PDA

View Full Version : Gun That Fires A Million Rounds Per Minute



96B
06-27-2003, 05:05 PM
Forget the minigun...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/BUSINESS/06/26/australia.metalstorm/index.html

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 05:10 PM
Is that actually possible? 16 666 rounds a second? Wow!

usa320
06-27-2003, 05:27 PM
that is freaken sick.

I will say it will make an awesome CIWS to defend ships against cruise missile attack...even better stopping power than the Phalanx.

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 05:41 PM
I'm just trying to work this out - say the latest squad level machine gun fires 1000 a minute (works out to 16.67 rounds a second). This latest weapon would require 1000 machine guns to fire simoutaneously, as a single entity to produce the 1 000 000 rounds per minute figure. Surely, this isn't possible? Even if you carried this weapon on a helicopter, it would require a fair amount of space (anyone ever seen 1000 machine guns side by side?) :)

specialairservice
06-27-2003, 05:50 PM
Er yeah i saw this on discovery channel or history channel and they described how it worked it dosen't fire faster than a mini gun.It uses HUNDREDS of different barrels to fire the bullets not 1 or a couple like the mini gun. the only part of the gun that has been invented is the firing mechanism. It dosen't take a genius to work out that multiplying the barrels will multiply the amount of bullets fired.

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 05:52 PM
Sure... but how feasible is a weapon with "hundreds" of barrels? (Actually 1000 according to my calculation) - would be a ***** to carry/clean/maintain)

specialairservice
06-27-2003, 05:57 PM
its definatly not an infantry weapon.

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 06:04 PM
For sure.

He219
06-27-2003, 06:14 PM
the firing mechanism has no moving parts. Instead, it uses electronic ballistics technology. Unlike other guns, the only parts which move are the bullets.

Interesting indeed. Imagine the weight and volume of ammunition required for such a beast. For CIWS weight would'nt be an issue though.

http://www.news.navy.mil/management/photodb/thumbnails/thumb_030220-N-9273C-027.jpg
4,500 RPM for the 20mm MK-15 'Phalanx'

Currently the MK-15's have been removed on ships like the Nimitz for example and have been replaced by the RIM-7
http://www.news.navy.mil/management/photodb/thumbnails/thumb_020710-N-6492H-501.jpg

Interesting prospects for the 1 million round gun though....

Smoothie104
06-27-2003, 06:19 PM
Technology is always moving foward and making things we can't yet comprehend. Imagine explaining an electrically powered 7.26 minigun to people in the 1700s only 250 years ago.

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 06:22 PM
True, but explain it to us, now. If this is true, it represents a major leap in technology, incomprehensible to many of us in this time-period.

He219
06-27-2003, 06:23 PM
Rather than use mechanical firing pins to shoot bullets one by one, O'Dwyer's gun holds multiple bullets in the barrel -- one behind the other.

Electronic charges set off in different parts of the barrel, just fractions of a second apart, fire the bullets in blindingly fast succession using traditional gunpowder.

The result is akin to a laser beam of lead and it offers several advantages over a regular machine gun.

First, the new gun is solid-state and electronic, meaning there are few mechanical parts to jam.

Second, more bullets can be fired with one squeeze of the trigger before the gun recoils.

But perhaps most remarkable of all, the unique ballistics of firing projectiles close together means that the bullets farther back of the pack actually push those in front of them, thereby increasing bullet velocity.
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,46570,00.html

He219
06-27-2003, 06:37 PM
Trident-za:

Gatling Operation:

The modern Gatling gun is usually composed of 3 to 7 barrels in a circular array. In operation, the barrels and inner receiver rotate together. Independent bolts, one aligned and moving with each barrel, follow a helical cam track in the outer receiver. The cam track controls the feeding, locking, and extracting functions by moving each bolt fore and aft relative to its barrel. The timing of the system is fixed by the position of the bolt in track versus rotation. Each bolt typically contains its own striker or other firing device. (Cannon cartridges are usually electrically primed.)

Today, Gatling guns are usually controlled by an electric motor, which means that rate of fire depends only on how fast the motor turns the mechanism. Theoretically, a Gatling gun can fire at any rate, from as slow as is needed to as fast as is safe. Most motors have several pre-set rates of fire, which can be selected by the user.

http://www.military.cz/usa/weapons/guns/kulomety/minigun/m134_06.jpg
http://www.military.cz/usa/weapons/guns/kulomety/minigun/m134_11.jpg

He219
06-27-2003, 06:50 PM
http://a1112.g.akamai.net/7/1112/492/2002091437/www.wired.com/news/images/full/metal_storm1b_f.jpg


Rather than use mechanical firing pins to shoot bullets one by one, O'Dwyer's gun lines bullets up in the barrel -- one behind the other -- with gunpowder packed between them. The gunpowder is ignited by an electronic charge. When the charges are set just fractions of a second apart, the bullets fire in blindingly fast succession.
Photo: Metal Storm




Just how lethal? That depends on how many rounds you want to fire and how many barrels you want to put to use. In a test firing of 36 barrels, lashed together and firing full bore, the gun reduced a series of 15 wooden doors to toothpicks in just two-tenths of a second.

The feat earned O'Dwyer's technology a place in the Guinness World Records for the fastest firing ballistic weapon, said company spokesman Peter Wetzig.

Tiger
06-27-2003, 07:09 PM
Nice toy

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 07:22 PM
Trident-za:

Gatling Operation:

The modern Gatling gun is usually composed of 3 to 7 barrels in a circular array. In operation, the barrels and inner receiver rotate together. Independent bolts, one aligned and moving with each barrel, follow a helical cam track in the outer receiver. The cam track controls the feeding, locking, and extracting functions by moving each bolt fore and aft relative to its barrel. The timing of the system is fixed by the position of the bolt in track versus rotation. Each bolt typically contains its own striker or other firing device. (Cannon cartridges are usually electrically primed.)

Today, Gatling guns are usually controlled by an electric motor, which means that rate of fire depends only on how fast the motor turns the mechanism. Theoretically, a Gatling gun can fire at any rate, from as slow as is needed to as fast as is safe. Most motors have several pre-set rates of fire, which can be selected by the user.

http://www.military.cz/usa/weapons/guns/kulomety/minigun/m134_06.jpg
http://www.military.cz/usa/weapons/guns/kulomety/minigun/m134_11.jpg

Sorry, He219... but we are effectively talking about a 1000% increase in firing rate here... excuse me for reading these "non-technical" articles and not believing them.... I don't deny the potential... just the logistics... work it out for yourself: how many barrels turning how fast are needed to produce 16 667 rounds PER SECOND? Have you any idea how long the "ammo belt" would need to be to sustain 3 minutes of firing at that rate? And how much that belt would weigh?

He219
06-27-2003, 07:50 PM
Smoothie104 wrote:

Imagine explaining an electrically powered 7.26 minigun to people in the 1700s only 250 years ago.

Trident-za wrote:

True, but explain it to us, now. If this is true, it represents a major leap in technology, incomprehensible to many of us in this time-period.

I responded with a simplified technical description for the operation of a Gatling Gun. Simultaneously I linked the operation of O'Dwyer's gun as a comparison. Obviously the design premises are totally different. Fixed Barrels with multiple bullets embedded in each tube firing a consecutive volley with electronic ignition typify O'Dwyer's concept.


work it out for yourself: how many barrels turning how fast are needed to produce 16 667 rounds PER SECOND? Have you any idea how long the "ammo belt" would need to be to sustain 3 minutes of firing at that rate? And how much that belt would weigh?

Again, NO AMMO BELT. The Barrels are FIXED with a finite amount of ammo.

The NUMBER of Barrels and the quantity of Bullets in each gives O'Dwyer's gun the increase of firepower proportionate to the Gatling Gun and others relative to the number of barrels and bullets in each used. The theory has been proven.

With no ammo belt you save the weight of casings. The next issue to figure out how to reload each barrel and how manny barrels and bullets in each is required to optimize as weapons system for it's purpose.


Was the information not clear enough even with the pretty pictures and descriptions for each of the two systems?

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 07:55 PM
Was the information not clear enough even with the pretty pictures and descriptions for each of the two systems?

Good one :) Yes, you got me there....

Remember, though, that here in Africa the internet does not work very fast, and all your pretty pictures take FOREVER to download. So, I replied before looking at them (isn't technology wonderful?)

Good point about the ammo belt, though. It remains to be seen, however, how exactly they ae going to organize/load/carry sufficient ammo to make this gun worthwhile, even if it does work.....

The simplified explanation just sounds... simplified. Sounds great in theory... but my mind still boggles at the concept of a million rounds per minute. Doesn't mean its wrong, of course, just that too stupid to grasp it.

He219
06-27-2003, 08:10 PM
Forgive my impatience, Trident-za.

I just got a little carried away. Get off the 56'gay' modem and invest in DSL or a preferably a cable modem, if available. Sometimes I forget about the slow data rate with dial-up service. You must hate all the cool video links.
;)

The theory with O'Dwyer's gun is now proven. As you pointed out, 1,000,000.00 rounds a minute is 16,666.67 rounds per second. If you have a fixed weapons system with say 166.67 Fixed Barrels loaded with 100 bullets each, a controlled ignition over a one second duration would release a volume of 16,667 bullets ovet that one second duration, establishing a rate stated at one milllion per minute. The beauty lies with the sequenced ignition over that one second duration. That is the premise.

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 08:14 PM
Damn impressive, whichever way you look at it - hope nobody ever fires one of these at me!!

You mean there is an option other than 56k? You are kidding? :lol:

(Joke... I just don't have the cash to afford it :( Technology costs big bucks in Africa. For the record, DSL and "cable" are NOT available in SA, at least not under those names. ADSL is available to a few select cities, but they have a 2GB a month cap on it - once you get to that limit, you're disconnected for the rest of the month, despite how much money you paid to get it)

He219
06-27-2003, 08:35 PM
Damn impressive, whichever way you look at it - hope nobody ever fires one of these at me!!

Hehe, that's right! The rate of fire is phenomenal, perfect for a CIWS. The technological integration is the really impressive part though. Imagine a pistol that fires three bullest before the recoil is felt. That's some serious stopping power. The AN-94 Assault Rifle is revolutionary as it fires two shots before the recoil is felt. O'dwyers system could lead to Cartridges for rifles that fire many bullets before the recoil is felt and at higher velocities.

This is the pistol example. I'll keep it small:
http://a1112.g.akamai.net/7/1112/492/2002091437/www.wired.com/news/images/thumbs/metal_storm5_t.jpg
larger image here (http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,46570,00.html#)

The Metal Storm Variable Lethality Law Enforcement pistol is fully electronic and can fire three rounds in 1/500th of a second. Plans for the prototype weapon include a fingerprint detection system for additional security. Photo: Metal Storm

That sucks about the lack of high speed internet access in Suid Afrika. 2 Gigs is nothing. I recently upgraded from dial up and it just like heading out of an Ice Age. The research capabilities and educational aspects are awesome. What parts of SA do you find yourself in?

Smoothie104
06-27-2003, 08:38 PM
Technology is always moving foward and making things we can't yet comprehend. Imagine explaining an electrically powered 7.26 minigun to people in the 1700s only 250 years ago.
_________________
DEMOCRACY is 2 Hungry wolves and a sheep discussing whats for Dinner.

LIBERTY is a Well Armed Sheep willing to contest the Majority Decision

Back to top


Trident-za



Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 76
Location: South Africa
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2003 5:22 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

True, but explain it to us, now. If this is true, it represents a major leap in technology, incomprehensible to many of us in this time-period.

Last edited by Trident-za on Fri Jun 27, 2003 5:23 pm; edited 1 time in total







I think electric motors were imcomprehensible in the 1700's

Trident-za
06-27-2003, 08:47 PM
Thanks for the smaller pic, He219, much appreciated :)


What parts of SA do you find yourself in?

I live in the province of Kwazulu-Natal (home of Shaka Zulu - that seriously bloodthirsty bastard). Its the most "english" of all the provinces (as opposed to Afrikaans) - although, technically its Zulu, I guess, I can't speak a word of that, though - seriously confusing language to learn :( Are you German, btw?

[Edit]Sorry, I guess this should have been answered with a PM - its hardly very interesting to anyone else.

usa320
06-27-2003, 09:05 PM
"currently the MK-15's have been removed on ships like the Nimitz for example and have been replaced by the RIM-7 "

are you sure? As far as i know the Nimitz Class carriers have both the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow and the MK-15, and last time i checked they were supposed to be installing RIM-116 RAM missile on them eventually.

He219
06-27-2003, 09:06 PM
Smoothie104, the Gatling Gun was actually invented in 1861 by Richard J Gatling. (http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Jordan_Gatling)
250 years ago it would have been 1753 or the Eighteenth Century, 108 years before it's invention. The concept is relatively simple to explain. The technological innovation necessary was the advent of cased ammuniton. Modern Gatlings merely have electric motors to operate them in lieu of a hand crank.

This might be for the old-timers, but perhaps you remember the Musket 'Gatling' in Burt Lancaster's movie 'The Crimson Pirate'?
hehehe

;) Take no offense, I live for the details.....

He219
06-27-2003, 09:18 PM
Thanks, Trident-za. German family origin but native Southern Californian nonetheless. I intend to visit SA sooner than later. Havn't quite made it that far south in Africa. PM would be better....

usa320, the MK-15's are off the Nimitz pending upgrades. I was aboard at the time of deployment in and saw the RIM-7 lunchers and was told of the 'new' system, probably the RIM-116 you mentioned. I'll double check. Also, no more Tomacats. Black Aces and Tophatters traded them in for SuperHornets. First cruise without.

p-)

usa320
06-27-2003, 09:27 PM
i will miss not seeing tomcats fly off carriers...

just as much as i was dissapointed when they ditched the A-6, and when i heard they are cutting back the A-10.

The tomcat has the longest range AA missile, that right there, along with its decent prescision bombing ability, should earn it a place in the fleet.

The A-10, bluntly put, cannot be replaced...nothing can compare.

whats even more disheartening is they have plans to replace S-3 tankers with tanker hornets (i reckon they are already doing this) and replacing EA-6B's with EF/A-18's...

specialairservice
06-28-2003, 08:40 AM
The phenix missile was designed to shoot down large bombers of the cold war. They wouldn't be that much use in the type of warfare the usa finds its self in today.

The tomcat was brought in to service in 1969, 34 years ago which is a very long time for a fighter plane to be in service. That is the main reason its being replaced and also, apart from the speed, the FA-18 E/F can do every thing better than the F14.

I do know that the EA6B prowler is being replaced by the EA 18G Growler.

I will admitt the usaf will have a hard time findind a replacement for the A10. Its very good at its job and very cheep.

I don't know anything about replacing the S3 with tanker hornets. The hornet is a fighter, and it proberbly can't carry enough fuel to refuel at least one hornet. Also i think lockheed are upgrading the S3s to extend the time in service.