4

Design and Thoughts on Distance Shooting

Sat 14 Apr, 2012 09:52 am
Well I have just finished the design phase of a new weapon system, for all you long range target buffs out there, you might be looking forward to the development of it!

I have designed a polymer cap that a bullet is fired through which from the impact and heat of the initial blast, instantly fuses the polymer to the bullet, encapsulating it, yet the polymer remains malleable while it travels through the barrel. The purpose of it remaining malleable is for polymer to be imposed with grooves from the designed rifling, and once the bullet leaves the barrel, the polymer instantly hardens from the pressure and temperature difference.

The point of all of this is to get the bullet to have lift that is equal to the gravitational constant on earth (massive computer simulation was required), this is achieved by the imposed grooves on the polymer that encapsulates the bullet and the rotation of the bullet thereof. Hence when the bullet is rotating, the unique grooves of the polymer create lift that is equal to the gravitational constant. The result of this is a bullet that at initial discharge from the barrel will start with no drop resulting from gravity, and as the rotational speed of the bullet decreases, distance which it drops due to gravity in that instance will increase. Yet not only dose this bullet have less initial drop and a decreased drop rate, it is also less effected by wind due to the grooves and atmospheric conditions due to attributes of the polymer.

I will not post raw calculations, formula's, or ratio's of things like the rate of drop for the decrease in spin, the percent which wind effects the bullet for decrease in spin, and the composition of the polymer to avoid atmospheric conditions. No I will just put it how we all can understand...

Avg: 98% less effected by wind (based on average effective distance of non-polymer coated round )
Avg: 99% less drop (based on average effective distance of non-polymer coated round)

Well this is just food for thought, but would it not be great to fire at current conventional long distances and not need to aim off target or require a spotter? Well this might just be a fictional idea ^^, or it could be a real possibility, no one knows...

(*note, if gun is held at level and a bullet is fired level from that point, it will drop at the same rate as bullet dropped by your hand, not only that, but if you drop and shoot the bullets at the same time and and distance from the ground, they both will land at the same time due to the gravitational constant.)

Discussion start? (ONR)
• Topic Stats
• Top Replies
Type: Discussion • Score: 4 • Views: 1,293 • Replies: 17
No top replies

rosborne979

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 10:04 am
@No0ne,
I don't see how you can get a directional (upward) lift on a rotating object. Unless there is some portion of the projectile which is not rotating (like a small wing on it or something).
roger

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 10:09 am
@rosborne979,
I not only agree, but will share the opinion that if something actually did provide lift, it would be at the expense of velocity.

I understand that early attempts were made with Teflon coated bullets, which were intended to prevent damage to the bore - not to penetrate soft armor.
BillRM

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 10:38 am
@No0ne,
My question is that if the design could work if would be using the angular momentum of the bullet spin to maintain a flat no drop projectile and that would just stop the spin within a meter or so of leaving the barrel as the energy of spin is very small compare to the total kinetics energy of the round.
0 Replies

No0ne

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 10:40 am
@roger,
Yes, you all are very correct, so dose this mean that something that can have less drop through lift must be something that is stationary and dose not rotate, but must provide lift without great expense to velocity? So what would this projectile have to look like, for example, a ring?
dalehileman

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 11:09 am
@No0ne,
NoOne, it sounds like a really great idea and I’m wondering why nobody had yet thought of it. After about 30 years’ plinking with my two sons I’d have a hard time correcting for distance
No0ne

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 11:22 am
@dalehileman,
Mainly because what works, works. So most of the time there is no need to think of other ways to do something when you have a tried and true way of doing it. I have seen scopes which use lasers to measure the distance from you to your target and measure humidity and wind (both the wind at your location and the wind to your target by using mirage) and tell you what adjustments to make all in your scope view, so with technology like that, what ever is cheaper wins and stifles out innovation.
0 Replies

roger

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 11:55 am
@No0ne,
Well, anything that provides lift is going to increase air resistance, whether it rotates or not.

I don't know about ring shaped, but there has been experimentation with completely hollow bullets, probably having a base that separated when leaving the muzzle. Whatever the results, they were not up to the theory.

My personal opinion on distance shooting, which is not really my thing, is that the single most important factor is cross sectional density. I recall that the largest naval guns and the old shore batteries had ranges out to around twenty miles with pretty good accuracy. This in spite of the fact that muzzle velocity was not much different that 30-06.
No0ne

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 12:13 pm
@roger,
Yes, it requires something that can be fired with no angular trajectory as result from the angle of the barrel, yet the projectile must have the ability to have both angular acceleration and speed as it exits the barrel, yet retains at a angular speed (rad/s) to avail the gravitational constant while maintaining a linear trajectory. Now finding a balance to achieve the desired outcome, well, it would be nice if there was such a magic number between all the variables that would allow for decreased drop rate over distance without increasing m/s^2 and m/s.

Now in that lays something interesting, if the negative effects of the angular speed require you to increase the m/s^2 and m/s less to decrease the drop rate, and it requires more of a increase of m/s^2 and m/s in a conventional round to provide the same drop rate, then what is the problem ^^?
roger

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 12:19 pm
@No0ne,
Falling, but never falling down. Put it like that, and the solution is obvious. All you have to do is achieve orbital velocity, and disregard air resistance.

Like many obvious solutions, the obvious is unobtainable.
0 Replies

rosborne979

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 02:03 pm
@No0ne,
No0ne wrote:

Yes, you all are very correct, so dose this mean that something that can have less drop through lift must be something that is stationary and dose not rotate, but must provide lift without great expense to velocity? So what would this projectile have to look like, for example, a ring?

Are you trying to get us to figure out this fantasy thing for you, or do you have something to propose?

If you want us to critique the physics of something you have a design for already, then you're going to have to describe it in a lot more detail.
0 Replies

rosborne979

2
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 02:18 pm
@No0ne,
No0ne wrote:
The point of all of this is to get the bullet to have lift that is equal to the gravitational constant on earth (massive computer simulation was required), this is achieved by the imposed grooves on the polymer that encapsulates the bullet and the rotation of the bullet thereof. Hence when the bullet is rotating, the unique grooves of the polymer create lift that is equal to the gravitational constant.

The statement above is not physically possible if you are talking about a projectile which is rotating longitudinally to the direction of travel.

If you are talking about a "rolling" spherical projectile then you can achieve lift by virtue of differing friction on the top and bottom of the "rolling" object, but you're going to get a curve, not a straight line. And if you're talking about a spinning disk type of projectile, then you would need to incorporate a very high rotation in proportion to forward velocity in order to maintain stability.

Any time you start using air resistance to counteract gravity, then you're really talking about "flying" projectiles with inherent air resistance issues.
No0ne

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 02:19 pm
@rosborne979,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qzeflmJvEU Seems like a very indirect way to ask if I was being sarcastic?
0 Replies

dalehileman

1
Sat 14 Apr, 2012 04:30 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
The statement above is not physically possible if you are talking about a projectile which is rotating longitudinally to the direction of travel.
Unless the force of gravity could somehow be brought into play: Say the grooves are somehow flexible, changing in shape according to the direction of gravitational force as the bullet rotates so that the pressure immediately above is slightly lower or bottom higher

Yes pretty far out but surely not impossible
No0ne

1
Sun 15 Apr, 2012 04:10 pm
@dalehileman,
Very far out there, and the idea might just be impossible. Yet one day, I want a satellite guided gliding artillery round that I can fire off my naval ship and hit a target that is 250 km away with an error radius of four feet.... cheaper than a missile, and great for a third-world nation that cannot shoot it down, not only that, but you would be long gone from where you shot it by the time the round is detected or lands. (heck, might as well wish for 350km)

Jeez it really gets my barrel raised just thinking about it, but I hope it is surely not impossible ^^

dalehileman

1
Mon 16 Apr, 2012 10:06 am
@No0ne,
Me too No, though at 81 my barrel doesn’t stiffen as easily
0 Replies

roger

1
Mon 16 Apr, 2012 10:44 pm
@No0ne,
That would require velocities that you are simply not going to get with a metal projectile moving down a metal barrel.
0 Replies

dalehileman

1
Tue 17 Apr, 2012 06:33 am
@No0ne,
Quote:
that I can fire off my naval ship and hit a target that is 250 km away
Rog is right, it would have to be a powered missile
0 Replies

Related Topics

1. Forums
2. » Design and Thoughts on Distance Shooting