US Military Developing New Designs for Hypervelocity Firearms

I'm surprised to see this hasn't been brought up here yet but the US Army revealed plans to develop a new approach to bolt and chamber design that would allow cartridges to be loaded to insane pressures (up to 100ksi compared to today's 62ksi for 5.56).

This is all centered around a new bolt lockup design that uses a screw (hasn't this been common on artillery pieces for over a century? Why is this just now being tried in small arms?) and a collet surrounding the brass case to keep it from expanding against the chamber wall so tightly that extraction becomes impossible. They're also playing around with tapered barrels which has me curious about what they've done to prevent barrel wear with these absurd velocities and the obvious increase in stress and friction associated with tapered bore designs. The drawbacks in terma of durability are obvious as many of these ideas have been tried in the past only to be abandoned as the best materials available still were not enough to overcome the increased wear associated with hypervelocity speeds and pressures. Maybe they've made some sort of materials science breakthrough in terms of barrel material? A ceramic coating perhaps? It's still a very neat development that could result in a huge leap in firearm performance if it pays off.

Article Link: techlinkcenter.org/us-army-researchers-are-turning-it-up-to-11-to-make-hypervelocity-firearms/

Attached: ARL-collet-illustration-color.jpg (914x410 28.81 KB, 67.97K)

Other urls found in this thread:

invidio.us/watch?v=X1W8iz8DyRw
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welin_breech_block
thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/10/29/level-iv-unbeatable-armor-caliber-problem-tungsten/
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiM6Z2c04vjAhXWX80KHWCmCuIQFjABegQIAhAB&url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705814034493&usg=AOvVaw17lfgKOjuYLvxFmyVJbNZM
pollmill.com/private/forms/what-is-the-size-of-grace-merete-yutuc-s-nipple-fk5qtmj
youtube.com/watch?time_continue=200&v=kqW3JvrHKrk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TKB-022PM
modernfirearms.net/en/assault-rifles/urz-plamen-2/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeeze_bore
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_Bofors_Dynamics_CBJ-MS
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littlejohn_adaptor
quarryhs.co.uk/sgun.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

New space gun program soon?

Probably because conventional small arms breech/chambers are perfectly capable of withstanding pressure from conventional cartridges and thus did not require the use of a complicated and historically, its been hard to produce a large quantity of interrupted screw mechanisms for small arms.

In addition there are a handful of black powder rifles like the Ferguson rifle used a screw breech before the introduction of cartridges.

Attached: 1280px-SIA-2004-26282-02.jpg (450x438 35.83 KB, 29.16K)

Slightly unrelated, I found this underneath OP's article; now ZOGbots will be placed in the Glorious Cube to undergo a spiritual transition and awaken as babykilling fed killers.

Attached: AVE NEX ALEA.PNG (1406x859, 939.64K)

The awarded patent for the breech and the patent application for the collet assembly.

Firearms development seems to have waned since it's heydays in the 19th century and early 20th century. Mostly mass production techniques and chemical engineering of propellants are all that we see. Instead of leading technology in the 19th century, firearms are based off of advancements from other technologies by the 20th century. Now in the 21st century firearms are almost steampunk accessories for "muh sekkin uhmuhndmuhnt" losers. (*see Zig Forums)

We are reaching levels of US Army that shouldn't be possible!
Let's see what we have here.
Put a casket magazine into a rifle, and you are already there. Why would you have to develop a completely new weapon instead of just making a high-capacity magazine? I can feel that it will be something retarded, like an externally driven magazine. Besides, what's the point of a magazine-fed machine gun in this day and age?
Instead of making a bullpup so that you can have a 20" long barrel in a weapon that is still short enough for room cleaning and 5.56 works with it just fine (after all, it was designed for a 20" barrel) they are developing new arms and ammunition. Great.
You can go even further beyond if you have a fixed bolt and a floating breech. Time and again I have to point at the Steyr ACR: invidio.us/watch?v=X1W8iz8DyRw
You could even use a non-telescopic cartridge with a straight walled metal case, because the primer is on the wall of the cartridge, therefore you can use the head just fine to push out the already fired cartridge.
I do admit that extraction with the floating chamber might have some technical challenges, but I suspect that the proper choice of materials might solve that. Would coating the inside of the chamber with teflon work?
Now this is something I can get behind. But on the picture it looks like that it has a long rifled section followed by a non-rifled tapered section, which is the opposite of how the Germans did it if I'm not mistaken. The rifling slows down the projectile a bit, and it's perfectly fine to rifle only the very end of the barrel after the taper.
So you will be able to buy these patents and do whatever you want? It's strange, considering how paranoid they seem to be with these things. Just look at ITAR.
Reading this is extremely painful.

You are thinking of interrupted screws, if I understand correctly they are using an actual screw that is literally an obsolete technology since Welin's invention: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welin_breech_block
It's basically the same as what small arms with rotating bolts have, just with more steps. The Ross rifle already did that, and today you could go even further beyond with e.g. 8 lugs that have 4 steps each for a retarded amount of locking surfaces, but without any of this autism.

There is a new school for NCOs in the Hungarian armed forces named Steel Cube. If someone asks why it's called that, then they reply that because it's not aluminium.

Attached: Ross_rifle_bolt_head.jpg (1672x2075 101.59 KB, 193.39K)

Correction: you might want to seat the bullet so deep that it's fully inside the case, like in the cartridge of the Nagant revolver. This way you can be sure that the projectile doesn't get deformed during the reloading process.

You know what? Arms development is so stagnant that I don't even care if they're wasting money on meme projects anymore. Give me absurd and overly complicated kraut magic-tier weapons. Give me 10 inch FN-90 clones with super-expensive bullets that travel at over 4,000 feet per second.

Give me anything that isn't even more fucking M4 clones

That's a hell of a boost.

If I'm reading this right the ammo for such a design would be conventional except for the propellant.

Add something like a tungsten core jacketed round and armor would be much less effective.

Honestly there isn't much to innovate on. That jump from BP to smokeless cause a bunch of change due to smokeless's wondrous ability to not fuck everything up. Until we get some retard strength steel from a new metallurgy discovery we're stuck to what we got from the 1900's in terms of tech.

Attached: 1388207019967.jpg (2880x2078, 1.1M)

Maybe graphene metal composites
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiM6Z2c04vjAhXWX80KHWCmCuIQFjABegQIAhAB&url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705814034493&usg=AOvVaw17lfgKOjuYLvxFmyVJbNZM

wow. even better guns for all the frizzy haired tranny mulattos in the gillatary to play with

Attached: black power west point military academy.jpg (962x882, 228.76K)

Then you have to deal with over-penetration in CQB, which runs contrary to the goals of counter-insurgency policy. The goal is to MINIMIZE the amount of collateral damage so that locals don't turn against you. Hard to do that when your spaceforce bullpup rifles fires FMJ at 3000 fucking feet per second that end up going through five buildings before stopping because you decided you needed a universal gun that can handle 600m+ engagements as well as building clearing.

This shit is UCP and the F-35 all over again. A shitty idea being passed through so they can try and justify having a "universal firearm" when the reality of warfare is that things are specialized or good fucking reason.

Attached: 5d5269ab362e6362fe8fd5a98a5e963645ab58546cb7af150f8f27f2475cff96.png (588x531, 337.97K)

It's stagnant because any money they invest in reinventing the wheel will only lead to diminished returns. More often than not good enough is actually good enough.

And people wonder why the US can't put shitholes like Vietnam, Afghanistan or Iraq in their place.

pollmill.com/private/forms/what-is-the-size-of-grace-merete-yutuc-s-nipple-fk5qtmj

Firing fast has never been an issue, we can do this since the 80s. Problem has always been barrel wear and temperature.

MUST KILL ZOGBOTS! KILL ALL ZOGBOTS !! RIP AND TEAR! RIP AND TEAR !!!! DOTR ONLY WAY! KILL KIL KILL !!!!! KILL ZOGBOTS ZOGBOTS MUST DIE

Attached: images (4).jpeg (253x199, 17.56K)

It's BS, they spread rumors of such things and foreign super power such as russia then start trying to develop the same thing and make gains in doing so, and the US then gets scientists and engineers working on such projects to defect.
That's how the US mil has always got it best stuff.

yea calling bullshit on that, sorry, i hope you're not from the south

What if you had a big bore with a very slow twist. You could use sabots with very low drag projectiles for longer range and armour piercing whilst keeping the option of using full bore subs for room clearing/raids.

Fuck me, that was some terrible use of punctuation and phrasing.

I'm sorry, I can't see the high tech expenses combined with morons and literal faggots joining the US army as a good thing, you guys are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for fatties that have microfractures.
Those cyberpunk guns look interesting, but will they work without logistics? Without high quality ammunition?

Zogbots must die faggot

Seems to be a weapon designed to excel in urban warfare or close quarters anyway.

I much prefer the other Magyar. Please don't further tarnish the reputation of your nationality on this board.

Attached: 57f4611c6ad6e108f882ff0b1db56a3ff218bf17f4976fc5b03961c093bf957d.png (399x322, 41.72K)

I really want somebody to invest in the development of a tank that is completely impervious to all known anti-tank sabot from both front and sides, while also equiped with addon armor that makes even a Kornet ATGM useless.
Sure, it would be both expensive and heavy, but god damn it would be one badass tank that would force other countries to come up with a countermeasure.

How much are you offering for this defense contract?

Why?

I think that real world performance of M193 5.56 and 7N6 5.45 show that the exact opposite would be the case. The faster you push either of those bullets, the more they fragment and/or yaw upon hitting anything of substance. Pushing a roughly similar bullet to 4,000fps from one of these rifles would lead to it virtually powderizing inside the target if the results from that oft-posted chart/infographic of 5.56 fragmentation by velocity are extrapolated.

If anything, this is a good solution to the overpenetration/"icepicking" issues that arose with the adoption of the 14.5" barreled M4. Pushing velocities back up to, or beyond, that of 5.56 out of a 20" barrel while retaining the maneuverability and light weight of a short barreled carbine is an great idea if it actually works.

That's a good observation.

Increasing terminal effectiveness with conventional projectiles from shorter barrels wasn't an angle I'd considered. Seemed more for armor but that's a very valid point.

Fake and gay.

well that'd be neat

that wasn't the point of those wars. the point was to cull the white warrior class in society so the stay-behinds are a more docile people pleasing to their masters, and to secure an international opium trade (this happened in both Nam and afghanistan)

government is never on your side. anything they want you to do, you should refuse.

Bound to be yet another malfunctioning piece of shit no doubt. Add it to the countless other garbage equipment the US Military has adopted since 2000.

We need to go back to the M16A2 and BDU

Attached: us-army-soldiers-of-co-a-2nd-battalion-75th-rangers-move-across-the-flight-28a61d.jpg (2560x1681 989.18 KB, 374.34K)

It all sounds great until they decide you're the bad guy.

Its called the armata mate.

Whorenugget

If they wanted a higher muzzle velocity they could've just lined the barrel with sex lube and banana peels

That's the big problem with hyper velocity. In fact, that one dood on the Youtube loaded 30 caliber black tip AP bullets into 300 Win Mag with the predictable results that it DECREASED penetration, because at some point the bullet failed due to the excess energy and velocity. Push a bullet too hard and it will simply fail on impact, in fact push some bullets fast enough and they will rip themselves apart from twisting too fast, or the fact that lead and soft lead alloys will deform badly from air resistance alone when the velocity is high enough. Old steel armor piercing projectiles used to have a velocity ceiling of about 2,400 fps if I'm correct on that, maybe higher, because at a high enough velocity the old steel projectiles would simply shatter on hard plate armor, and do worse than if they were lower velocity.

A good example of this principle is the 357 Magnum. If I'm going to shoot 158 grain bullets, and I'm going to use various power loads, I'm going to choose vastly different bullets for each power selection. If I have to use super light 38 Special, 158 grain semi wad cutters. If I can use 38 Special +p, I'll use semi wad cutter hollow points. If I use full power magnum loads, semi jacketed hollow points. If I'm going to use my rifle with full power magnum loads, I'll be back to a full jacketed soft point so the bullet won't fragment apart when I want it to hold together to do maximum damage. Low enough velocity and energy, I either need to choose a solid non expanding bullet (SWC) and once the power and velocity get high enough I need a hollow point of light construction, then as the energy increases a harder built hollow point, then eventually no hollow point at all. We eventually need heavy construction, eventually possibly better materials. Push those bullets through a 35 Whelen, at full velocity and not reduced, and you will have a potential disaster as far as terminal performance is invovled.

Eventually this means that making a bullet that will penetrate barriers will become HARDER than easier. You will have to start choosing harder, rarer materials you can't find in enough quantities to use for war. So you either have a bullet that fragments against EVERYTHING and fails to penetrate barriers when they are needed to penetrate those barriers, or design a bullet you can't even make because there isn't enough material for it (and will ice pick just as badly as the 62 grain 5.56 ball). Velocity is not magic, and it sometimes creates more problems than what its worth.

You forgot weakening pissraels neighbors, for eventual greater israel

Don't you mean desk warrior class? Or Keyboard warrior class? Because that's what you are.

This is why I hate Zig Forumstards. All they ever do is prattle on about (((them))) and "muh rope day" and talk about how they're paragons of white virtue or how much they love uncle Hitler. Aside from HWINDU, what has Zig Forums actually done? What have they built? What have they accomplished? Not much.

t. butthurt zoggie

Zig Forums killed muslims and jews, which is more than what Zig Forums does.

Last thing Zig Forums has done is firing blind at niggers and then get arrested.

I'm not sure if Tarrant is more Zig Forums or more Zig Forums, but I think he's both.

That was half Zig Forums. This Zig Forums is pretty much all Zig Forumsacks; fuck, pretty much every board besides Zig Forums and a few obscure leftist and apoliticakl boards are.

guns are for infantry. infantry is white.

That has less to do with affirmative action college students, and more to do with all the dual citizens we have in congress

faggots get pog jobs like admin, logistics, supply. The actual grunts are mostly white cuckservatives.
There will probably be one of these fancy toys per battalion. If they are actually good, maybe some Special Ops guys will get some.

Exactly, at some point you just treat it like a micrometeor impact and get a whipple shield.

They managed to spread memes among themselves.

Reminds me of this old post I read way back when on the high road forums. In seriousness though I wonder if it would be feasible for snipers. If you can retain the bullet weight and ballistic coefficient then getting the velocity close to 6000fps would extend the range quite a bit. A future where mile long shots are a dime a dozen?

Attached: 4700fps remington 700.png (1850x532, 60.1K)

You still need a rifleman capable of those shots, which most people aren't, especially under stress of combat. Also, low velocity hand cast bullets in a 45-70 using obsolete blackpowder can reach out to 1,000 yards in the right hands, better than a high tech jacketed bullet at high velocity in a 5.56 NATO. We think about how great flat shooting high velocity is at closer ranges, we keep forgetting we need big heavy bullets to get good BC and good long range performance.

Go ahead, push a 75 grain match bullet in a .224 rifle at 6,000 fps, considering that's the kind of bullet you will NEED to get long range results, or heavier, and tell me about the recoil. I've killed stuff with a 220 Swift, its in a category different than a 223. Keep punching it up northwards, it only gets worse.

Bigger calibers can achieve better ballistic coefficient. Throw a 168 grain Match King at 5,000, or 6,000 fps, tell me how that feels to shoot? With a 175 MK, how about the heavier 308 caliber offerings? If you get the chance, shoot a 300 super magnum of some caliber, throw a 150 grain bullet at 3,500 fps and tell me how controllable that rifle is, how much it kicks, what kind of massive blast it produces? What kind of barrel you really want to harness that gunpowder. A 125 grain bullet at 5,000 fps will kick harder, buck harder with muzzle blast, and will eventually have WORSE long range performance than Elmer Fuddpucker with his Winchester 70 hunting rifle in 30-06 shooting a 200 grain match bullet at 2,400 fps.

Keep in mind, we want long range performance we don't focus on velocity. What's the velocity of the highest BC 338 Lapua loads? What's the velocity of a long range 50 BMG load? If you can get a high BC bullet to 2,400 fps+, that might be all you need. Long rangers prefer heavier slower bullets, because BC eventually matters more than velocity. And we already have heavy, "slow" loads in many calibers that already kick "too much" or kick hard enough for combat rapid fire purposes.

Also, what kind of accuracy can we get out of 100k psi? Many match shooters already prefer to stay away from the 65,000 psi SAAMI limit for many cartridges they load for, much less beyond. What kind of gunpowder, what kind of effects of pressure will affect accuracy? No point in a bullet that can have theoretical flat shooting to X yards it if can't shoot Y MOA to be effectively accurate at that range.

inb4 "But PALMA shooters use ~150 grain bullets", yes, they make it work, yet everyone else still uses heavy bullets with high BC.

Attached: 84fb399ee9ed38966718fc70c889892d7492df88733f14e4039750df5702ae68.png (587x571, 226.23K)

this. making small atgms or suicide drones would be superior for long range sniping since you can correct the flightpath midflight.
also offtopic but imagine how small we could make drones. see that fly on the wall? its soviet spy!

The hell is that supposed to mean?

Not that user, but an externally driven magazine would be a magazine that uses either recoil or gas pressure to operate a mechanism that advances the cartridges in the magazine one position. A good example would be the pan magazines on early light machine guns.

I enjoyed the ".308 in .270 rifle" story and believe that is possible, but no way an AK bolt can withstand that kind of pressure with those locking lugs. They are half the size of the lugs on a Remington 700 which means their total force bearing area is far less than half that of a 700, never mind that of high power bolt actions using three lugs or something like a Weatherby bolt. Peak Fuddlore right there.

No, I will say that a very high quality AK might fire a round and cycle at that kind of pressure. Except it would only do so once because those lugs would be sheered clean off, turning into a one-time-use blowback action.

...

Modern steel bolt action rifles are quite strong, but plenty of people have manged to fuck that up, too. Interesting that in some official reloading books that they basically tell you that you have some margin of error at the MAP because Mausers and 700's and all in modern steel can safely handle modest amounts of over pressure without danger, basically meaning that 65,000 psi MIGHT not be a complete limitation to them, even if we are all wiser to stay there. Still, you see people making Youtube videos about breaking parts, getting gassed, hurting themselves, hurting their guns from overcharge. Personal anecdote I know about a local fellow who enjoyed a miracle after SHEERING the fucking lugs off his 700 with a bad load, luckily the bolt only had enough force to break his glasses from what I head. "Pedestrians should not confuse right of way with immortality" and "reloaders should not confuse strong actions with indestructability".

Everyone should keep in mind that proof loads for strong action rifles with modern steel are way, way, way higher than 65k psi. They keep the actual pressure and loads a secret to the industry to keep retards from getting retarded ideas to do retarded things. A brand new Mauser or 700 or falling block action rifle might actually fire a handful of 140k psi rounds before it leaves the factory for all we know, hearing they have 90-120k psi would not shock me. But with that in mind, remember that a handful to test it will be fine, an attempted lifetime of those pressure loads will mean a short lifespan on the gun, perhaps for the shooter. That being said, it would be interesting to see if anyone in the know could tell us what armorers with AK's of this and that actually use for proof loads and what the maximum an AK can handle before it fucks up kablooey. Increase the pressure, you will fuck up the lugs like you say, far earlier than a good bolt action, but it might survive a high pressure round or two.

Also, keep in mind falling blocks are the strongest of all actions. A Ruger No 1 really hoesntly can't be beat for max pressure outside a test cannon. If there are goofy stories about over pressure rounds not blowing a gun up, it might be a falling block more than a bolt action. They might be able to really, really, really fuck up a load and maybe have that gun survive and keep ticking. Even then you can break something, and hurt yourself. Could I hotload 45-70 for my modern steel 1885 Winchester? I betcha I could. Betcha I won't, either.

tl;dr, Best not to know what a gun can take before it fails from firsthand experience.

If the want to use a pan magazine then that's just ridiculous, if it's something more like a box magazine then i don't see how they are going to pull that off.

t.butthurt boomermutt

Why do you need higher velocities for CQC? Would it not make more sense to implement this in DMRs or standard rifles to increase ranged proficiency and decrease bullet drop? I would think that in small spaces like room clearing higher RoF is much more important than velocities. What exactly is their reasoning for using this for close quarters?

Calico. It was a drum mag that used a windlass and a spring to push the bullets into the breech. Vid related, link for timecode below:
youtube.com/watch?time_continue=200&v=kqW3JvrHKrk

I suppose they could do the same thing with a large box magazine, quad stacked casket, to get something like 120 rounds of ammo.
Casket magazines always had problems with springs, just looking at the spring contraption of a casket magazine gives me hives. I'd be interested in seeing how winding it externally would be used.

In G11 you had to wind the trigger? I don't remember.

Frankly if America DOESNT do anything to improve infantry forces, they're going to get laughed out of every conflict.

This. Also this is talking about testing loads for the AK, which are very high. Every 1000th rifle that comes out of Kalashnikov is fired with incrementally stronger test loads. It's possible that some freak of metallurgy had an AK survive (ie not explode) a test load of that pressure, even if it didn't cycle afterward.

And now I've remembered that there was already a quite advanced bullpup with a falling block(esque) action: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TKB-022PM

That's not true, most militaries want a relatively RoF of around 600 for their submachine guns, because with a high RoF you just spray your whole magazine into the room with one pull of the trigger, and you'll be lucky if a few shots land on what you were aiming for. To illustrate how important it is, the Skorpion even has this funky czechnology to slow down the RoF.

The easiest solution is to just make a belt-fed weapon that has the whole feed system integrated into a replaceable unit, so you can reload life if it was a magazine-fed weapon: modernfirearms.net/en/assault-rifles/urz-plamen-2/

depleted uranium rounds
/out

I'll admit i am a tad curious to how well the tapered barrel would work.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeeze_bore
The theory is solid, and it was invented for hunting rifles. It's basically the same as flechette ammunition, but without any of the downsides. I'd say these are the real questions:

i dont think barrels would be such an issue. i mean fuck they are planning on using it for smgs, right? they dont really need to be even rifled for that.
i guess easilly exchangable barrels would be ideal, but again, locking system would need to be robust as fuck at these velocities.
i am more curious how they plan on making an loading mechanism

I'm working on a squeeze bore barrel design that also uses progressive oval rifling.
the oval rifling doesn't tear up the jacket like progressive cut rifling can, and is easier to clean.
Barrels could be produced by hammer forging or ECM.

could you tell us more? your work seems quite interesting. are you a gunsmith? amator or professional? does oval riffling get fucked by big loads?

Attached: blackColShepard.jpg (680x680, 50.33K)

First a disclaimer: I haven't made a prototype yet, so all of this is just theory right now. I may get a prototype made with ECM later this year. The idea was on the back burner for a while because I thought it needed to be hammer forged, and I don’t have that level of tooling.

The concept is an attempt to minimize the issues that progressive rifling and squeeze bore have.

problems this rifling system solves:
Jacket damage (problem with progressive rifling)
Progressive rifling tends to tear up jackets because the helix angle changes as the bullet moves down the barrel. This is kind of like cross threading a bolt and can end with the jacket flying off the bullet. With this system the bullet is only deformed so the jacket stays intact.

Ease of mass production (problem with progressive rifling and squeeze bore)
This rifling can be formed by hammer forging. The mandrel will come out nicely because of the taper and lack of hard edges.

Cleaning problems (problem with progressive rifling and squeeze bore)
A smooth bore is easier to clean. Cleaning a non-tapered progressive barrel probably wouldn't be too bad, but a rifled squeeze bore would probably need a few different sized brushes to deal with the taper.

This rifling system also seems to be well suited to ECM. Two problems with ECM: it doesn't do hard, precise edges very well; and it usually needs to be lapped or polished to get a good finish. This system should be fairly tolerant of being slightly oversize since the bullet is getting squeezed down anyway, and lapping will be easy because it’s smooth inside. Lapping should be doable with a soft rope (think the back end of a boresnake) charged with abrasive compound.

I've been thinking about the same thing, and I think you should try solid brass bullets once you have the prototype barrel. With 3D printing and lost wax casting you could make any kind of prototype bullet you want (although only in relatively low numbers). You don't have to worry about the jacket if there is none, and it looks like projectiles for tapered barrels are essentially the same size as the ˝end calibre˝, just with oversized gas checks.

Attached: APBCT.jpg (690x1024 122.83 KB, 61.01K)

what is wrong with americans? why cant americans into engineering anymore? could they ever??

Jews.

H1B Pajeets.

Yes, but you fail to see the point. This abortion wasn't designed to be an effective weapon, but to steal taxpayer money away, just like pretty much every retarded US military program that never seems to go anywhere while wasting ungodly amounts of money.

Outside of specialist applications like long range shooting why are hypervelocities needed? Wouldnt they reduce short to medium range lethality and increase the risk of collateral damage because of over penetration?
The decreased cartridge size is nice but wouldn’t it be better to aim for more suitable velocities and thus more practical & even smaller round?

Why are rifle velocities needed in this application? Is body armour that effective?

Wouldn’t this slow down rate of fire by adding further actions to the mechanism before firing?

How does the collet stop this without the bullet jamming in it instead?

Non of the things mentioned are revolutionary. Its just a reapplication of conventional tech.
Can they make this work in a lab? No doubt.
Will it result in a usable firearm that is a meaningful improvement? Probably not.
The only real improvement i can see from normal use would be smaller cartridges at the cost of higher manufacturing & maintenance cost.
The useful of this in more specialist applications (anti tank rifles, lol) is interesting & could be worth the cost.

Attached: Darek-Zabrocki-Concept-Art-march6-small-vfx.jpg (1920x1080, 763.33K)

Is there a way to calculate what kind of velocities can be achieved with squeeze bores?

There are many ways to apply the squeeze bore idea, so there's not "one way" to calculate what will happen. The basic concept is if you have a given volumetric flowrate of gas, it will have to move faster as the tube it's moving through gets smaller.

About the simplest squeeze bore is Arthur Langsford's design. He re-barreled .22lr rifles with .17 cal barrels. The barrels had an extended forcing cone and faster twist rifling (for the long bullet). This design gained about 200 FPS over the same cartage fired out of a standard barrel. This extra speed combined with the higher sectional density (and probably higher BC) meant that the bullet had much better penetration, could be used at longer ranges, and was less affected by crosswinds.

On the other end purpose built squeeze bore rifles with projectiles designed for it can get velocities over 5000 FPS.

The next stop is light gas guns. They get velocities over 25,000 FPS. I'm done writing for now, so if you want to know more just google it. There's plenty of info.

Sounds like the CBJ-MS. That gun never went anywhere, to my recollection (or it's all top secret) and info about it is very sparse.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_Bofors_Dynamics_CBJ-MS

Attached: cbj_lmg901.jpg (650x446 58.14 KB, 123.24K)

We could just use DU since we have uranium mines

wouldnt the whole project be much easier if they used caseless ammo? no need for extraction, which will get fucked at such pressures.

G-11 please come back

I wish that gun went somewhere. Combined with its AP ammo and it could shred things up nicely.
Is it because tungsten ammo is expensive or something?

It's basically a gun with a bull action and a bull barrel, with special snowflake overpressure cartridges. There's nothing inherently interesting about the design, they're just throwing money at the problem. Even people in WWII could have built similar guns if they just threw enough money into an infantry weapon.

Each cartridge for example was tungsten APFSDS that cost four dollars to fire once. What the fuck was the point? Maybe some ninja unit somewhere could make use of them, but guns like this can't be used widely.

One of their marketing points was that you can take any weapon chambered for 9mm Parabellum and they just need a new barrel, and possibly a new main spring, and they can fire this cartridge. You could take basically any ww2 SMG and they would work. Damn, if you have a working MP-18,I then you can rechamber it to fire this tungsten ammo. The gun itself is admittedly just an UZI clone with a few extras.

Attached: A Colonia Rostallo Kulturális és Hadtörténeti Alapítvány római kori hagyományőrző tagjai az EP-választáson a nemesvámosi polgármesteri hivatalban kialakított szavazókörben 2019. május 26-án.jpeg (2000x1333, 440.5K)

Answering here, because we do have a thread for this.
First and foremost, pushing a projectile that has a bigger calibre with the same amount of gas is more efficient. The problem is of course that you have to push a projectile with a worse ballistic coefficient, and that's why squeezing it down to a smaller diameter helps. Second, the gas has to flow through a smaller hole, and that speeds it up. I don't know the name of the physical phenomena, especially not in English, but the choke of a shotgun works the same way. There is also a custom exhaust system in cars that works on the same principle, but again, I don't know its English name. In Hungarian that part is called a "gas accelerator".
They are competing technologies, because they do the same thing, that is, pushing a bigger projectile inside the barrel than what will be fired. With a smoothbore you can fire both saboted and full-calibre projectiles, but they have to be fin stabilized. You also have to deal with the sabot, which is quite a challenge. Squeeze bore requires a more complicated barrel, but the technology itself is simpler. You can even make a muzzle device:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littlejohn_adaptor
quarryhs.co.uk/sgun.htm
But as the first article notes you need special projectiles, and that is especially a problem if you already have quite a lot of non-special ones.
If you want to fire saboted projectiles, then smoothbore is simply better.
You'd squeeze the sabot onto the projectile, and then it would somehow have to shed it. Not impossible, but you'd make it way too complicated for dubious gains.

Can't we adapt the new smoothbore tank guns projectile designs to bullets?
Spin stabilizing isn't that hard.
Forget about the tech part of the shell, but wouldn't just making a tailed .30 caliber bullet that sits in a .410 cal shotgun shell work? Those shells don't hit the smoothbore, the barrel is just there to channel the pressure.
Virtually it's how some shotguns shells already work, it would be the same but with a gun designed to withstand much higher pressure.

The shell in that PDF seems to be a full-calibre one, using the same technology in a .410 shotshell wouldn't give us anything useful. It would be just a fancy slug. Maybe you could load it into a .460 S&W case, but even then you'd just have a .460 S&W with a very fancy projectile for smoothbore barrels. To make it .30 calibre you'd have to give it a sabot, and then we are back at Project SPIW.

Yeah I'm retarded.
But my original point was it's not a sabot, the only thing that is discarded is the gas seal/wad around the deploy-able fins so they won't try to deploy before they leave the barrel.
And yet they get very good accuracy at long range, granted 2500m for a 120mm isn't exactly long but it's with an ammo that is extremely as inconsistent as it can get (it's density all over the place).

Compared with the current standard of solid bullets and rifled bores, I'm not sure what would we gain. Accuracy is not a problem with rifled barrels, and rifling a barrel seems to be simpler than putting moving fins on every single bullet. Maybe it would worth it if a smoothbore barrel made the projectiles significantly faster, but that's not the case if I'm not mistaken.