Yep, the terminal velocity is so slow that friction between the air and the surface of the drop is nearly zero. The terminal velocity of a 1.5mm raindrop is only 20~25 FPS (~7m/s).Ragnarok wrote:The interesting part is that the water's surface tension exceeds the forces on it from drag.
Most Efficient Projectile Shape
-
- Sergeant Major
- Posts: 3198
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:48 am
- Location: Greenwood, Indiana
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 15 times
- Contact:
Which I already posted earlier in this thread.Ragnarok wrote:Actually, it does. The important point is that water drops in free fall are not the "teardrop shape" they're often assumed to be.psycix wrote:They are all very amusing, but they dont have much to do with aerodynamic shapes do they?
Which is probably due to the low sectional density.jimmy101 wrote:Yep, the terminal velocity is so slow that friction between the air and the surface of the drop is nearly zero. The terminal velocity of a 1.5mm raindrop is only 20~25 FPS (~7m/s).
-
- Sergeant Major
- Posts: 3198
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:48 am
- Location: Greenwood, Indiana
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 15 times
- Contact:
Yep, with a density of just 1g/cc water makes a pretty crap "shell". Lead is 11.3g/cc. 11.3 times as much mass, 11.3x the sectional density for a sphere, basically the same Cd. Water would make a pretty crappy bullet.psycix wrote:Which is probably due to the low sectional density.jimmy101 wrote:Yep, the terminal velocity is so slow that friction between the air and the surface of the drop is nearly zero. The terminal velocity of a 1.5mm raindrop is only 20~25 FPS (~7m/s).
It would... but that does bring up the question of ice bullets. Clearly ballistically and terminally poor with a density of even less than water, but very hard to trace forensically, as they would quickly melt away.jimmy101 wrote:Water would make a pretty crappy bullet.
I know the Mythbusters got bad results with making and firing them, but that is in a rifle with very high pressure, high temperature gases - but what about in a reasonably high pressure, low-ish calibre pneumatic spudgun?
Obviously, I'm not suggesting the use of it, but it is an interesting question.
I reckon that with a decent mould, you could make a hollow tailed projectile that would exhibit good stability and passable accuracy - and you could make up for the low density by making a fairly long projectile to improve the sectional density.
Might be interesting to look into.
Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
- jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26183
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 547 times
- Been thanked: 326 times
The hollow tail would probably shatter on firing. I think that - speaking theoretically, of course - you'd have to be at a few yards range anyway, close enough for stability not to matter. There's definitely no question of having any significant accuracy beyond a target that's in the same room.Ragnarok wrote:I reckon that with a decent mould, you could make a hollow tailed projectile that would exhibit good stability and passable accuracy - and you could make up for the low density by making a fairly long projectile to improve the sectional density.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
Depends on how hollow. I think that if the outer diameter matched the diameter of the pipe it was being fired from closely enough, the gases in the tail would force it against the walls not unlike an airgun pellet's skirt doesjackssmirkingrevenge wrote:The hollow tail would probably shatter on firing.
With something like my porting muzzle attachment, you could then kill the barrel pressure at the muzzle end very quickly so that once the support of the walls was lost, there was no pressure on the inside either.
I'll add it to my list of "Things to try sometime", see what kind of results I can get at range. Obviously in practical terms, an untraceable ice bullet is no use unless you're at least far enough from your target that you can't be identified yourself.
Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
- inonickname
- First Sergeant 4
- Posts: 2606
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:27 am
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage ... lemods.htm
I'd say 1 is your best bet, so golf balls are good..
I'd say 1 is your best bet, so golf balls are good..
-
- Sergeant Major
- Posts: 3198
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:48 am
- Location: Greenwood, Indiana
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 15 times
- Contact:
I don't think it would be difficult to get an ice slug up to lethal KE's with sufficient accuracy at say a 100 foot range.
Heck a basic cylinder from a rifled barrel, or even a sphere from a rifled barrel should do the trick. Perhaps not the most elegantor efficient round but certainly should be possible to get enough accuracy and KE to do "significant damage".
Heck a basic cylinder from a rifled barrel, or even a sphere from a rifled barrel should do the trick. Perhaps not the most elegantor efficient round but certainly should be possible to get enough accuracy and KE to do "significant damage".
Yeah, but 100 feet is still close enough that it's kind of pointless trying to hide the ballistics or evidence by using an ice bullet - you're close enough to be traced, unless of course you have a compact and near silent launcher which can generate a reasonable KE, and that's no mean feat.jimmy101 wrote:I don't think it would be difficult to get an ice slug up to lethal KE's with sufficient accuracy at say a 100 foot range.
I was thinking out beyond at least 100 yards myself, far enough that you're far enough away that it will be starting to get hard to spot or identify where you shot from.
Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
Or let the slugs rain down from the sky by firing them upwards like long range artillery.
Could fire it over a few houses, so you are not in the line of sight.
Could fire it over a few houses, so you are not in the line of sight.
-
- Sergeant Major
- Posts: 3198
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:48 am
- Location: Greenwood, Indiana
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 15 times
- Contact:
Kennedy was shot from a range of about 180 feet. People in the area could not localize the shooter. 40+ years later it still can not be proven where the shooter(s) was(were) based on the audio recordings of the event.Ragnarok wrote: Yeah, but 100 feet is still close enough that it's kind of pointless trying to hide the ballistics or evidence by using an ice bullet - you're close enough to be traced, unless of course you have a compact and near silent launcher which can generate a reasonable KE, and that's no mean feat.
100' is probably far enough. As long as there is no one close to the muzzle and it is a complex accoustic location (i.e., around buildings).
The human ability to localize a sound is really pretty poor. Especially when the sound was unexpected and there is an echo. People are so bad at it that the military uses accoustic devices to localize enemy shooters.
- Lentamentalisk
- Sergeant 3
- Posts: 1202
- Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 5:27 pm
- Location: Berkeley C.A.
It should be noted that mainly these are used on Humvees, because they are too loud inside to have the slightest clue where shots are coming from.jimmy101 wrote:The human ability to localize a sound is really pretty poor. Especially when the sound was unexpected and there is an echo. People are so bad at it that the military uses accoustic devices to localize enemy shooters.
Do not look back, and grieve over the past, for it is gone;
Do not be troubled about the future, for it has not yet come;
Live life in the present, and make it so beautiful that it will be worth remembering.
Do not be troubled about the future, for it has not yet come;
Live life in the present, and make it so beautiful that it will be worth remembering.
Whoa, I haven't checked this thread for a while until I saw it on this wiki page. I thought why would that be on the wiki page and then I looked here and saw all of the replies. Thanks a lot for the discussion, I learned a lot from reading it. I am going to do the fair, but I don't plan on going any higher than the school level.
It would be on the Wiki Page because I thought it contained some good information.Floyd wrote:I thought why would that be on the wiki page and then I looked here and saw all of the replies.
Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
-
- Specialist
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 2:18 am
wow not fun reading 6 pages of comments to catach up i ve made some projectiles like its a spitzer design with a steel tip but is surrounded by wood. i am going to try fill it with lead solder and put a steel tip on top of that as i cannot find any harder material that i can get but i do have my eye carbide for some reason i cant upload a picture