Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 82 users online :: 5 registered, 0 hidden and 77 guests


Most users ever online was 155 on Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:40 am

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], mrfoo, MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

Carnage! Updated (with more videos)

Post questions and info about pneumatic (compressed gas) powered cannons here. This includes discussion about valves, pipe types, compressors, alternate gas setups, and anything else relevant.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

Unread postAuthor: goathunter » Wed Aug 08, 2007 9:07 pm

DYI: the m829 weighs in at 41lbs and it fits the 120mm. main gun on an Abram.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M829

I can pretty much guarantee that if you were able to reproduce such an item to be fired out of a spudgun the feds would be on your door step. :D

BTW: Fun little gun you got up in the pics.But why didn't the dowel shatter?Is it coated or something?
  • 0

"Some people wonder all their lives if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem"-Ronald Reagan

"KA BLAAM! Elimination! Lack of education."-Big Mama, Fox and the Hound, Disney

goathunter
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:20 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Aug 08, 2007 10:07 pm

goathunter wrote:But why didn't the dowel shatter?Is it coated or something?


Path of least resistance I'm guessing, the materials it went through were all wood or similar.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: joannaardway » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:01 pm

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:let's take for example the US Army's, solution to the problem, the M829 kinetic energy penetrator - that leaves the barrel at over 5 times the speed of sound with a whopping 4,391,500 ft/lbs :shock:

Pittance.
The Maxwell Labs' Railgun throws a 1.6kg (3.5 lb) projectile at 3300m/s (10830 fps, roughly Mach 10), for 6,429,520 ft lbs of energy - at a decent (for a railgun) 27% efficency.
Of course, it's not pratical as an anti-tank weapon yet, but it shows what the future could be like.

Those DU rounds are pretty hefty. Having been part of the Army cadets (Royal Artillery), I've been shown the typical anti-tank rounds, including a APFSDS DU round (not sure what exact variant).
The thing that strikes you about all the (non-explosive) rounds is just how much they all weigh. You look at the tungsten steel one, think "That can't be that heavy", then when it's passed to you, you nearly drop the thing - because it weighs more than twice what you think it does.

@goathunter: The DU round wasn't anywhere near 41 lbs in weight. As a rough guess, it was 10-12lbs tops.
Are you sure that 41 lb number doesn't include the propellant charge?
  • 0

Novacastrian: How about use whatever the heck you can get your hands on?
frankrede: Well then I guess it won't matter when you decide to drink bleach because your out of kool-aid.
...I'm sorry, but that made my year.
User avatar
joannaardway
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: SW Hertfordshire, England, UK.
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:10 pm

According to Fr. Frog, the actual projectile weighs in at around 10 lbs.

Rail guns are a long way from being practical but IIRC the US Navy are evaluating them as a ship-borne weapon that would offer a cheaper alternative to cruise missiles for certain applications - have a look here for further info.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: joannaardway » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:29 pm

That weight sounds about right.

How soon the armed forces will be able to use a railgun that doesn't require a full service after each shot is going to be an interesting one to watch.
To me, my view is that for the immediate future, the railgun and it's cousins, the coilgun and gauss gun are mostly in the realm of the hobbist and computer gamers, but obviously the practicality issues will eventually be sorted to make it militarily viable.
  • 0

Novacastrian: How about use whatever the heck you can get your hands on?
frankrede: Well then I guess it won't matter when you decide to drink bleach because your out of kool-aid.
...I'm sorry, but that made my year.
User avatar
joannaardway
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: SW Hertfordshire, England, UK.
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:37 pm

I wonder which will see active service first - rail/coil/gauss gun or lasers.....

Michael
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: spud yeti » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:50 pm

I'd probably have to go for rail guns

(I edited all the rest out, because it was stupid, sorry folks)
  • 0

Last edited by spud yeti on Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
really good quote/phrase here
User avatar
spud yeti
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 1:41 pm
Location: Cape town south africa
Reputation: 0

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: joannaardway » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:54 pm

Gepard wrote:I wonder which will see active service first - rail/coil/gauss gun or lasers.

I'd lean towards the kinetic energy based ones. Lasers have several disavantages.
  • 0

Novacastrian: How about use whatever the heck you can get your hands on?
frankrede: Well then I guess it won't matter when you decide to drink bleach because your out of kool-aid.
...I'm sorry, but that made my year.
User avatar
joannaardway
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: SW Hertfordshire, England, UK.
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: DYI » Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:06 pm

Due to the massive amount of power required, and the relatively low amount of destruction, lasers are only really practical for shooting down missiles from long range, as there are far quicker and more economical alternatives for neutralizing tanks/infantry/ships.

Because of this, I think that it will be a long time before lasers become a viable anti-infantry/ anti-armor weapon.
  • 0

User avatar
DYI
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2861
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 8:18 pm
Location: The People's Republic of Canuckistan
Country: Turks and Caicos Islands (tc)
Reputation: 9

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:09 pm

I was thinking about solely anti personnel and armour warfare I was thinking more generally.

IIRC there is already a land vehicle based laser weapons system that's being tested at the moment....

Not sure on the status of the plane based one though.....

Michael
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:39 pm

Gepard wrote:IIRC there is already a land vehicle based laser weapons system that's being tested at the moment...


Land based laser shooting down mortar rounds, and here's the anti-missile airborne laser.

It's interesting to see how laser armour will develop, probably along the lines of heat dissipating ceramic that is used to counter shaped charge warheads.

I'm with kinetic energy projectiles personally :)
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: DYI » Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:46 pm

Yes, it is rather difficult to build an armored vehicle that can stop something moving at Mach 10 with ~6 000 000 ft/lbs of energy while still being able to move.
  • 0

User avatar
DYI
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2861
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 8:18 pm
Location: The People's Republic of Canuckistan
Country: Turks and Caicos Islands (tc)
Reputation: 9

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:50 pm

DYI wrote:Yes, it is rather difficult to build an armored vehicle that can stop something moving at Mach 10 with ~6 000 000 ft/lbs of energy while still being able to move.


It's hard enough to stop a broomstick eh :wink:
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: DYI » Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:56 pm

Now we just have to get the broomstick going at Mach 10... :D
  • 0

User avatar
DYI
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2861
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 8:18 pm
Location: The People's Republic of Canuckistan
Country: Turks and Caicos Islands (tc)
Reputation: 9

Unread postAuthor: goathunter » Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:48 pm

joannaardway-"@goathunter: The DU round wasn't anywhere near 41 lbs in weight. As a rough guess, it was 10-12lbs tops.
Are you sure that 41 lb number doesn't include the propellant charge?"

I was talking total weight, not just the dart itself.You are correct.I should have been more specific.

Speaking of tungsten steel:
I know its expensive but has anyone tried shooting tungsten rods like welders use?I keep on trying to get my dad to let me borrow one of the rods for "experimental" use, but he won't let me(I think I shouldn't have told him it'd be exiting my spudgun's barrel).




Jack,You left out the pain "laser" that is mounted on a humvee for crowd control. Nothing as cool as a long range microwave oven to cook frozen burritos/occasional mobs :D
But I'm with you on kinetic projectiles.Even if a vehicle does have armor enough to stop a round like the one mention, the vehicle is quickly unable to be airlifted and mass produced cheaply.That is at least with the current military norm. :wink: [/quote]
  • 0

"Some people wonder all their lives if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem"-Ronald Reagan

"KA BLAAM! Elimination! Lack of education."-Big Mama, Fox and the Hound, Disney

goathunter
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:20 pm
Reputation: 0

PreviousNext

Return to Pneumatic Cannon Discussion

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], mrfoo, MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'