Of Interest to Varmint Hunters
Collapse
X
-
........There was a similar invention tested pre or post WW1 that operated on a similar principle. A truck mounted generator supplied electricity to a motor which spun a vaned disc which propelled steel balls (I assume steel) as projectiles.
Basicly all I recall of this particular device was at the time it was wildly inaccurate. I believe a photo and a bit of info was in "Hatcher's Notebook". of course, that was 1920's tech and we've since landed a man on the moon and put a computer into most households since.
RickSon of the silver stream ..... Bullet caster.
Comment
-
-
A weapon like that proposed would require materials, technology, and power beyond those presently used in military equipment. I would think a large gas turbine engine output stage would have to be direct coupled to drive the rotating assembly in full auto fire. To acheive pointing accuracy competitive to present weapons systems the assembly's RPM would have to be controlled to 1 part in 360,000, and the projectile release point controlled to within 1 micro second.
I don't know of any material that could make a rotating disk containing complex mechanism safe to spin at 1000 ft/sec peripheral speed much less than 8000. Supersonic windage would blot up a large part of the system's available power and the windage would render the vicinity inhospitable if not hazardous to the gunner.
Then there's precession of what amounts to a huge gyroscope to elevate it. Would one man be able to do so with muscle alone? I don't think so.
What about the lucky incoming round? This weapon has a large target silhouette and the rotating assembly contains roughly a freight train's kinetic energy. What damage could be inflicted on the platform and crew should the DREAD take a hit and the drum burst.
As for no recoil, that's pure nonsense. The recoil energy would be the algebraic sum of the accelerations along the projectile's path before release.
Silent? Also nonsense. It may not be quite as noisy as an M-60 but its sure to be as noisy as a helicoptor take-off.
What we have here is a Buck Rogers application of the excellent Roto-Brade media blaster where a media (sand) transport system introduces the stuff in the center of a rotating vaned impellor. The media flies off tangentially to impact at 300 ft/sec on the work which is transported on a carousel through the blast. The blasting action of the Roto-Brade is powerful and far more efficient than air.
As a weapons system the DREAD system is more of a subject for Popular Mechanics than a topic of practical discussion until the power, technology, and materials problems have been addressed.
Don't get me wrong. I think the idea has intrinsic merit but it's the responsibility of the proposer to anticipate the obvious practical objections to its implementation and to offer either remedies or demonstrate them as inapplicable. The DREAD as represented in the link has been offered as a brainstorm topic unsupported by sensible discussion.
[This message has been edited by Forrest Addy (edited 05-14-2005).]
Comment
-
-
Yeah, their babble about no recoil is idiotic. Simple conservation of momentum dictates that that is impossible. So does newton's second law. You can't send something flying off at 8000 fps (or any speed at all) without it pushing back on you. Their lack of comprehension of that basic fact renders any of their other claims extremely suspect.
-Justin
Comment
-
-
Comment