posted
So you don't think that further development of incredibly lethal weapons is cool and were just making conversation?
I am sorely disapointed in you, Nim.
I want one of these soooo bad. Car mounted and rapid fire.
Though, from a design POV, I wish they'd just design it to accelerate a penny to balistic speeds. Think of the time, money and availability advantages in that alone.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Jason: "So you don't think that further development of incredibly lethal weapons is cool and were just making conversation? I am sorely disapointed in you, Nim."
Read my post again. Stretch out with your feelings. Especially "satisfying to discuss" and "What I say here, I say for the sake of conversation".
Then check out my thread in Gen. Sci-Fi about the XM-8 future US battle rifle.
Shit, Harold, I expect more from you.
About ballistic speeds, has any gun managed to fire a shell out into space? I seem to remember a fleeting comment on that in that "Doomsday Gun" movie with Frank Langella and Kevin Spacey. Anyway, this technology would probably get priority on naval vessels or attack aircraft, bigger scale. Which reminds me of those EMP-bombs the US dropped on Bagdhad in the last campaign. How large an area did they affect?
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Well, what do you want to discuss? It's a different but not radically new way of accelerating a projectile to ludicrous speed, which means the technology will probably wind up in military applications where such speeds are a plus, which means a reciprocal of the technology will probably wind up in military applications where they aren't. That is the order of things.
And to shoot a shell into orbit you would need 1) a really really really high amount of energy and 2) a really really really long barrel so it could attain minimum escape velocity plus however much extra speed your shell would lose due to friction and gravity on the short trip spaceward. I don't think such Big Bertha guns exist anywhere but in the minds of crazed mechanical engineers. So far.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: [QBThough, from a design POV, I wish they'd just design it to accelerate a penny to balistic speeds. Think of the time, money and availability advantages in that alone. [/QB]
You ought to watch "Mythbusters" on Discovery. They made a penny gun out of a staple gun. Made a nice impression on the cement they fired it at.
B.J.
(And I still don't think they busted the chicken cannon myth.)
Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Cartman: "Well, what do you want to discuss?"
For starters, the phenomenon behind this new type of gun. An inductive acceleration on a non-magnetic projectile? Generating an inductive-current in the object? And what about that older concept? A railgun based on a Lorentz-force rail-accelerator? Is that viable or in use today? Also, back to my earlier question, are the EMP-bombs (that were used in the last Iraqi war) using the same technology as this pulse rifle concept?
Imagine the Next Gen MBT, with fuel-cell powered engines, one of those new electro-shields burning up incoming RPG-7 rockets, and a main pulse gun flinging away titanium projectiles at extreme velocities, without the bang and smoke, nor much of a recoil, and quick follow-up shots due to a semi-auto slaved, personless turret?
This is what I'm talking about. Perhaps now U C, Jason.
-------------------- "I'm nigh-invulnerable when I'm blasting!" Mel Gibson, X-Men
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Induction occurs in all electrical conductors, not just magnetic ones. And aluminum just so happens to have VERY GOOD electrical conductivity. So when the stuff is exposed a magnetic field, it's electrified (negatively charged). But the coil inducing the current is ALSO negatively charged, so both charges repel each other and the ring careens down the barrel with equal force. That's why the coil has to be in close proximity to the ring and why the field has to be brief and intense, or the acceleration would be agonizingly (uselessly) slow.
EMP bombs just dump as much current through a coil as possible during detonation to fry every semiconductor within their blast radius. Same principle (induction), different application.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
