Is a self contained air-bullet cartridge feasible? Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? ...
What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?
Will I lose my paid in full property
What were wait-states, and why was it only an issue for PCs?
Has a Nobel Peace laureate ever been accused of war crimes?
All ASCII characters with a given bit count
Retract an already submitted Recommendation Letter (written for an undergrad student)
Where/What are Arya's scars from?
RIP Packet Format
Israeli soda type drink
Is it OK if I do not take the receipt in Germany?
What to do with someone that cheated their way though university and a PhD program?
Is there a verb for listening stealthily?
What is /etc/mtab in Linux?
Why isPrototypeOf() returns false?
Mechanism of the formation of peracetic acid
Married in secret, can marital status in passport be changed at a later date?
What was Apollo 13's "Little Jolt" after MECO?
Why did Israel vote against lifting the American embargo on Cuba?
Are these square matrices always diagonalisable?
Why did Europeans not widely domesticate foxes?
How did Elite on the NES work?
Why do people think Winterfell crypts is the safest place for women, children & old people?
When does Bran Stark remember Jamie pushing him?
Suing a Police Officer Instead of the Police Department
Is a self contained air-bullet cartridge feasible?
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraNew blog post: When Gods FearMost 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
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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
$endgroup$
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
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am imagining full auto from a magazine type feeding system that uses the excess air from the cartridges the same way the gunpowder gases are used to cycle in modern powder guns.
$endgroup$
– Alex
11 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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
$endgroup$
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 9 hours ago
Cyn
12.3k12758
12.3k12758
asked 11 hours ago
AlexAlex
737
737
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
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am imagining full auto from a magazine type feeding system that uses the excess air from the cartridges the same way the gunpowder gases are used to cycle in modern powder guns.
$endgroup$
– Alex
11 hours ago
add a comment |
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
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am imagining full auto from a magazine type feeding system that uses the excess air from the cartridges the same way the gunpowder gases are used to cycle in modern powder guns.
$endgroup$
– Alex
11 hours 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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am imagining full auto from a magazine type feeding system that uses the excess air from the cartridges the same way the gunpowder gases are used to cycle in modern powder guns.
$endgroup$
– Alex
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am imagining full auto from a magazine type feeding system that uses the excess air from the cartridges the same way the gunpowder gases are used to cycle in modern powder guns.
$endgroup$
– Alex
11 hours ago
add a comment |
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.]
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Alex I think this is your best bet. Imho, the answer to your original question is simply, no. No imho what your asking for would not be possible.
$endgroup$
– Rob
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
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.
New contributor
$endgroup$
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.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
10 hours 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.]
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Alex I think this is your best bet. Imho, the answer to your original question is simply, no. No imho what your asking for would not be possible.
$endgroup$
– Rob
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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.]
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Alex I think this is your best bet. Imho, the answer to your original question is simply, no. No imho what your asking for would not be possible.
$endgroup$
– Rob
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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.]
$endgroup$
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 10 hours ago
answered 11 hours ago
TheLucklessTheLuckless
1,228111
1,228111
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Alex I think this is your best bet. Imho, the answer to your original question is simply, no. No imho what your asking for would not be possible.
$endgroup$
– Rob
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Alex I think this is your best bet. Imho, the answer to your original question is simply, no. No imho what your asking for would not be possible.
$endgroup$
– Rob
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@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
10 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
10 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Alex I think this is your best bet. Imho, the answer to your original question is simply, no. No imho what your asking for would not be possible.
$endgroup$
– Rob
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Alex I think this is your best bet. Imho, the answer to your original question is simply, no. No imho what your asking for would not be possible.
$endgroup$
– Rob
10 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@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
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
@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
10 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
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.
New contributor
$endgroup$
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.
New contributor
$endgroup$
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.
New contributor
$endgroup$
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.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 8 hours ago
WilliamWilliam
411
411
New contributor
New contributor
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.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
10 hours 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.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
10 hours 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.
$endgroup$
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 11 hours ago
Zeiss IkonZeiss Ikon
2,614117
2,614117
$begingroup$
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
10 hours 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
10 hours 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
10 hours 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
10 hours 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
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
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
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am imagining full auto from a magazine type feeding system that uses the excess air from the cartridges the same way the gunpowder gases are used to cycle in modern powder guns.
$endgroup$
– Alex
11 hours ago