Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

there actually was a handgun made once that fired missiles instead of bullets.

about 2,000 were made, mostly collectors bought them for the novelty.

the only way a missile gun will work is if it has a 2 stage launch.

this is because a missile takes time to reach lethel velocity, you could actually protect yourself from this hand gun by sticking your finger in the barrel, a 2 stage launch solves this.

the first stage charge is identicle to a normal bullet and is contained in a case. after the first is fired the second charge ignites after leaving the barrel(meaning minimal backwash)


a 2 stage launch means a bolt round will have a long range, will increase in speed over distance, be lethel at close range, be firable like any other solid slug weapon.

Grey Templar wrote:there actually was a handgun made once that fired missiles instead of bullets.

about 2,000 were made, mostly collectors bought them for the novelty.

the only way a missile gun will work is if it has a 2 stage launch.

this is because a missile takes time to reach lethel velocity, you could actually protect yourself from this hand gun by sticking your finger in the barrel, a 2 stage launch solves this.

the first stage charge is identicle to a normal bullet and is contained in a case. after the first is fired the second charge ignites after leaving the barrel(meaning minimal backwash)


a 2 stage launch means a bolt round will have a long range, will increase in speed over distance, be lethel at close range, be firable like any other solid slug weapon.

qft

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoffTmg9bxU

jyrojet rocket firing pistol

and they are suppost to be 2 stage one of the inquisitor (inquistion wars / jack draco ) books described the sound ...round fired...rocket lights..hits target..detonates..

then is worst! accuracy is wasted and your hands burned


mmm interesting gun!

Black Corsair wrote:then is worst! accuracy is wasted and your hands burned


mmm interesting gun!

prob self guiding too
if it aint it should be hay i thaught of it so they should

darkangels_rule wrote:prob self guiding too
if it aint it should be hay i thaught of it so they should

Actually, the Arbites have executioner rounds, which home in with something...like bodyheat, I don't remember.
And I remember in the Soul Drinkers books, Inquisitor Thadeus had those little rounds that had micro-cogitators in them, which enabled them to home in repeatedly.

why not? actually we pick things like these in rounds.... and a bolt round its supossed to be a high caliber... surely it has room for this

Grey Templar wrote:there actually was a handgun made once that fired missiles instead of bullets.

about 2,000 were made, mostly collectors bought them for the novelty.

the only way a missile gun will work is if it has a 2 stage launch.

this is because a missile takes time to reach lethel velocity, you could actually protect yourself from this hand gun by sticking your finger in the barrel, a 2 stage launch solves this.

the first stage charge is identicle to a normal bullet and is contained in a case. after the first is fired the second charge ignites after leaving the barrel(meaning minimal backwash)


a 2 stage launch means a bolt round will have a long range, will increase in speed over distance, be lethel at close range, be firable
like any other solid slug weapon.

There are a few things about this set of statements I'd like to point out. Namely...

1. The gun you are thinking of is the Gyrojet. It was made in pistol and rifle form.

2. I don't know how on this green earth you think that sticking your finger in the barrel of a rocket-firing rifle/pistol would save you. Yes, it doesn't have max power when it first fires, but still enough to destroy your finger (not including contained back pressure caused by rocket igniton, it wouldn't quite surprise me if the sheer expansion gasses blew your hand apart)

3. Lastly, you can fire small rockets (Gyrojet rounds) from a closed system, eliminating the need for a two-stage firing sequence. Over time, this method of firing will wear on the gun substantially, but a purpose made weapon can take the pressure of firing a rocket (bullets create a much larger pressure shock on the firearm)

Sorry, just my two cents.

And kids, never stick your finger in anything that remotely looks like a gun. It won't save you.

Definitely two stage i think everyone is thinking the whole round is case-less which its not. like Black Corsair said if the rocket fired inside the bolter the internal workings would be turned to slag now the bolt round is not entirely case-less just the bolt and how this works is there is a propellant in the case which pushes the bolt out then the rocket fires and off goes the bolt flying towards the enemy when that happens out goes the case for the propellant if that wasn't there where do you think the exhaust gasses would go? into the internal workings of the bolter making the internals hot molten metals the case keeps this from happening then is ejected so the rifle needs no bore

Rocket weapons were invented by the Chinese in the 8th century and did not turn the launch rail into slag.

Yes, there is a backwash problem. There is also an accuracy problem, a penetration problem, and a problem of requiring a lot more propellant than a conventional round.

A two-stage conventional+rocket munition combines all of these problems into a complex, expensive nightmare of a missile.

It is only used by the SMs because of the Rule of Cool.

Instead of discussing the science of bolters, perhaps we should first resolve the topic of Pink Horror biology

That is off topic. You can start another thread.

I know. I was simply noting the absurdity of discussing whether or not a recoiless, automatic, hand held grenade launcher when many even more absurd issues exist.

Why bother coming into 40K Background?

Well, you see, uh.. never mind.

No matter how ridiculous or insane can be a thread! the most important is.... HAVE FUN! and threads like these shows the variety that the human being has to reach the FUN

I like threads like this they're like design workshops\thinktank groups so please I don't want anyone to think that I am a know-it-all and not listening to\reading all of your threads if I'm wrong call me on it.

Fl@nked: An ejection port on the bottom of a firearm with a bottom fed magazine is a real PITA. The casing has to be drawn up from the magazine, placed into the reciever and fired as normal, but then to eject it you have to either draw it back behind the magazine without the spring pushing another round into place or somehow eject it before the bolt reaches the magazine feed. The convention today is that the force from the discharge is used to kick the firing bolt back resetting it and opening the breech for the release of the spent cartridge and allowing a new round to be fed into the reciever.

BloodDrop101X: The problem with the exhaust gases isn't that they are caustic or too high of a tempurature for the inside of the Bolter, it is that they are what launch the projectile. So a casing isn't large enough to hold them (because of newtons third law) also it would get jammed in against the bolt everytime it is fired causing wear. The gas would then have to escape either out the side ejection port (breach) or the front of the barrel in both cases throwing the shooters aim off target for the next round making consistant rapid fire impossible.

Killkrazy: A launch rail has a much differant purpose then an enclosed system like a rifle. With the launch rail the only purpose it has it to hold the rocket on an angle, it can allow the exhaust gas to go where ever it wants. Where as a rifle has to enclose all of the preassure from the ignition of the propellent (either powered or ballistic) and direct it out toward the projectile essentially the same as a cannon. Complex equations in physics are why we have state functions .

darkangles_rule: The bolts don't need to be self guided. If the AM put as much work into producing these as the fluff sugggests then the ballistic coefficent would be a known and consistant so the shooter would only have to set it on the correct course and fire.

If you couldn't tell physics REALLY interests me, studying firearms and ballistics is a way I use to visualise classical mechanics in action. I would like to address the accuracy and penetration problems if anyone would care to acctually voice them.

@ComputerGeek01

I have yet to take physics, more of a chemistry/electronics person. But onto the topic.

Like you said, it's a real pain to discharge spent casings through the bottom of the weapon. Most ambidexterous weapons I have seen actually discharge casings from the top instead, not too difficult to move the ejector port 45 degrees.

As for accuracy and penetration, I think I can only give my two cents on the penetration front. Does anyone have the FPS stats for a rocket round against a comparable caliber bullet? Personally I think that a self-contained rocket round would not only suffer from slower speeds (I'm guesstimating) but the real problem is that since your propellant and payload is self-contained, most of the room you could be using for a harder hitting/penetrating round is being taken up by space needed for storing said propellant.

@Fl@nked: Yes some weapons do eject spent cartridges from the top but these occasionally hit you in the face. I guess as long as you are a Space Marine you wont really notice the 2nd degree burns but for the rest of us it really sucks. I've only seen this with Bolt actions never really semi\full autos.

The above mentioned Gyrojet has a muzzle velocity of 1250 fps and is .51" in diameter with a listed effective range of 50m. Compared to a .50" Action Express 300gr at 1550 fps and an effective range listed at 200m. So based on the statline of these two firearms I would say that the conventional firearm wins, however a lot of the stuff I'm reading on the Gyrojet compares it to the .45 ACP which is .45" at a speed of only 1080fps I couldn't find a range but I would assume it to be simular to the .50 AE. I guess what I'm saying is don't blast the idea because one company failed to make it work.

Don't forget that Force is Mass TIMES Acceleration, so an increase in either one will affect the outcome by a multipule. Penetration is going to be the force behind the projectile and the hardness of it compared to that of the target. Increasing Acceleration is easier then increasing Mass as far as design consideration goes.

Overall I think you have single handedly squashed the one stage rocket propelled bolt, I guess I should have looked it up first. However there is very little to disprove the two stage rocket theory except that I cannot think of a fuel that offers a specific impulse higher then gunpowder that can be used as a rocket fuel to speed up the projectile, but that isn't to say that the gunpowder itself can't be used as the fuel. I'm just spit balling here, I'm not sure where I'm going with it yet but I'll get back to you.

Yeah, two-stage rounds are about the only solution unless someone revoloutionizes the one-stage design. As for the propellant of a two-stage round, the only things with higher specific impulses that I can think of is things like RDX or other explosives, but of course at that point you aren't making a rocket, or even really a bullet for that matter, as the firing of said RDX would probably blow the gun apart.

As for the Mass X Acceleration part, you make a good point. As you said, more acceleration is much easier than more mass, but I think the way to go about that would be not to worry about mass or acceleration (as I stated above, I haven't seen anything to greatly increase speed) but to focus on bullet composition. Using materials like depleted uranium which not only have more mass than lead (an added benefit) but are also pyrophoric and self sharpening, that in my opinion is the surefire way to increase penetration. Actually, if I recall correctly, don't bolters fire DU rounds?

But then again, if you're worried about glowing, DU isn't your friend.

We might need to move this conversation as it seems to have widely diverged from the OP's topic.

they are made with a Diamantine tip, a Depleted Deutrium core and a mass reactive detonator.

Diamantine is the same substance that makes the very tip of impierial starship rams. the hardest substance in the galaxy.

Deutrium is a radioactive substance used to power plasma reactors, not highly radioactive, but very dense.

Mass reactive detonators cause the bolts to explode upon impact. Thermite is a possable ingrediant.

ComputerGeek01 wrote:

Killkrazy: A launch rail has a much differant purpose then an enclosed system like a rifle. With the launch rail the only purpose it has it to hold the rocket on an angle, it can allow the exhaust gas to go where ever it wants. Where as a rifle has to enclose all of the preassure from the ignition of the propellent (either powered or ballistic) and direct it out toward the projectile essentially the same as a cannon. Complex equations in physics are why we have state functions .

.

My point in mentioning a launch rail was to show that rockets can work without melting the apparatus from which they are launched.

The propellant charge of a rocket burns more slowly than a bullet's, exerting constant pressure on the projectile balanced by a plume of exhaust. Depending on the length of burn, the exhaust backwash could be a danger to the firer.

In a conventional bullet, the propellant burns practically instantaneously and the high pressure gas pushes the bullet up the barrel. The exhaust gas emerges as the muzzle flash, but it is far enough away from the firer not to be dangerous to him, and moving forwards.

Rifles do not have to be enclosed for this to work. The principle of the recoilless rifle such as the Carl Gustav 84mm is that a large amount of the propellant is exhausted backwards and balances the recoil of the round.

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

You know, explosive rounds sound more plausible as to the actual identity of a bolter round.

Or heck, just say that the bolter is a refined this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4ebtj1jR7c

What I was trying to say was if the bolt had to propell its self out of the barrel on its own using the rocket motor without the casing there to catch the blast it would melt the internals but with the case there holding a propellant to first push the bolt out of the barrel then have the bolts motor fire sounds a bit more plausible right? therefore the whole bolt round is not case-less notice I said the whole round the bolt itself yes it is caseless it has it own motor and explosives contained within it so yes the bolt is case-less not the entire round itself because the round contains the case the propellant to get the bolt out of the barrel then the bolt with all of its parts contained within it if you follow this link and scroll to the bottom of the page you will find a picture of the bolt rounds http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Bolt_weapon

The rocket blast does not need to go into a casing, it could be vented out the side of the breech or up past the barrel. Some of it could be tapped to operate the reload mechanism.

I know the fluff specifies a two stage round with a spin stabilized rocket etc. In terms of real engineering it is probably the worst possible design that could be built for accuracy, penetrating power and warhead weight.

Rule of Cool is everything in 40K

ComputerGeek01 wrote:Just my two cents but a firearm cannot be ambidexterous. The 'handedness' of a firearm is determined by which side the spent casing ejects from. SM's however are all ambidexterous so it doesn't really matter. I would throw a bolter ammo couter on for scouts as this would be a cool conversion.

The ejection port does not stop a firearm being used with the other hand - the ejection port has enough clearance from your body to continue functioning and most eject the brass at a sufficient angle to clear your body if used off-hand. Why do you think that ambidexterous controls are available for most popular firearms?

This is the single biggest complaint with bullpup rifles - the ejection port is under your face making this impossible (even worse if it has a reciprocating charging handle!) There are a couple of bullpups that eject into a tube which dumps the brass out the front to avoid this.

Grey Templar wrote:they are made with a Diamantine tip, a Depleted Deutrium core and a mass reactive detonator.

Diamantine is the same substance that makes the very tip of impierial starship rams. the hardest substance in the galaxy.

Deutrium is a radioactive substance used to power plasma reactors, not highly radioactive, but very dense.

Mass reactive detonators cause the bolts to explode upon impact. Thermite is a possable ingrediant.

Just want to correct you on the 2nd, deutrium is a form of HYDROGEN and thus is one of the least dense things there is however it is heavy hydrogen (still would be more like heliums mass, from balloons everyone knows what helium is like).

Scott-S6 wrote:

ComputerGeek01 wrote:Just my two cents but a firearm cannot be ambidexterous. The 'handedness' of a firearm is determined by which side the spent casing ejects from. SM's however are all ambidexterous so it doesn't really matter. I would throw a bolter ammo couter on for scouts as this would be a cool conversion.

The ejection port does not stop a firearm being used with the other hand - the ejection port has enough clearance from your body to continue functioning and most eject the brass at a sufficient angle to clear your body if used off-hand. Why do you think that ambidexterous controls are available for most popular firearms?

This is the single biggest complaint with bullpup rifles - the ejection port is under your face making this impossible (even worse if it has a reciprocating charging handle!) There are a couple of bullpups that eject into a tube which dumps the brass out the front to avoid this.

The FAMAS is designed to let the cheekrest be moved from one side to the other, swapping the side of the ejection port.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Steyr-AUG also allows the ejection port to be swapped over.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:
This is the single biggest complaint with bullpup rifles - the ejection port is under your face making this impossible (even worse if it has a reciprocating charging handle!) There are a couple of bullpups that eject into a tube which dumps the brass out the front to avoid this.

The FAMAS is designed to let the cheekrest be moved from one side to the other, swapping the side of the ejection port.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Steyr-AUG also allows the ejection port to be swapped over.

Both require dismantling the weapon and swapping components (bolt) to do this - it doesn't help you when your right arm is injured or you need to shoot around the left side of something.

The FN2000 and Kel-Tec RFB both have front ejection to make them genuinely ambi-dexterous.

True, however the ability to quickly grab a right-handed rifle and use it left-handedly is not the most important function of a military weapon.

Many countries have introduced or are introducing bullpup design rifles. The basic design is fairly mature having been produced originally in the 1940s.

Factors such as short length are considered more important than ease of swapping hands.

The inability to fire around the left hand side of an obstacle without entirely exposing yourself is an issue. Likewise, being entirely unable to use it if your right arm is injured is also a problem. This was a major complaint with the bullpups put forward during the last few rounds of US trials.

There are lots of advantages to a bullpup design. The two main disadvantages are the ejection problem (solution found by FN) and the high sight level (this is more of a historical complaint as most modern assault rifles have in-line stocks which force the sight level up anyway).

I would imagine that once FN's forward ejection has had time to prove itself then most other manufacturers will copy it or produce something similar. I hear that an update to the Tavor is planned to do exactly this. With the single biggest argument against bullpups gone I can see them becoming significantly more common. (especially with the US's recent experiences in Arghanistan which seem to be suggesting that 14.5" barrels are not adequate)

Personally, my biggest problem with bullpups is that mag change is slow since you must operate the mag release with your left hand (which has a magazine in it). Once someone comes up with a magrelease which can be operated with the trigger finger ALA M16 series then I will be entirely on-board! (as long as it's got forward ejection as well - I like my face the way it is!)