Metal Storm - Holy Jebus...

Nothing can ever go worng with Metal Storm.

but this is chump change compared to other things DARPA is up to.

I have a few questions, though.

How do the projectiles engage the rifing?

Are there cartridge cases? If so, where do the cartridge cases go? If not, how is the propellent stored?

How does the gun compensate for the difference in barrel length (and therefore muzzle velocity, tragectory, and accuracy) between the first bullet fired and the last?

How do subsequent cartridges survive the detonation of the one ahead of it? How do explosive shells not detonate when the propellent of the previous shell goes off in the gun barrel?

And how do you reload them?

popular science or mechanix, one of them I read both, anyway checked the rifles out and done a report and in the report remington found that the length of a barrel only needed to be long enough to get the projectile headed in the right direction and get it to spin. which translated to something like two inches long. anything from that took away from the accuracy. Due to operator or whatever movements ever so slight. The reason for the electric fired projectile, using powder with an electric primer was there were no moving parts in firing the round, no moving parts, firing pin, no movement to the barrel. I kid you not. I looked it up one day and I bet a person could still find the info and article, I just don't want to take the time right now or I would. Anyways

As I understand it rifling is proving to be the biggest problem facing rail guns. The problem being that any attempt to spin up the round results in collision with the walls which introduces all manner of problems for electromag technology. Thus rail guns are proving to not be as accurate as once was hoped.

in the fact that right now it has to be bold enough to get the round spinning and that in itself would cause movement ever so slight. I wonder why they don't make the rifling start at a straight line then gradually increase in twist to what is wanted, drag it out over an inch or two, kinda like the crumple zone in the front of a car to spread the energy out over time to slow down the rate of deceleration. Anyways this is interesting

It uses gunpower like a regular gun. It somehow makes the primer go off with an electromagnetic coil, though. I would guess that there is a firing circuit that picks up the energy pulse from the coil wrapped around the barrel and that sparks the primer. Or each round has an RFID chip in it, and the gun knows the serial numbers and firing order of all the rounds in the gun and sends an energy pulse to set each one off in sequence.

Due to the massive energy requirements the military is looking at railguns as anti-missile systmes and as naval artillery, not something you can mount on a trailer and tow behind a Humvee.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coilgun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_storm

the rail gun was merely a tangent issue.

the chip responds only to a code that is unique to that round. So each bullet is individually addressable.

(You'd better not accidentally address the last round in the stack before the first round is fired, though. I can see how a hacker could bring down some expensive military hardware that way...)

the lock time was suppose to be several thousand times faster than a conventional hammer and firing pin, so the gun would not have time to move between the trigger being pressed and the bullet leaving the barrel.

I've often thought that if they put a random timer on that gun it would make an awesome sniper rifle. When you squeeze the trigger, the gun waits between 1 and 5 seconds to fire. This way you can't flinch or anticipate and pull the shot off target. Of course, if you let go of the trigger the gun would cancel the shot. And you could turn it off if you wanted to.

I also remember reading an article in Guns and Ammo, I think, where an AR-15 designed as a police sniper weapon for urban areas had an 18" bull barrel instead of the more usual 24", and the author noted that the short, stiff barrel greatly increased accuracy because it vibrated less.

Of course, the rifle had a scope mounted on it so having a short barrel didn't affect accuracy like it would with iron sights. With iron sights, the distance between the front and rear sights are critical for accurate shooting. A longer barrel gives a longer sight distance, which reduces the inheirent error of the sighting system.

However, a shorter barrel also robs the bullet of needed velocity, which reduces the flatness of the trajectory. A more rainbow-like trajectory makes knowing the range to the target more critical, for a range estimation error of 10% too far might make the bullet fly over the target, and an error of 10% too close might make the bullet hit the foot of the target. The loss of velocity also reduces the impact kinetic energy.

In the case of the Metal Storm weapon, the gun would have to aim high for the first shot, then progressivly lower it's aiming point for subsequent, faster-moving bullets. There is also the possibility that in the super-rapid-fire mode, later-fired rounds would overtake and possibly hit or otherwise disrupt the flight of the first-fired bullets.

There is also the possiblity that the first bullets may be under-stabilized. This happens commonly when shooters try firing heavy-for-caliber bullets out of a rifle with a twist ratio intented for lighter bullets. I understand that the .223 Rem has this problem when trying to fire target bullets like the 77-grain Sierra MatchKing when the rifle's twist only works for bullets up to about 65 grains or so. The slower-moving MatchKing does not achieve enough RPMs to spin-stabilize itself upon leaving the barrel, and the bullet tumbles in flight. Accuracy and trajectory go to hell in very short order.

There is also the possiblity of over-stabilizing the bullet, so that as it arcs through air it does not keep its long axis lined up with it's direction of motion. In other words, as the bullet reaches the peak of it's flight, it does not tip over towards the Earth on the way down. The nose stays up while the bullet curves down, kind of how an airliner looks on landing. This would also affect the trajectory as well as how it will hit the target.

I do wonder how they address these problems. Perhaps with different powder charges from front to back?

http://www.outdoorlife.com/outdoor/gear/gunvault/article/0,19912,453991,00.html

Very interesting, but killed by reliability questions, cost, and ammunition availability, and the fact that you can't easily apply the technology to self-loaders without violating the Title 2/Class III provisions of the National Firearms Act as amended by the McClure-Volkmer Act.

Federal law requires that rifle barrels must be at least 16" long, or else the rifle is subject to the same controls as a machinegun, i.e. possession without government permission (BATFE Form 4) is a 10-year felony. Minimum length for a shotgun barrel is 18". However, you can go much, much shorter (the barrel on my wife's 9mm pistol is 3" long, IIRC, and I once owned a .22 revolver with a 1 5/8" barrel. You pay the price in velocity, though; one of the reasons a rifle barrel is as long as it is, is that it gives you more time and distance to accelerate the bullet. That's why a typical handgun bullet is traveling at barely Mach 1, whereas even a low-velocity rifle tops Mach 2 and some rifle bullets approach Mach 4.

I didn't catch that if they did. but my other post might help

They're probably already engaged (they are rammed into the barrel at the factory).


The barrel is the case, except that the propellant may also be solid and coated with something to prevent flashovers.


Different propellant charges (precalculated) behind each bullet; the front bullet has faster-burning propellant than the last, etc. But it's more a close-range, volume-of-fire weapon (think point defense for a ship) than it is a long-range precision gun.


Propellant is sealed in some way. They are fired electrically (individually primed).


Use of shock-resistant explosives, and careful fuse design. This problem actually dates back to the 1800's (you have the same problem with an explosive shell in an ordinary artillery piece).


Replace the barrel(s), either one at a time, or from a barrel magazine. Empty barrels are shipped somewhere (factory or depot?) to be reloaded with new ammunition. Which is why this system will never be practical for small arms, military OR civilian.

is oh so good at creating more and better ways for us to kill people. I think we've gone far enough in our quest for the ultimate weapon. We've enough weapons to kill each and every human being on the planet several times over. Perhaps it's time to channel the funds for these "future weapons" to a more peaceful purpose for the benefit of all mankind? :shrug:

Fuck the Pentagon and their wasteful spending. Enough is enough.

The Corporation is as like an entity as you can get including legal rights. And one of its most prosperous industries is to create devices to kill humans. I mean really.... how much of a clue do we need to see that there need to be controls placed by We The People on such entities.

Me thinks FSM might be an alien ploy.:P

its naieve to think that we are alone in the universe.

if they put the money that's going into developing this monstrosity into peace, environmental protection, and/or better healthcare, we'd all be a hell of a lot better off . . .

I was particularly taken by they video's claim that the technology can be used "just for fun" . . .
r-i-i-i-i-i-ght . . .

we live in a sick world that's getting sicker by the day . . .

an array of dispensers set up to produce, for example, a flag in the sky--something you couldn't do with traditional pro fireworks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67OYIk1woiI

Imagine a gun with no recoil, no sound, no heat, no gunpowder, no visible firing signature (muzzle flash), and no stoppages or jams of any kind. Now imagine that this gun could fire .308 caliber and .50 caliber metal projectiles accurately at up to 8,000 fps (feet-per-second), featured an infinitely variable/programmable cyclic rate-of-fire (as high as 120,000 rounds-per-minute), and were capable of laying down a 360-degree field of fire. What if you could mount this weapon on any military Humvee (HMMWV), any helicopter/gunship, any armored personnel carrier (APC), and any other vehicle for which the technology were applicable?
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?%20name=News&file=article&sid=526