A New Rifle for a New Millenium

hksigwalther, although it may seem that a laser weapon might be a preferred kind of new rifle, it has inherent problems when used as a tool to kill (game or enemy soldiers)most wavelengths readily absorbed by animals can also be absorbed by humidity, water (rain), and surface structures (skin, adipose, muscle) or in the case of humans reflected by suitable choices in first or barrier layer clothes. A projectile delivers much more energy then with any forseable advance (short of a light portable fusion reactor- don't hold your breath)in laser technology with existing power supplies x ten (that is with ten times the power available today in a 20 lb package you still would have trouble bringing down game or a man at more then a few feet away.
*
*
*
Although there is a class of weapons which would meet some of your descriptions (restricted to antipersonel and unusual circumstances) they are not generally known, and certainly aren't sport related so we won't go there.
 
I believe that if you have a projectile that continues to gain velocity in an uncontrolled environment, ie: outside of the barrel, you can kiss accuracy goodbye.
 
Well muleshoe, why do you believe that? The bullet that leaves a conventional weapon undergoes continuous deceleration as it traverses the air cloumn between the muzzle and target, nonetheless we can all agree that very accurate rifles exist. Why then should we not expect similar behavoir from an accelerating projectile?
*
*
In point of fact although, this possible property (an accelerating projectile) seems to have peaked some interest. The solution set limits the use of this type projectile to calibers greater then .25 inch (due to laminar flow properties of air at 1 atmosphere). The high accuracy of the initial description, however of .1 moa seems to have raised little comment. It is actually more challenging and indeed as you suggest even a minor instability added by an acceleration menas may render it unobtainable.
 
Please expand upon how a constant-accelleration-projectile is NOT a rocket. Where is the boost coming from? What propels it initially and in flight? WHY should laminar air flow be an issue at over .25", when clearly it is viable with projectiles several inches in diameter at similar velocities?

Deceleration by air resistance and accelleration by g are constants. How do you maintain constancy of thrust (which comes fromwhere, exactly?) without either a barrel for stability or a fly-by-wire technique? Gyros?

??

??
 
Well TJ, inside a barrel the thrust is contained and centered equally across the exposed surface of the bullet. Or at least I assume it's equally. How do you keep the thrust centered once your projectile exits the confines of the barrel? If it's off, even fractionally, won't your projectile tumble? :confused:
 
muleshoe- inside of the barrel of a rifle the rifling spins the bullet, differential pressure partially and continuously kicks the bullet about its center axis due to small imperfections in the bore, a major differential change at the end of the barrel can further distort the path of the projectile (that's why target shooters recess and carefully dress the crown of the barrel). Once it leaves the barrel the bullet continues to spin and any acceleration not centered on the axis of rotation (but in a vector direction the same as the direction of the bullet as it left the muzzle) will cause the bullet to spiral downrange to the target (at a pitch rate equal to the decaying spin of the projectile- that is a lengthing spiral).
*
*
Our boost mode technique needs to be centered and if possible sustain and or increase the spin rate- you may find this a tall order. *
*
Properly controlled this motion can be used to steer the projectile downrange and can be used to make dynamic compensation of secondary factors, wind, isotherms, small obstructions, corners and motion of the target. Naturally this steering can be accomplished with a deccelerating projectile also (though with a much narrower range of response).
 
Oh no, TJ, I agree with you concerning lasers. They work fine...in a clear atmosphere without any countermeasures. And even then, they can only cut holes, not much energy transfer to the target. I just can't get past on how to get projectiles to >= 6Kfps.

Concerning acceleration past the barrel, there was one experiment I saw in one of the educational programs of using a laser to propel a conical shaped object with a very highly polished reflective surface. I think the idea was to focus the beam of the laser (which was being aimed at the inside of the cone) from behind the cone (pointy end is forward). This would focus the incoming beam even tighter behind the cone creating a plasma which then propelled the cone. (I think this is how it worked. Someone correct me if I am wrong.)

So...maybe if you shot a projectile with a shiny indentation at its back end (much like the reflective surface of a flashlight) out of a barrel and then lased it from behind as it went on its way then maybe you can accelerate it.

- Ron V.

------------------
 
Actually hksigwalther, this method could work but not due to radiation pressure (light pressure) but rather by choosing a material for the interior of the projectile, along with a reflective material forming a nozzle at the rear so that the wavelength of the laser is optimal for the atmospheric transport (wavelengths in the near IR that are not absorbed well by water [and therefor by flesh by the way]). The material in the projectile is choosen to be highly absorbtive of the laser wavelength and thus by pulsing the laser into the projectile a series of (rocket like) exhaust pulses boost the velocity of the round. The return of the laser pulse tells us the velocity of the projectile downrange and thus this method provides the abiltiy to increase, decrease or hold steady the velocity of the round downrange.
*
*
Unfortunately this method requires a great deal of energy in the laser pulse and therefor a bulky and power hungry laser (heavy battery). Less constraining then the pure laser approach but not in the cards in the first quarter of our new century (by my estimates).
 
Although I replied to Long Path via e-mail he has not responded back. Therefor I'll answer some of his points openly here.

The system is not a rocket because it lacks an ignitor or oxidiser and the source of chemical energy is normally inert and non-poisonous and therefor does not come under any federal or state projectile restictions of which I am aware.

Like most rifle rounds the projectile is spin stabilized.

The acceleration profile is adjustable and downrange wind corrections (small corrections) can be made during time of flight.
 
Ok I will play. Since it is going to have to be a new concept rifle lets solve each problem step at a time. Projectile will be a rocket type missal that will have a smart guidance system which rides a IR laser beam to the target. That takes care of both accuracy and velocity. Next would be the launcher, It would have a rail with an air bearing so there would be no wear on the rail and could give the missile a precision launch path .Since the guidance system is in the projectile it won't contribute anything to the weight of the launcher so it would be easy to keep the weight of the launcher to a minimum. With this concept all you have to do is generate a solid propellant that was progressive burning so that when it gets to the end the burn rate is that of TNT. No Problem all we have to do is submit an unsolicited proposal and sit back and wait for the big bucks to start rolling in!
 
While I think this is far fetched, I too will play. What about a gyroscopically stabilized platform. Would certainly stabilive the sights for longer shots now possible with your 6k projectile.
Gale, if I remember right TNT detonates at about 21,000 fps so we only need a progressive burning propellent that is about half that of TNT. That should make things a whole lot easier don't you think ;)
 
Staying for the moment with the basic package: consider the "average hunter" who does do walking and stalking type hunting--as opposed to one who climbs in a stand and sits.

The lighter the package, obviously, the easier to carry. Fine. At the end of a 100-yard "walk" up a steep mountain side, you surprise the elk of your dreams. I submit there is a certain amount of need for a gun to be heavy enough, balanced well enough, that you can hold pretty steady and make a successful shot.

So I'm not sure I'd want a hunting rifle which weighed less than some six to seven pounds, fully dressed.
 
Let's back up a little. These properties are not necessarily connected. That is the high velocity does not have to be ultra accurate (with an associated doppler lidar wind and steering system)and vice versa. In fact if the goal is high accuracy in a light package for modest ranges (300 yard max) the high velocity is a distraction.

Alternately, the same in flight acceleration technique and steering system can be used to produce an ultralight rifle (2 to 3 lbs.) that has high accuracy and low kick with a projectile at 3k or less.

The system can and should be operable as a conventional rifle by adopting a cartridge capable system for a standard loaded round that can also be fed and support the high accuracy, high performance steerable rounds.


No rail gun here, no air bearing lets stay with techniques that can be brought into production with existing components (I don't know of any rail gun without a power supply far too heavy to lift let alone take to the range or woods).

A compact lidar suitable for short (300 yards or less) is much easier then you might think to implement, although it is still a serious development project. The system would still require skill from the shooter and (depending on the range and velocity of the round) solid follow through on the target- a skill not presently absolutely required (although common among experienced shooters).
 
Tom--

Dunno what happened to my response to your email... I wrote you back.

To answer your initial question, YES! We'd love it. The 3-piece breakdown into the case isn't that necessary, but not necessarily preclusive.

You've a pretty positive group, here, I'd say. I think we'd all like it, if we can grip the concept. We're all just fuzzy on the final product.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top