Is a self contained air-bullet cartridge feasible?Making Gunpowder out of CorpsesMost likely form, and progression to, near-future self-driving vehicles built in countries with current road infastructure?Are Jetpacks feasible?Are gunswords feasible?Does vibranium bullet works?Feasibility of a Synthetic Buoyancy Bladder, Used in the AirWar eagles, feasible?Bullet should burnt down into ashes in the air itself if it misses the targetHow to stop a sniper bullet?Full body bullet resistant armourSpaceship Engineering & Infrastructure Challenges: Air Currents
Is it idiomatic to construct against `this`
Which big number is bigger?
Map of water taps to fill bottles
Solving polynominals equations (relationship of roots)
How exactly does Hawking radiation decrease the mass of black holes?
Why does nature favour the Laplacian?
Alignment of various blocks in tikz
Two field separators (colon and space) in awk
Can someone publish a story that happened to you?
How do I check if a string is entirely made of the same substring?
Is there really no use for MD5 anymore?
"You've called the wrong number" or "You called the wrong number"
Why do games have consumables?
Implications of cigar-shaped bodies having rings?
Why does Mind Blank stop the Feeblemind spell?
Does tea made with boiling water cool faster than tea made with boiled (but still hot) water?
Rivers without rain
Do I have an "anti-research" personality?
Does Gita support doctrine of eternal samsara?
"Whatever a Russian does, they end up making the Kalashnikov gun"? Are there any similar proverbs in English?
How to have a sharp product image?
Should the Death Curse affect an undead PC in the Tomb of Annihilation adventure?
Is this homebrew Wind Wave spell balanced?
Size of electromagnet needed to replicate Earth's magnetic field
Is a self contained air-bullet cartridge feasible?
Making Gunpowder out of CorpsesMost likely form, and progression to, near-future self-driving vehicles built in countries with current road infastructure?Are Jetpacks feasible?Are gunswords feasible?Does vibranium bullet works?Feasibility of a Synthetic Buoyancy Bladder, Used in the AirWar eagles, feasible?Bullet should burnt down into ashes in the air itself if it misses the targetHow to stop a sniper bullet?Full body bullet resistant armourSpaceship Engineering & Infrastructure Challenges: Air Currents
$begingroup$
In my world, there is no access to modern or traditional gunpowder. I was wondering if a dedicated technician with a modern shop (cnc machines, and a surplus of parts and raw material, etc) would be able to develop a bullet the fires from compressed air that is in the same cartridge as the projectile. Issues I am not sure of are: How big would the cartridge have to be to push a 30 caliber bullet at lethal trajectory? and how thick would the air chamber have to be to hold that pressure?
technology physics near-future combat kinetic-weapons
edited Apr 23 at 19:47
Cyn
12.5k12758
asked Apr 23 at 17:49
AlexAlex
17711
$endgroup$
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
In my world, there is no access to modern or traditional gunpowder. I was wondering if a dedicated technician with a modern shop (cnc machines, and a surplus of parts and raw material, etc) would be able to develop a bullet the fires from compressed air that is in the same cartridge as the projectile. Issues I am not sure of are: How big would the cartridge have to be to push a 30 caliber bullet at lethal trajectory? and how thick would the air chamber have to be to hold that pressure?
technology physics near-future combat kinetic-weapons
edited Apr 23 at 19:47
Cyn
12.5k12758
asked Apr 23 at 17:49
AlexAlex
17711
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
what is the difference between this and an air-rifle? Those can kill and it is easier to pump air into a big container than tiny cartridge
$endgroup$
– aaaaaa
Apr 23 at 17:54
3
$begingroup$
You would never have to pump your gun if you left with enough bullets. I find that an air rifles biggest weakness is the limited amount of shots they can fire. So if there is a large fight where the mechanic I described has to fight more then ten enemies, he would be able to without having to retreat and pull out a bicycle pump to charge up.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 17:58
$begingroup$
Air rifles are usually charged by breaking and closing again. This bratty kid shows you how - youtu.be/AI2b5n4nkCg - Two or three pumps are usually more than enough. No bicycle equipment needed. Are your self-contained bullets loaded individually or is this an automatic weapon?
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Apr 23 at 18:12
1
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - I doubt three pumps compresses enough air to push a 210 grain sphere of lead at 500fps. - OP, your objective should be lethally propelling lead with air, not trying to make something disposable that I wouldn't want to be in the same room with... "Contents Under Pressure."
$endgroup$
– Mazura
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
How do you create a world with organic chemistry and not discover gunpowder ? No systematic industrial chemistry could avoid finding it. Long before you get to make useful high precision CNCs and compressed air you will discover gunpowder. Gunpowder exists since the 9th century and compressed air to the extent you required would not be available until maybe the 17th century. The cannon was developed in the 12th to 13th century.
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
In my world, there is no access to modern or traditional gunpowder. I was wondering if a dedicated technician with a modern shop (cnc machines, and a surplus of parts and raw material, etc) would be able to develop a bullet the fires from compressed air that is in the same cartridge as the projectile. Issues I am not sure of are: How big would the cartridge have to be to push a 30 caliber bullet at lethal trajectory? and how thick would the air chamber have to be to hold that pressure?
technology physics near-future combat kinetic-weapons
edited Apr 23 at 19:47
Cyn
12.5k12758
asked Apr 23 at 17:49
AlexAlex
17711
$endgroup$
In my world, there is no access to modern or traditional gunpowder. I was wondering if a dedicated technician with a modern shop (cnc machines, and a surplus of parts and raw material, etc) would be able to develop a bullet the fires from compressed air that is in the same cartridge as the projectile. Issues I am not sure of are: How big would the cartridge have to be to push a 30 caliber bullet at lethal trajectory? and how thick would the air chamber have to be to hold that pressure?
technology physics near-future combat kinetic-weapons
technology physics near-future combat kinetic-weapons
edited Apr 23 at 19:47
Cyn
12.5k12758
asked Apr 23 at 17:49
AlexAlex
17711
edited Apr 23 at 19:47
Cyn
12.5k12758
asked Apr 23 at 17:49
AlexAlex
17711
edited Apr 23 at 19:47
Cyn
12.5k12758
edited Apr 23 at 19:47
Cyn
12.5k12758
edited Apr 23 at 19:47
Cyn
12.5k12758
12.5k12758
asked Apr 23 at 17:49
AlexAlex
17711
asked Apr 23 at 17:49
AlexAlex
17711
asked Apr 23 at 17:49
AlexAlex
17711
17711
1
$begingroup$
what is the difference between this and an air-rifle? Those can kill and it is easier to pump air into a big container than tiny cartridge
$endgroup$
– aaaaaa
Apr 23 at 17:54
3
$begingroup$
You would never have to pump your gun if you left with enough bullets. I find that an air rifles biggest weakness is the limited amount of shots they can fire. So if there is a large fight where the mechanic I described has to fight more then ten enemies, he would be able to without having to retreat and pull out a bicycle pump to charge up.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 17:58
$begingroup$
Air rifles are usually charged by breaking and closing again. This bratty kid shows you how - youtu.be/AI2b5n4nkCg - Two or three pumps are usually more than enough. No bicycle equipment needed. Are your self-contained bullets loaded individually or is this an automatic weapon?
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Apr 23 at 18:12
1
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - I doubt three pumps compresses enough air to push a 210 grain sphere of lead at 500fps. - OP, your objective should be lethally propelling lead with air, not trying to make something disposable that I wouldn't want to be in the same room with... "Contents Under Pressure."
$endgroup$
– Mazura
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
How do you create a world with organic chemistry and not discover gunpowder ? No systematic industrial chemistry could avoid finding it. Long before you get to make useful high precision CNCs and compressed air you will discover gunpowder. Gunpowder exists since the 9th century and compressed air to the extent you required would not be available until maybe the 17th century. The cannon was developed in the 12th to 13th century.
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
|
show 4 more comments
1
$begingroup$
what is the difference between this and an air-rifle? Those can kill and it is easier to pump air into a big container than tiny cartridge
$endgroup$
– aaaaaa
Apr 23 at 17:54
3
$begingroup$
You would never have to pump your gun if you left with enough bullets. I find that an air rifles biggest weakness is the limited amount of shots they can fire. So if there is a large fight where the mechanic I described has to fight more then ten enemies, he would be able to without having to retreat and pull out a bicycle pump to charge up.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 17:58
$begingroup$
Air rifles are usually charged by breaking and closing again. This bratty kid shows you how - youtu.be/AI2b5n4nkCg - Two or three pumps are usually more than enough. No bicycle equipment needed. Are your self-contained bullets loaded individually or is this an automatic weapon?
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Apr 23 at 18:12
1
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - I doubt three pumps compresses enough air to push a 210 grain sphere of lead at 500fps. - OP, your objective should be lethally propelling lead with air, not trying to make something disposable that I wouldn't want to be in the same room with... "Contents Under Pressure."
$endgroup$
– Mazura
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
How do you create a world with organic chemistry and not discover gunpowder ? No systematic industrial chemistry could avoid finding it. Long before you get to make useful high precision CNCs and compressed air you will discover gunpowder. Gunpowder exists since the 9th century and compressed air to the extent you required would not be available until maybe the 17th century. The cannon was developed in the 12th to 13th century.
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
what is the difference between this and an air-rifle? Those can kill and it is easier to pump air into a big container than tiny cartridge
$endgroup$
– aaaaaa
Apr 23 at 17:54
$begingroup$
what is the difference between this and an air-rifle? Those can kill and it is easier to pump air into a big container than tiny cartridge
$endgroup$
– aaaaaa
Apr 23 at 17:54
3
3
$begingroup$
You would never have to pump your gun if you left with enough bullets. I find that an air rifles biggest weakness is the limited amount of shots they can fire. So if there is a large fight where the mechanic I described has to fight more then ten enemies, he would be able to without having to retreat and pull out a bicycle pump to charge up.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 17:58
$begingroup$
You would never have to pump your gun if you left with enough bullets. I find that an air rifles biggest weakness is the limited amount of shots they can fire. So if there is a large fight where the mechanic I described has to fight more then ten enemies, he would be able to without having to retreat and pull out a bicycle pump to charge up.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 17:58
$begingroup$
Air rifles are usually charged by breaking and closing again. This bratty kid shows you how - youtu.be/AI2b5n4nkCg - Two or three pumps are usually more than enough. No bicycle equipment needed. Are your self-contained bullets loaded individually or is this an automatic weapon?
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Apr 23 at 18:12
$begingroup$
Air rifles are usually charged by breaking and closing again. This bratty kid shows you how - youtu.be/AI2b5n4nkCg - Two or three pumps are usually more than enough. No bicycle equipment needed. Are your self-contained bullets loaded individually or is this an automatic weapon?
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Apr 23 at 18:12
1
1
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - I doubt three pumps compresses enough air to push a 210 grain sphere of lead at 500fps. - OP, your objective should be lethally propelling lead with air, not trying to make something disposable that I wouldn't want to be in the same room with... "Contents Under Pressure."
$endgroup$
– Mazura
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - I doubt three pumps compresses enough air to push a 210 grain sphere of lead at 500fps. - OP, your objective should be lethally propelling lead with air, not trying to make something disposable that I wouldn't want to be in the same room with... "Contents Under Pressure."
$endgroup$
– Mazura
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
How do you create a world with organic chemistry and not discover gunpowder ? No systematic industrial chemistry could avoid finding it. Long before you get to make useful high precision CNCs and compressed air you will discover gunpowder. Gunpowder exists since the 9th century and compressed air to the extent you required would not be available until maybe the 17th century. The cannon was developed in the 12th to 13th century.
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
$begingroup$
How do you create a world with organic chemistry and not discover gunpowder ? No systematic industrial chemistry could avoid finding it. Long before you get to make useful high precision CNCs and compressed air you will discover gunpowder. Gunpowder exists since the 9th century and compressed air to the extent you required would not be available until maybe the 17th century. The cannon was developed in the 12th to 13th century.
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
|
show 4 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Combining the projectile directly with the air chamber and a single use valve is possible, (and exact sizing would depend on materials and valve design) but it is vastly inferior to a bulk storage tank design that is separate from your projectiles:
- Bulk tank storage means that you need 1-2 valves to fire potentially dozens of rounds at lethal velocities in place of at least one valve per shot.
- Reduced valve count translates into reduced maintenance (and potentially increased safety)
- Handling the independent projectiles does not introduce risks of damage or leaking charges.
- Bulk storage allows option for consistent regulation and reduces the risk of shot-to-shot variance due to differences in cartridge pressures.
Consider the Girandoni air rifle - each cylinder allowed approximately 30 rounds to be fired, and the soldier was typically issued two spares. The accompanying (ball) ammunition occupies a very small and highly flexible volume - This translates into ease of carrying and handling.
Contrast this to the (non-lethal) options seen in paintball and the obscure 'goblin' shells that held one paintball and an air charge to fire it:
These proved unreliable, inconsistent, and took up far more space than a CO2 cartridge beside the paintballs that could be fired with one.
And the small 12 gram CO2 cartridges weigh more and take up more space than what could be achieved with a larger bulk tank.
For handling and ergonomics, a mixed Tank+Magazine design may be what you're really after - A single bulk tank with capacity to hold a charge for multiple rounds, and a magazine of ammunition that the tank can reliably fire.
(Answer can be improved with exact numbers by myself, or another member, if needed/someone gets around to crunching the numbers - Material options and exact bullet size/weight would need to be established for accurate figures.)
edited Apr 24 at 6:17
Elmy
13.6k22564
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,353111
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I feel like there has to be some material that we have developed that would allow for high pressure air storage without being to bulky. The Girandoni has obviously proven its worth, but I can't help but think their must be a better way. A weakness I see is the reliance on a tank of air. even if you carry two a trip and fall might render that who supply worthless if the nozzle was to break, or a leak was able to form.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:30
1
$begingroup$
The Girandoni was rugged enough for Lewis and Clark on their mission of exploration. It was good enough to come under an attempted ban during the Napoleonic wars, because it had the accuracy and power to kill, but didn't give away its location with clouds of smoke -- and the guns stood up to the handling of soldiers in war, albeit an elite unit.
$endgroup$
– Zeiss Ikon
Apr 23 at 18:43
2
$begingroup$
@Alex you would be extremely hard pressed to approach the consistency and weight/volume efficiencies with a per-cartridge charge. You may get closest if you could make the projectile itself the tank, with a primitive burst disk 'valve', but then every round is a quality control nightmare and vastly more difficult to produce in bulk. - Any improvement you make with materials for the single use cartridge has More improvement in bulk storage.
$endgroup$
– TheLuckless
Apr 23 at 19:09
3
$begingroup$
The rocket equation places strict limits on the mass ratio of any projectile powered by exhausting propellant. Space-going rockets are typically more than 85% propellant by mass, or 1% payload when you account for structural mass. An air gun wouldn't need to work nearly as hard against gravity, but compressed air (the other two parameters of the equation) is a pretty inefficient propellant compared to rocket fuels. Even if your bullets were 50% propellant by mass that's a significant loss of kinetic energy after even short flights. Hypergolic propellants might be a more believable solution.
$endgroup$
– Matthew Gauthier
Apr 23 at 20:48
2
$begingroup$
@MatthewGauthier : the rocket equation is completely irrelevant here, because the bullet in this case doesn't have to carry the propellant to be used while in flight. The small compressed air canister can be in the cartridge which stays in the gun and will be ejected later. It doesn't have to fly with the bullet, exhausting the air while in flight.
$endgroup$
– vsz
Apr 24 at 6:27
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The Brocock Air Cartridge System seems to fit your description. The cartridges are loaded with an airgun pellet and primed from a pump or diving tank. They are designed to resemble and function as close to real firearm cartridges as possible, rather than being designed for the kind of power you describe.
answered Apr 23 at 20:38
WilliamWilliam
811
New contributor
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've actually designed (though not built) a cartridge that works like this. By my calculation, and by comparison to conventional precompressed air guns, I think a cartridge the size of a .30-06 round holding pressure similar to that used in PCP air guns should be able to propel a lightweight .30 caliber bullet (say, 100 grain or lighter) at close to the speed of sound, or a heavier bullet at somewhat slower velocity.
This is adequate for hunting small game (squirrels, rabbits, etc.), or marginally adequate for self defense against unarmored assailants -- ballistically, it would be similar power to a .32 ACP handgun cartridge, possibly as good as a .32 H&R Magnum (the former fires an 88 grain bullet at slightly subsonic speed; the latter fires a 100 grain bullet at supersonic muzzle velocity). It would be "single shot" in a handgun, but in a rifle sized arm could be loaded from as magazine, as was done starting in the 1890s with powder weapons.
This could be scaled up some -- a larger air capacity cartridge will give more velocity and/or propel a heavier bullet -- but there's a limit to how big it's practical to make your cartridges. If you need something like a .50 BMG cartridge to hold enough air to propel a 180 grain .35 bullet at Mach 1.5 (i.e. enough power to reliably kill deer at moderate range), the ammunition bulk is likely to limit how many rounds you can carry.
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,724117
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If the projectiles are too bulky I could see possible use in a mounted weapon. There would be no need to move the gun, and the air would allow for less heat to affect the weapon.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:32
$begingroup$
@Alex well tbf if it's a mounted weapon it would probably benefit from a tank (which you could make as durable as you want, since it's mounted anyway)
$endgroup$
– somebody
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144627%2fis-a-self-contained-air-bullet-cartridge-feasible%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Combining the projectile directly with the air chamber and a single use valve is possible, (and exact sizing would depend on materials and valve design) but it is vastly inferior to a bulk storage tank design that is separate from your projectiles:
- Bulk tank storage means that you need 1-2 valves to fire potentially dozens of rounds at lethal velocities in place of at least one valve per shot.
- Reduced valve count translates into reduced maintenance (and potentially increased safety)
- Handling the independent projectiles does not introduce risks of damage or leaking charges.
- Bulk storage allows option for consistent regulation and reduces the risk of shot-to-shot variance due to differences in cartridge pressures.
Consider the Girandoni air rifle - each cylinder allowed approximately 30 rounds to be fired, and the soldier was typically issued two spares. The accompanying (ball) ammunition occupies a very small and highly flexible volume - This translates into ease of carrying and handling.
Contrast this to the (non-lethal) options seen in paintball and the obscure 'goblin' shells that held one paintball and an air charge to fire it:
These proved unreliable, inconsistent, and took up far more space than a CO2 cartridge beside the paintballs that could be fired with one.
And the small 12 gram CO2 cartridges weigh more and take up more space than what could be achieved with a larger bulk tank.
For handling and ergonomics, a mixed Tank+Magazine design may be what you're really after - A single bulk tank with capacity to hold a charge for multiple rounds, and a magazine of ammunition that the tank can reliably fire.
(Answer can be improved with exact numbers by myself, or another member, if needed/someone gets around to crunching the numbers - Material options and exact bullet size/weight would need to be established for accurate figures.)
edited Apr 24 at 6:17
Elmy
13.6k22564
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,353111
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I feel like there has to be some material that we have developed that would allow for high pressure air storage without being to bulky. The Girandoni has obviously proven its worth, but I can't help but think their must be a better way. A weakness I see is the reliance on a tank of air. even if you carry two a trip and fall might render that who supply worthless if the nozzle was to break, or a leak was able to form.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:30
1
$begingroup$
The Girandoni was rugged enough for Lewis and Clark on their mission of exploration. It was good enough to come under an attempted ban during the Napoleonic wars, because it had the accuracy and power to kill, but didn't give away its location with clouds of smoke -- and the guns stood up to the handling of soldiers in war, albeit an elite unit.
$endgroup$
– Zeiss Ikon
Apr 23 at 18:43
2
$begingroup$
@Alex you would be extremely hard pressed to approach the consistency and weight/volume efficiencies with a per-cartridge charge. You may get closest if you could make the projectile itself the tank, with a primitive burst disk 'valve', but then every round is a quality control nightmare and vastly more difficult to produce in bulk. - Any improvement you make with materials for the single use cartridge has More improvement in bulk storage.
$endgroup$
– TheLuckless
Apr 23 at 19:09
3
$begingroup$
The rocket equation places strict limits on the mass ratio of any projectile powered by exhausting propellant. Space-going rockets are typically more than 85% propellant by mass, or 1% payload when you account for structural mass. An air gun wouldn't need to work nearly as hard against gravity, but compressed air (the other two parameters of the equation) is a pretty inefficient propellant compared to rocket fuels. Even if your bullets were 50% propellant by mass that's a significant loss of kinetic energy after even short flights. Hypergolic propellants might be a more believable solution.
$endgroup$
– Matthew Gauthier
Apr 23 at 20:48
2
$begingroup$
@MatthewGauthier : the rocket equation is completely irrelevant here, because the bullet in this case doesn't have to carry the propellant to be used while in flight. The small compressed air canister can be in the cartridge which stays in the gun and will be ejected later. It doesn't have to fly with the bullet, exhausting the air while in flight.
$endgroup$
– vsz
Apr 24 at 6:27
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Combining the projectile directly with the air chamber and a single use valve is possible, (and exact sizing would depend on materials and valve design) but it is vastly inferior to a bulk storage tank design that is separate from your projectiles:
- Bulk tank storage means that you need 1-2 valves to fire potentially dozens of rounds at lethal velocities in place of at least one valve per shot.
- Reduced valve count translates into reduced maintenance (and potentially increased safety)
- Handling the independent projectiles does not introduce risks of damage or leaking charges.
- Bulk storage allows option for consistent regulation and reduces the risk of shot-to-shot variance due to differences in cartridge pressures.
Consider the Girandoni air rifle - each cylinder allowed approximately 30 rounds to be fired, and the soldier was typically issued two spares. The accompanying (ball) ammunition occupies a very small and highly flexible volume - This translates into ease of carrying and handling.
Contrast this to the (non-lethal) options seen in paintball and the obscure 'goblin' shells that held one paintball and an air charge to fire it:
These proved unreliable, inconsistent, and took up far more space than a CO2 cartridge beside the paintballs that could be fired with one.
And the small 12 gram CO2 cartridges weigh more and take up more space than what could be achieved with a larger bulk tank.
For handling and ergonomics, a mixed Tank+Magazine design may be what you're really after - A single bulk tank with capacity to hold a charge for multiple rounds, and a magazine of ammunition that the tank can reliably fire.
(Answer can be improved with exact numbers by myself, or another member, if needed/someone gets around to crunching the numbers - Material options and exact bullet size/weight would need to be established for accurate figures.)
edited Apr 24 at 6:17
Elmy
13.6k22564
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,353111
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I feel like there has to be some material that we have developed that would allow for high pressure air storage without being to bulky. The Girandoni has obviously proven its worth, but I can't help but think their must be a better way. A weakness I see is the reliance on a tank of air. even if you carry two a trip and fall might render that who supply worthless if the nozzle was to break, or a leak was able to form.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:30
1
$begingroup$
The Girandoni was rugged enough for Lewis and Clark on their mission of exploration. It was good enough to come under an attempted ban during the Napoleonic wars, because it had the accuracy and power to kill, but didn't give away its location with clouds of smoke -- and the guns stood up to the handling of soldiers in war, albeit an elite unit.
$endgroup$
– Zeiss Ikon
Apr 23 at 18:43
2
$begingroup$
@Alex you would be extremely hard pressed to approach the consistency and weight/volume efficiencies with a per-cartridge charge. You may get closest if you could make the projectile itself the tank, with a primitive burst disk 'valve', but then every round is a quality control nightmare and vastly more difficult to produce in bulk. - Any improvement you make with materials for the single use cartridge has More improvement in bulk storage.
$endgroup$
– TheLuckless
Apr 23 at 19:09
3
$begingroup$
The rocket equation places strict limits on the mass ratio of any projectile powered by exhausting propellant. Space-going rockets are typically more than 85% propellant by mass, or 1% payload when you account for structural mass. An air gun wouldn't need to work nearly as hard against gravity, but compressed air (the other two parameters of the equation) is a pretty inefficient propellant compared to rocket fuels. Even if your bullets were 50% propellant by mass that's a significant loss of kinetic energy after even short flights. Hypergolic propellants might be a more believable solution.
$endgroup$
– Matthew Gauthier
Apr 23 at 20:48
2
$begingroup$
@MatthewGauthier : the rocket equation is completely irrelevant here, because the bullet in this case doesn't have to carry the propellant to be used while in flight. The small compressed air canister can be in the cartridge which stays in the gun and will be ejected later. It doesn't have to fly with the bullet, exhausting the air while in flight.
$endgroup$
– vsz
Apr 24 at 6:27
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Combining the projectile directly with the air chamber and a single use valve is possible, (and exact sizing would depend on materials and valve design) but it is vastly inferior to a bulk storage tank design that is separate from your projectiles:
- Bulk tank storage means that you need 1-2 valves to fire potentially dozens of rounds at lethal velocities in place of at least one valve per shot.
- Reduced valve count translates into reduced maintenance (and potentially increased safety)
- Handling the independent projectiles does not introduce risks of damage or leaking charges.
- Bulk storage allows option for consistent regulation and reduces the risk of shot-to-shot variance due to differences in cartridge pressures.
Consider the Girandoni air rifle - each cylinder allowed approximately 30 rounds to be fired, and the soldier was typically issued two spares. The accompanying (ball) ammunition occupies a very small and highly flexible volume - This translates into ease of carrying and handling.
Contrast this to the (non-lethal) options seen in paintball and the obscure 'goblin' shells that held one paintball and an air charge to fire it:
These proved unreliable, inconsistent, and took up far more space than a CO2 cartridge beside the paintballs that could be fired with one.
And the small 12 gram CO2 cartridges weigh more and take up more space than what could be achieved with a larger bulk tank.
For handling and ergonomics, a mixed Tank+Magazine design may be what you're really after - A single bulk tank with capacity to hold a charge for multiple rounds, and a magazine of ammunition that the tank can reliably fire.
(Answer can be improved with exact numbers by myself, or another member, if needed/someone gets around to crunching the numbers - Material options and exact bullet size/weight would need to be established for accurate figures.)
edited Apr 24 at 6:17
Elmy
13.6k22564
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,353111
$endgroup$
Combining the projectile directly with the air chamber and a single use valve is possible, (and exact sizing would depend on materials and valve design) but it is vastly inferior to a bulk storage tank design that is separate from your projectiles:
- Bulk tank storage means that you need 1-2 valves to fire potentially dozens of rounds at lethal velocities in place of at least one valve per shot.
- Reduced valve count translates into reduced maintenance (and potentially increased safety)
- Handling the independent projectiles does not introduce risks of damage or leaking charges.
- Bulk storage allows option for consistent regulation and reduces the risk of shot-to-shot variance due to differences in cartridge pressures.
Consider the Girandoni air rifle - each cylinder allowed approximately 30 rounds to be fired, and the soldier was typically issued two spares. The accompanying (ball) ammunition occupies a very small and highly flexible volume - This translates into ease of carrying and handling.
Contrast this to the (non-lethal) options seen in paintball and the obscure 'goblin' shells that held one paintball and an air charge to fire it:
These proved unreliable, inconsistent, and took up far more space than a CO2 cartridge beside the paintballs that could be fired with one.
And the small 12 gram CO2 cartridges weigh more and take up more space than what could be achieved with a larger bulk tank.
For handling and ergonomics, a mixed Tank+Magazine design may be what you're really after - A single bulk tank with capacity to hold a charge for multiple rounds, and a magazine of ammunition that the tank can reliably fire.
(Answer can be improved with exact numbers by myself, or another member, if needed/someone gets around to crunching the numbers - Material options and exact bullet size/weight would need to be established for accurate figures.)
edited Apr 24 at 6:17
Elmy
13.6k22564
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,353111
edited Apr 24 at 6:17
Elmy
13.6k22564
edited Apr 24 at 6:17
Elmy
13.6k22564
edited Apr 24 at 6:17
Elmy
13.6k22564
13.6k22564
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,353111
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,353111
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,353111
1,353111
1
$begingroup$
I feel like there has to be some material that we have developed that would allow for high pressure air storage without being to bulky. The Girandoni has obviously proven its worth, but I can't help but think their must be a better way. A weakness I see is the reliance on a tank of air. even if you carry two a trip and fall might render that who supply worthless if the nozzle was to break, or a leak was able to form.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:30
1
$begingroup$
The Girandoni was rugged enough for Lewis and Clark on their mission of exploration. It was good enough to come under an attempted ban during the Napoleonic wars, because it had the accuracy and power to kill, but didn't give away its location with clouds of smoke -- and the guns stood up to the handling of soldiers in war, albeit an elite unit.
$endgroup$
– Zeiss Ikon
Apr 23 at 18:43
2
$begingroup$
@Alex you would be extremely hard pressed to approach the consistency and weight/volume efficiencies with a per-cartridge charge. You may get closest if you could make the projectile itself the tank, with a primitive burst disk 'valve', but then every round is a quality control nightmare and vastly more difficult to produce in bulk. - Any improvement you make with materials for the single use cartridge has More improvement in bulk storage.
$endgroup$
– TheLuckless
Apr 23 at 19:09
3
$begingroup$
The rocket equation places strict limits on the mass ratio of any projectile powered by exhausting propellant. Space-going rockets are typically more than 85% propellant by mass, or 1% payload when you account for structural mass. An air gun wouldn't need to work nearly as hard against gravity, but compressed air (the other two parameters of the equation) is a pretty inefficient propellant compared to rocket fuels. Even if your bullets were 50% propellant by mass that's a significant loss of kinetic energy after even short flights. Hypergolic propellants might be a more believable solution.
$endgroup$
– Matthew Gauthier
Apr 23 at 20:48
2
$begingroup$
@MatthewGauthier : the rocket equation is completely irrelevant here, because the bullet in this case doesn't have to carry the propellant to be used while in flight. The small compressed air canister can be in the cartridge which stays in the gun and will be ejected later. It doesn't have to fly with the bullet, exhausting the air while in flight.
$endgroup$
– vsz
Apr 24 at 6:27
|
show 2 more comments
1
$begingroup$
I feel like there has to be some material that we have developed that would allow for high pressure air storage without being to bulky. The Girandoni has obviously proven its worth, but I can't help but think their must be a better way. A weakness I see is the reliance on a tank of air. even if you carry two a trip and fall might render that who supply worthless if the nozzle was to break, or a leak was able to form.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:30
1
$begingroup$
The Girandoni was rugged enough for Lewis and Clark on their mission of exploration. It was good enough to come under an attempted ban during the Napoleonic wars, because it had the accuracy and power to kill, but didn't give away its location with clouds of smoke -- and the guns stood up to the handling of soldiers in war, albeit an elite unit.
$endgroup$
– Zeiss Ikon
Apr 23 at 18:43
2
$begingroup$
@Alex you would be extremely hard pressed to approach the consistency and weight/volume efficiencies with a per-cartridge charge. You may get closest if you could make the projectile itself the tank, with a primitive burst disk 'valve', but then every round is a quality control nightmare and vastly more difficult to produce in bulk. - Any improvement you make with materials for the single use cartridge has More improvement in bulk storage.
$endgroup$
– TheLuckless
Apr 23 at 19:09
3
$begingroup$
The rocket equation places strict limits on the mass ratio of any projectile powered by exhausting propellant. Space-going rockets are typically more than 85% propellant by mass, or 1% payload when you account for structural mass. An air gun wouldn't need to work nearly as hard against gravity, but compressed air (the other two parameters of the equation) is a pretty inefficient propellant compared to rocket fuels. Even if your bullets were 50% propellant by mass that's a significant loss of kinetic energy after even short flights. Hypergolic propellants might be a more believable solution.
$endgroup$
– Matthew Gauthier
Apr 23 at 20:48
2
$begingroup$
@MatthewGauthier : the rocket equation is completely irrelevant here, because the bullet in this case doesn't have to carry the propellant to be used while in flight. The small compressed air canister can be in the cartridge which stays in the gun and will be ejected later. It doesn't have to fly with the bullet, exhausting the air while in flight.
$endgroup$
– vsz
Apr 24 at 6:27
1
1
$begingroup$
I feel like there has to be some material that we have developed that would allow for high pressure air storage without being to bulky. The Girandoni has obviously proven its worth, but I can't help but think their must be a better way. A weakness I see is the reliance on a tank of air. even if you carry two a trip and fall might render that who supply worthless if the nozzle was to break, or a leak was able to form.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:30
$begingroup$
I feel like there has to be some material that we have developed that would allow for high pressure air storage without being to bulky. The Girandoni has obviously proven its worth, but I can't help but think their must be a better way. A weakness I see is the reliance on a tank of air. even if you carry two a trip and fall might render that who supply worthless if the nozzle was to break, or a leak was able to form.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:30
1
1
$begingroup$
The Girandoni was rugged enough for Lewis and Clark on their mission of exploration. It was good enough to come under an attempted ban during the Napoleonic wars, because it had the accuracy and power to kill, but didn't give away its location with clouds of smoke -- and the guns stood up to the handling of soldiers in war, albeit an elite unit.
$endgroup$
– Zeiss Ikon
Apr 23 at 18:43
$begingroup$
The Girandoni was rugged enough for Lewis and Clark on their mission of exploration. It was good enough to come under an attempted ban during the Napoleonic wars, because it had the accuracy and power to kill, but didn't give away its location with clouds of smoke -- and the guns stood up to the handling of soldiers in war, albeit an elite unit.
$endgroup$
– Zeiss Ikon
Apr 23 at 18:43
2
2
$begingroup$
@Alex you would be extremely hard pressed to approach the consistency and weight/volume efficiencies with a per-cartridge charge. You may get closest if you could make the projectile itself the tank, with a primitive burst disk 'valve', but then every round is a quality control nightmare and vastly more difficult to produce in bulk. - Any improvement you make with materials for the single use cartridge has More improvement in bulk storage.
$endgroup$
– TheLuckless
Apr 23 at 19:09
$begingroup$
@Alex you would be extremely hard pressed to approach the consistency and weight/volume efficiencies with a per-cartridge charge. You may get closest if you could make the projectile itself the tank, with a primitive burst disk 'valve', but then every round is a quality control nightmare and vastly more difficult to produce in bulk. - Any improvement you make with materials for the single use cartridge has More improvement in bulk storage.
$endgroup$
– TheLuckless
Apr 23 at 19:09
3
3
$begingroup$
The rocket equation places strict limits on the mass ratio of any projectile powered by exhausting propellant. Space-going rockets are typically more than 85% propellant by mass, or 1% payload when you account for structural mass. An air gun wouldn't need to work nearly as hard against gravity, but compressed air (the other two parameters of the equation) is a pretty inefficient propellant compared to rocket fuels. Even if your bullets were 50% propellant by mass that's a significant loss of kinetic energy after even short flights. Hypergolic propellants might be a more believable solution.
$endgroup$
– Matthew Gauthier
Apr 23 at 20:48
$begingroup$
The rocket equation places strict limits on the mass ratio of any projectile powered by exhausting propellant. Space-going rockets are typically more than 85% propellant by mass, or 1% payload when you account for structural mass. An air gun wouldn't need to work nearly as hard against gravity, but compressed air (the other two parameters of the equation) is a pretty inefficient propellant compared to rocket fuels. Even if your bullets were 50% propellant by mass that's a significant loss of kinetic energy after even short flights. Hypergolic propellants might be a more believable solution.
$endgroup$
– Matthew Gauthier
Apr 23 at 20:48
2
2
$begingroup$
@MatthewGauthier : the rocket equation is completely irrelevant here, because the bullet in this case doesn't have to carry the propellant to be used while in flight. The small compressed air canister can be in the cartridge which stays in the gun and will be ejected later. It doesn't have to fly with the bullet, exhausting the air while in flight.
$endgroup$
– vsz
Apr 24 at 6:27
$begingroup$
@MatthewGauthier : the rocket equation is completely irrelevant here, because the bullet in this case doesn't have to carry the propellant to be used while in flight. The small compressed air canister can be in the cartridge which stays in the gun and will be ejected later. It doesn't have to fly with the bullet, exhausting the air while in flight.
$endgroup$
– vsz
Apr 24 at 6:27
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The Brocock Air Cartridge System seems to fit your description. The cartridges are loaded with an airgun pellet and primed from a pump or diving tank. They are designed to resemble and function as close to real firearm cartridges as possible, rather than being designed for the kind of power you describe.
answered Apr 23 at 20:38
WilliamWilliam
811
New contributor
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Brocock Air Cartridge System seems to fit your description. The cartridges are loaded with an airgun pellet and primed from a pump or diving tank. They are designed to resemble and function as close to real firearm cartridges as possible, rather than being designed for the kind of power you describe.
answered Apr 23 at 20:38
WilliamWilliam
811
New contributor
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Brocock Air Cartridge System seems to fit your description. The cartridges are loaded with an airgun pellet and primed from a pump or diving tank. They are designed to resemble and function as close to real firearm cartridges as possible, rather than being designed for the kind of power you describe.
answered Apr 23 at 20:38
WilliamWilliam
811
New contributor
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
The Brocock Air Cartridge System seems to fit your description. The cartridges are loaded with an airgun pellet and primed from a pump or diving tank. They are designed to resemble and function as close to real firearm cartridges as possible, rather than being designed for the kind of power you describe.
answered Apr 23 at 20:38
WilliamWilliam
811
New contributor
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Apr 23 at 20:38
WilliamWilliam
811
New contributor
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Apr 23 at 20:38
WilliamWilliam
811
answered Apr 23 at 20:38
WilliamWilliam
811
811
New contributor
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
William is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've actually designed (though not built) a cartridge that works like this. By my calculation, and by comparison to conventional precompressed air guns, I think a cartridge the size of a .30-06 round holding pressure similar to that used in PCP air guns should be able to propel a lightweight .30 caliber bullet (say, 100 grain or lighter) at close to the speed of sound, or a heavier bullet at somewhat slower velocity.
This is adequate for hunting small game (squirrels, rabbits, etc.), or marginally adequate for self defense against unarmored assailants -- ballistically, it would be similar power to a .32 ACP handgun cartridge, possibly as good as a .32 H&R Magnum (the former fires an 88 grain bullet at slightly subsonic speed; the latter fires a 100 grain bullet at supersonic muzzle velocity). It would be "single shot" in a handgun, but in a rifle sized arm could be loaded from as magazine, as was done starting in the 1890s with powder weapons.
This could be scaled up some -- a larger air capacity cartridge will give more velocity and/or propel a heavier bullet -- but there's a limit to how big it's practical to make your cartridges. If you need something like a .50 BMG cartridge to hold enough air to propel a 180 grain .35 bullet at Mach 1.5 (i.e. enough power to reliably kill deer at moderate range), the ammunition bulk is likely to limit how many rounds you can carry.
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,724117
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If the projectiles are too bulky I could see possible use in a mounted weapon. There would be no need to move the gun, and the air would allow for less heat to affect the weapon.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:32
$begingroup$
@Alex well tbf if it's a mounted weapon it would probably benefit from a tank (which you could make as durable as you want, since it's mounted anyway)
$endgroup$
– somebody
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've actually designed (though not built) a cartridge that works like this. By my calculation, and by comparison to conventional precompressed air guns, I think a cartridge the size of a .30-06 round holding pressure similar to that used in PCP air guns should be able to propel a lightweight .30 caliber bullet (say, 100 grain or lighter) at close to the speed of sound, or a heavier bullet at somewhat slower velocity.
This is adequate for hunting small game (squirrels, rabbits, etc.), or marginally adequate for self defense against unarmored assailants -- ballistically, it would be similar power to a .32 ACP handgun cartridge, possibly as good as a .32 H&R Magnum (the former fires an 88 grain bullet at slightly subsonic speed; the latter fires a 100 grain bullet at supersonic muzzle velocity). It would be "single shot" in a handgun, but in a rifle sized arm could be loaded from as magazine, as was done starting in the 1890s with powder weapons.
This could be scaled up some -- a larger air capacity cartridge will give more velocity and/or propel a heavier bullet -- but there's a limit to how big it's practical to make your cartridges. If you need something like a .50 BMG cartridge to hold enough air to propel a 180 grain .35 bullet at Mach 1.5 (i.e. enough power to reliably kill deer at moderate range), the ammunition bulk is likely to limit how many rounds you can carry.
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,724117
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If the projectiles are too bulky I could see possible use in a mounted weapon. There would be no need to move the gun, and the air would allow for less heat to affect the weapon.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:32
$begingroup$
@Alex well tbf if it's a mounted weapon it would probably benefit from a tank (which you could make as durable as you want, since it's mounted anyway)
$endgroup$
– somebody
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've actually designed (though not built) a cartridge that works like this. By my calculation, and by comparison to conventional precompressed air guns, I think a cartridge the size of a .30-06 round holding pressure similar to that used in PCP air guns should be able to propel a lightweight .30 caliber bullet (say, 100 grain or lighter) at close to the speed of sound, or a heavier bullet at somewhat slower velocity.
This is adequate for hunting small game (squirrels, rabbits, etc.), or marginally adequate for self defense against unarmored assailants -- ballistically, it would be similar power to a .32 ACP handgun cartridge, possibly as good as a .32 H&R Magnum (the former fires an 88 grain bullet at slightly subsonic speed; the latter fires a 100 grain bullet at supersonic muzzle velocity). It would be "single shot" in a handgun, but in a rifle sized arm could be loaded from as magazine, as was done starting in the 1890s with powder weapons.
This could be scaled up some -- a larger air capacity cartridge will give more velocity and/or propel a heavier bullet -- but there's a limit to how big it's practical to make your cartridges. If you need something like a .50 BMG cartridge to hold enough air to propel a 180 grain .35 bullet at Mach 1.5 (i.e. enough power to reliably kill deer at moderate range), the ammunition bulk is likely to limit how many rounds you can carry.
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,724117
$endgroup$
I've actually designed (though not built) a cartridge that works like this. By my calculation, and by comparison to conventional precompressed air guns, I think a cartridge the size of a .30-06 round holding pressure similar to that used in PCP air guns should be able to propel a lightweight .30 caliber bullet (say, 100 grain or lighter) at close to the speed of sound, or a heavier bullet at somewhat slower velocity.
This is adequate for hunting small game (squirrels, rabbits, etc.), or marginally adequate for self defense against unarmored assailants -- ballistically, it would be similar power to a .32 ACP handgun cartridge, possibly as good as a .32 H&R Magnum (the former fires an 88 grain bullet at slightly subsonic speed; the latter fires a 100 grain bullet at supersonic muzzle velocity). It would be "single shot" in a handgun, but in a rifle sized arm could be loaded from as magazine, as was done starting in the 1890s with powder weapons.
This could be scaled up some -- a larger air capacity cartridge will give more velocity and/or propel a heavier bullet -- but there's a limit to how big it's practical to make your cartridges. If you need something like a .50 BMG cartridge to hold enough air to propel a 180 grain .35 bullet at Mach 1.5 (i.e. enough power to reliably kill deer at moderate range), the ammunition bulk is likely to limit how many rounds you can carry.
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,724117
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,724117
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,724117
answered Apr 23 at 18:23
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,724117
2,724117
$begingroup$
If the projectiles are too bulky I could see possible use in a mounted weapon. There would be no need to move the gun, and the air would allow for less heat to affect the weapon.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:32
$begingroup$
@Alex well tbf if it's a mounted weapon it would probably benefit from a tank (which you could make as durable as you want, since it's mounted anyway)
$endgroup$
– somebody
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If the projectiles are too bulky I could see possible use in a mounted weapon. There would be no need to move the gun, and the air would allow for less heat to affect the weapon.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:32
$begingroup$
@Alex well tbf if it's a mounted weapon it would probably benefit from a tank (which you could make as durable as you want, since it's mounted anyway)
$endgroup$
– somebody
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If the projectiles are too bulky I could see possible use in a mounted weapon. There would be no need to move the gun, and the air would allow for less heat to affect the weapon.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:32
$begingroup$
If the projectiles are too bulky I could see possible use in a mounted weapon. There would be no need to move the gun, and the air would allow for less heat to affect the weapon.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 18:32
$begingroup$
@Alex well tbf if it's a mounted weapon it would probably benefit from a tank (which you could make as durable as you want, since it's mounted anyway)
$endgroup$
– somebody
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@Alex well tbf if it's a mounted weapon it would probably benefit from a tank (which you could make as durable as you want, since it's mounted anyway)
$endgroup$
– somebody
2 days ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144627%2fis-a-self-contained-air-bullet-cartridge-feasible%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
what is the difference between this and an air-rifle? Those can kill and it is easier to pump air into a big container than tiny cartridge
$endgroup$
– aaaaaa
Apr 23 at 17:54
3
$begingroup$
You would never have to pump your gun if you left with enough bullets. I find that an air rifles biggest weakness is the limited amount of shots they can fire. So if there is a large fight where the mechanic I described has to fight more then ten enemies, he would be able to without having to retreat and pull out a bicycle pump to charge up.
$endgroup$
– Alex
Apr 23 at 17:58
$begingroup$
Air rifles are usually charged by breaking and closing again. This bratty kid shows you how - youtu.be/AI2b5n4nkCg - Two or three pumps are usually more than enough. No bicycle equipment needed. Are your self-contained bullets loaded individually or is this an automatic weapon?
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Apr 23 at 18:12
1
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - I doubt three pumps compresses enough air to push a 210 grain sphere of lead at 500fps. - OP, your objective should be lethally propelling lead with air, not trying to make something disposable that I wouldn't want to be in the same room with... "Contents Under Pressure."
$endgroup$
– Mazura
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
How do you create a world with organic chemistry and not discover gunpowder ? No systematic industrial chemistry could avoid finding it. Long before you get to make useful high precision CNCs and compressed air you will discover gunpowder. Gunpowder exists since the 9th century and compressed air to the extent you required would not be available until maybe the 17th century. The cannon was developed in the 12th to 13th century.
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago