Australia develops supergun

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


One word: power.

You simply cannot get enough power for either the torpedoes or the subs to go that first to begin with.

Uh? We already have supercavitating torpedoes. The tech involves surrounding the torpedo with gas, so as to reduce the friction between the torp and the water. Less friction reduces the effort the engine has to make, thus allowing the torp to go much faster. The russian torp can reach speeds aroung 300 miles per hour.

Since it works for torps, why can't it work for subs? They might not reach 300 mph, but it would still allow them to go much faster than current speeds.

[Panag]

Originally posted by The diplomat


Do you think Israel could get one of those? You could probably put it to good use against Hamas.

hi ,

we allready have one , ......

have a nice day

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by The diplomat


Uh? We already have supercavitating torpedoes. The tech involves surrounding the torpedo with gas, so as to reduce the friction between the torp and the water. Less friction reduces the effort the engine has to make, thus allowing the torp to go much faster. The russian torp can reach speeds aroung 300 miles per hour.

Since it works for torps, why can't it work for subs? They might not reach 300 mph, but it would still allow them to go much faster than current speeds.

I imagine it would be more difficult to create the Gas Bubble the larger the object is.
And of course the Difficulties to sustain it while the Object moves within it with large speeds would also rise with increasing size of the Object.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
I imagine it would be more difficult to create the Gas Bubble the larger the object is.
And of course the Difficulties to sustain it while the Object moves within it with large speeds would also rise with increasing size of the Object.

True. It would not be easy by any means. But with improvements and extensive modifications, perhaps the tech could be applied to submarines. I was just wondering.

[Zylka]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


More crap.

I am amused that it is claimed that the next bullet gets into the barrel. Yowzas!

So you're saying the technology simply doesn't exist, because YOU don't believe it? They're lying, and that's all there is to it? What will you say in the near future when the PCR acquires one of these and makes a cheap vending machine knock-off version of its own?

...and if you missed it pointed out for the 5th or 6th time - THE BULLETS ARE PRE-LOADED INTO EACH BARREL BEFORE FIRING. Go find a Chinese forum to make illiterate claims on, please and thanks!

[Zylka]

Originally posted by CICSMaster


Reload takes about 1 sec. Snap off the used barrell(s) and snap in a new set.

What I don't think you're taking in to account here is that even at that generous re-load rate, it's still pretty much useless. The only ammunition casing light and small enough to be human re-loaded in under 5 seconds would likely be <9mm. So in terms of firing at human targets - you're going to sink 540 bullets into one person (in the shape of a 6x6 barrel square), crank the smoking barrel casing off, grab a new one, snap it firmly in place, aim at a new target, and then overkill it as well.

The barrels do not move or flex towards independent targets, and there is no current swivel mechanism for the entire structure (even re-aiming would be a b*tch for each set of "shots") - so the only use available other than making a defensive cluster (at curret rate), would be firing a lot of kick ass shots right into the glowing green eyeball center of the alien boss in some SNES shooter game.

Even with a MASSIVE structure firing grenade rounds over a a huge distance, what can you do more than fill a kitchen sized area with 540 grenade bursts? Is that really useful? I honestly don't know if you could even destroy a modern MBT with that... but do know that with current limitations it would be much easier to have an opposing MBT or RPAT station in place

Give an accurate HIGH SPEED machine swivelling base with smart targetting, indepedent AI targetting and precise movement for EACH barrel (or groups of barrels), and/or a massive, self cooling, jam-free machine reloader able to pump out gigantic casings and snap new ones in place in milliseconds - and we have a horrifying offensive unit. Until then, its main purpose is shooting close threats out of the sky with *scatter* shot bursts

[Edan]

Wow. With a weapon like that, you could actually kill the bad guy in those slasher movies in one try, instead of a dozen tries.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by The diplomat


True. It would not be easy by any means. But with improvements and extensive modifications, perhaps the tech could be applied to submarines. I was just wondering.

I agree with you The tech isnt there yet, but that doesnt mean its not possible, even if the increase in speed is from 10 knots to 70 or 80 knots underwater for a limited time (it would undoubtedly take a lot of gas, which would also require a ballast system either of its own or integrated into the main ballast), that would be huge in terms of submarine warfare.

[raghar]

Actually submarines have speed around 28(32) to 40 kts. Major problem is sound, not speed. Of course it would be nice to have 450 kts. Taxpayers would be crazy however.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by raghar
Actually submarines have speed around 28(32) to 40 kts. Major problem is sound, not speed. Of course it would be nice to have 450 kts. Taxpayers would be crazy however.

under water??? wow. I guess i shouldnt have assumed things havent changed much since U-boats...

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by raghar
Actually submarines have speed around 28(32) to 40 kts. Major problem is sound, not speed. Of course it would be nice to have 450 kts. Taxpayers would be crazy however.

Actually, noise is no longer much of a problem. The new US subs are incredibly quiet.

But most subs can only reach speeds of 30 kts, whereas torps go around 50-60 kts. So, torps have a big speed advantage over subs. If subs could boost their speed, they would gain an advantage over enemy torps and would not have to rely so exclusively on countermeasures.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

The barrel is metallic yes? That means if you pass a current through the barrel to "eletronically fire" some propellant the whole barrel will be electricfied, igniting all the explosives inside.

Why would passing a charge through the barrel necessarily set off the propellant? The best ideas I have for how they handle the proper sequencing of the shots is that they can:

A) Use fuzes to replace primers in every charge, and use a coded sequence or frequency variation to set off each charge in it's turn. This would be more effective for larger caliber weapons.

B) You can have leads attached to various parts of the barrel where the charges will be stored, and these will go off in sequence. Obviously any system had better be able to instantly and flawlessly determine whether the previous actions have completed, and whether they were successful.

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Urban Ranger

Here are some interesting questions:

1. How do you embed and control electronics in a metallic gun barrel that could reach hundreds of degrees in temperature?

This sort of problem is solved every day in other speres. How does my engine do its job every day? It's hot, cold, metal etc. and has a lot of metallic components to it. One thing that might work is communicating through the metal as we communicate through networks. Instructions are sent through the metal, and only the proper recipient responds. The same method more or less could be used with radio waves.

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
2. What causes a projectile to "flex?" I am assuming "flex" means "expand," not bend or deform.

I assume so as well, and it is heat and pressure that makes the projectile expand.

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
3. How do you prevent the explosives inside the barrel from going off due to a rise in temperature?

They don't use explosives, they use propellants for starters. You can fiddle around with the characteristics of these materials because you aren't building the same sort of weapon as in the past. For instance, the propellant could be a very poor conductor of heat as well as unlikely to be set off unless it is extremely hot, far above even the ambient tempurature in a gun barrel in action. This might require the use of fuzes to regulate and fire the charges.

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
4. Normally, guns cannot be fired over a certain rate because overheating of the barrel will cause jamming. How is this problem solved?

It isn't solved any more than previously, it is instead avoided by reducing the number of successful mechanical operations that must occur in order for each round to successfully fire and the gun to return to firing condition to zero.

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Metal does not just flex and relax of its own accord. What causes the projectile to "relax?"

I imagine that the amount of pressure on the bullet is reduced significantly as the previous bullet is pushed along the barrel by the gas pressure of the propellant, but I don't know exactly and the article was very short of technical detail.

This tech seems to be of limited usefullness at the moment, but could presage a much larger change ahead. Amongst the problems for this tech are:

1) How useful is this rate of fire increase going to be? For infantry weapons the answer seems to be not much, with the possible exception of anti-armor weapons. Firing shots a milisecond apart from the same barrel is going to produce a lot of hits in the exact same area. This is most likely not to be of any advantage when shooting someone, but might allow a pretty effective attack against an armored target. For aircraft and anti-aircraft platforms (including terminal missle defense platforms) an improved rate of fire is a bonus, as there is likely to be a large momentum differential between target and firer.

2) How is recoil going to be handled? Recoil is dealt with in bite sized chunks with most automatic weapons today, but these new weapons firing at maximum rate are going to keep adding recoil on top of recoil. This is likely to require these weapons to have very strong and heavy platforms to fire from in order to take advantage of the ROF.

3) Ammunition is going to be a bit of a problem. Firstly, with an increased rate of fire ammunition consumption is likely to rise. Secondly, if your ammunition is now delivered in pre-configured, pre-loaded barrels, the weight per round is going to increase. Conversely, the weapon itself is going to be both simpler and lighter, with few moving parts. Jams, excessive heating and barrel wear are all going to be less of a problem.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by The diplomat
Uh? We already have supercavitating torpedoes. The tech involves surrounding the torpedo with gas, so as to reduce the friction between the torp and the water.

AFAIK, the idea is to move the torpedo so fast that water does not have time to flow back into the area behind the tip, creating a "cavity," thus the name.

The problem with moving something so fast, of course, it power.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Sikander
Why would passing a charge through the barrel necessarily set off the propellant? The best ideas I have for how they handle the proper sequencing of the shots is that they can:

A) Use fuzes to replace primers in every charge, and use a coded sequence or frequency variation to set off each charge in it's turn. This would be more effective for larger caliber weapons.

Fuses? What kind of fuses? The sort that is used to prevent overloading by melting? These fuses don't ignite.

Originally posted by Sikander
B) You can have leads attached to various parts of the barrel where the charges will be stored, and these will go off in sequence. Obviously any system had better be able to instantly and flawlessly determine whether the previous actions have completed, and whether they were successful.

This seems to be more workable. However, if you have leads, they will protrude into the barrel, causing all sorts of mechanical problems. Besides, you need to drill holes for the leads, weakening the mechanical integrity of the barrel. This also causes all kinds of problems, one of them being the barrel blowing up.

There is also the question of precisely placing these projectiles and propellents into the barrel.

Originally posted by Sikander
I assume so as well, and it is heat and pressure that makes the projectile expand.

I thought about that as well. However, once the projectile has expanded, the only way to make it contract is to cool it down. I don't see how that can be done here.

Originally posted by Sikander
They don't use explosives, they use propellants for starters. You can fiddle around with the characteristics of these materials because you aren't building the same sort of weapon as in the past. For instance, the propellant could be a very poor conductor of heat as well as unlikely to be set off unless it is extremely hot, far above even the ambient tempurature in a gun barrel in action. This might require the use of fuzes to regulate and fire the charges.

Well, just different names for a mixture of chemical compounds that is designed to burn quickly ("explode"). However, these compounds tend to be unstable (otherwise they wouldn't react quicky) so as to just go off above a threshold temperature.

Originally posted by Sikander
It isn't solved any more than previously, it is instead avoided by reducing the number of successful mechanical operations that must occur in order for each round to successfully fire and the gun to return to firing condition to zero.

Well, even if I assume you can put 100 barrels to a gun, that's still 10,000 rounds to be fired from each barrel a minute, which works out to 167 rounds per barrel per second.

That seems to be a rather unlikely number.

Originally posted by Sikander
I imagine that the amount of pressure on the bullet is reduced significantly as the previous bullet is pushed along the barrel by the gas pressure of the propellant, but I don't know exactly and the article was very short of technical detail.

Yeah, the whole article seems to be just some sort of press release.

Originally posted by Sikander
2) How is recoil going to be handled? Recoil is dealt with in bite sized chunks with most automatic weapons today, but these new weapons firing at maximum rate are going to keep adding recoil on top of recoil. This is likely to require these weapons to have very strong and heavy platforms to fire from in order to take advantage of the ROF.

3) Ammunition is going to be a bit of a problem. Firstly, with an increased rate of fire ammunition consumption is likely to rise. Secondly, if your ammunition is now delivered in pre-configured, pre-loaded barrels, the weight per round is going to increase. Conversely, the weapon itself is going to be both simpler and lighter, with few moving parts. Jams, excessive heating and barrel wear are all going to be less of a problem.

Both of these are going to be major problems if in fact this item works as asserted.

One more thing about ammunition is, even if it is delivered in pre-loaded barrels, there are still difficulties:

1. The loading will be knocked out of wack during the course of delivery.

2. You can't reload when the gun is firing. You have to stop, wait for it to cool down, remove the old barrels, then put on the new ones. Now, even if we ignore the mechanical problems that can arise, doing so will just kill off the RoF.

[Panag]

hi ,

""" . You can't reload when the gun is firing. You have to stop, wait for it to cool down, remove the old barrels, then put on the new ones. Now, even if we ignore the mechanical problems that can arise, doing so will just kill off the RoF. """

>>> that you can do with several machine guns in todays world in under a minute , ......

the negev and stoner weapons are good examples of that , ......

have a nice day