energy.

And that is the problem as you have to beat the already ms lock times !

Holding a rifle still enough for a period while a cap decides when to go pop is detrimental to precision accuracy where fast ignition is key to good results.
Even with current traditional reloading components there are preferences for some models of primer as they give better/faster/more consistent ignition.