All in favor of Metal Storm(?)

[Gene2]

I personally am in favor of Metal Storm. With the technological advancements Metal Storm has been a part in, it seems reasonable to have an assault rifle type weapon to be used as an option for the military. But as we all know, there are some problems to that:

Metal Storm:

The Good—
1.Electronically fired means no moving parts
2.lightweight (in some cases)
3.Pretty much Jam-Proof
4.Takes different kinds of munitions

The Bad---
1.Could you fry a circuit in one of the electronic parts?
2.I question the accuracy
3.High Cost!

Vs.



Conventional Weapons (assault rifles):

The Good---
1.Accurate
2.lightweight
3.simpler
4.In some cases cheaper

The Bad---

1.Jamming problems
2.Rusting (In some cases)
3.Usually only one type of munition.



As these statistics are shown, what is your opinion?

www.metalstorm.com

[ed316]

I need more test done.

[Gene2]

I think it is most reasonable if you vote only ONCE!!!!!!!!!

I have a while until my poll closes, so please just let other people vote, also.

[ed316]

I didn't vote. How many of us here seen one in real life? Not I said Ed.

[SBL]

Another pro of Metal Storm is that the actual firing of the weapon would likely be virtually silent.
That being said, I'd have to see more of it before I could make any sort of decision.

[Ratamacue]

It seems to me that Metal Storm weapons would be highly impractical in military small arms. How cumbersome would it be to carry a whole bunch of weapon barrels instead of magazines?

By the way SnakeBite, how the hell did you come to the conclusion that Metal Storm weapons are silent? They still use chemical propellant. Maybe you're thinking of that centrifuge weapon that's been touted fairly recently, which looks to be essentially vaporware.

[hauptman]

For every job there is the right tool ...

[KillerBD]

From what I've read and seen its still too much in the development stages. Also it doesn't seem very reliable, stacking one bullet infront of another... Having a battery to fire the weapon isn't a very good idea in my opinion.

And #2 and 4 from "The Good" list is also applys to convetional weapons....

Overall I think this would make a bad choice for a hand held weapon.

But maybe for a defensive weapon on or near a building, or a turret on a tank, this gun might do a good job.

[SBL]

It seems to me that Metal Storm weapons would be highly impractical in military small arms. How cumbersome would it be to carry a whole bunch of weapon barrels instead of magazines?

By the way SnakeBite, how the hell did you come to the conclusion that Metal Storm weapons are silent? They still use chemical propellant. Maybe you're thinking of that centrifuge weapon that's been touted fairly recently, which looks to be essentially vaporware.


I'd seen a promo video for metal storm some weeks back stating the weapon was "virtually silent''- at least in comparison to conventional arms. But, being that I'm no expert I don't doubt that I could be mistaken.

[Biglug]

I'm all in favor of one being set up on my front porch loaded with rock salt and run by a remote control.
That way as soon as a Jehovah's Witness or Democratic candidate opens the gate I can hit em with 10 to 20 barrels from the front and unload another 100 in their ass as their running away.rofl

[Gene2]

The ammunition comes in, what I call, "tubular magazines", not seperate barrels.

[StukaJr]

Metal Storm claims to propel projectiles via electrical charge or propellant - so far I've only seen propellant based test prototypes in videos... The danged black boxes smoke like muthafuggers - no working prototype that fired silently or without using conventional propellants as of yet... At least, not publically available videos or demonstrations. Only videos I've seen are that of the black box excessively smoking and spitting lead - not of what happens downrange... Also, it's hard to lay claims to rate of fire when a M134 minigun produces more continuous stream of lead by the sounds it makes.

Given that fact - stacking bullets and charges the long way of the barrel... How does one produce accurate results? If overall length of a bullet with propellant is 10mm - first bullet flies out of a 100 mm barrel, second bullet flies out of the 110mm barrel, third bullet flies out of a 120mm barrel... Fire 10 bullets and the barrel length has gone from 3" sub-compact to a 6" full size - am I expected to have a reliable handgun/longarm/AA gun, per se? Sounds like they are making a claim to ignore the basics of ballistics that all other gun makers seem to follow.

I don't believe their claims to having the electrically propelled rail gun technology just yet. As for what I've seen in their videos, seems like designs copying old "Pepperbox" revolvers - not silent, not quick to reload and good knows how accurate or controllable.


The ammunition comes in, what I call, "tubular magazines", not seperate barrels.

Name one other firearm that propells ammunition out of its magazine?

[nullterm]

Conventional. It works and there's no electrical systems to malfunction or batteries to worry about.

Machinegunners already have to lug around one spare barrel, half a dozen or a dozen is impractical. For riflemen and 'gunners, I'm still guessing that magazines and belted ammunition is lighter on a per round basis.

It does have a high rate of fire, but not sustainable for long periods of time like a M-249 or minigun that uses long belts of ammunition. And for rifles, smgs, pistols, I think reloading would be faster using a magazine.

However, I do like the idea of remote fired fixed grenade launchers. But it'd be more useful as an ambush or support weapon than offensive. It will have it's uses, but I don't see it directly changing infantry or special forces gear anytime soon.

[KillerBD]

^^^ StukaJr and nullterm bring up some good points.

[Gene2]

But what I mean is that they have about 8 inch long tubular mags. If you look at the FFW Concept Weapon, and the pouch for ammunition on the latest Future Warrior Concept, you will see what I mean.

[Gene2]

Future Warrior as in 2020

[SBL]

Metal Storm claims to propel projectiles via electrical charge or propellant - so far I've only seen propellant based test prototypes in videos... The danged black boxes smoke like muthafuggers - no working prototype that fired silently or without using conventional propellants as of yet... At least, not publically available videos or demonstrations. Only videos I've seen are that of the black box excessively smoking and spitting lead - not of what happens downrange... Also, it's hard to lay claims to rate of fire when a M134 minigun produces more continuous stream of lead by the sounds it makes.

Given that fact - stacking bullets and charges the long way of the barrel... How does one produce accurate results? If overall length of a bullet with propellant is 10mm - first bullet flies out of a 100 mm barrel, second bullet flies out of the 110mm barrel, third bullet flies out of a 120mm barrel... Fire 10 bullets and the barrel length has gone from 3" sub-compact to a 6" full size - am I expected to have a reliable handgun/longarm/AA gun, per se? Sounds like they are making a claim to ignore the basics of ballistics that all other gun makers seem to follow.

I don't believe their claims to having the electrically propelled rail gun technology just yet. As for what I've seen in their videos, seems like designs copying old "Pepperbox" revolvers - not silent, not quick to reload and good knows how accurate or controllable.



Name one other firearm that propells ammunition out of its magazine?


Well I guess that about proves I don't know what I'm talking about.

[Ratamacue]

But what I mean is that they have about 8 inch long tubular mags. If you look at the FFW Concept Weapon, and the pouch for ammunition on the latest Future Warrior Concept, you will see what I mean.

Future Warrior as in 2020If you're talking about the cylindrical ammunition carried by the Future Warrior concept soldier, those are supposed to be the guided rockets fired from the pistol. If you're talking about the pouches on the chest armor, those look to me like they're magazines that attach to the top/back of the weapon, behind the optics.

[nullterm]

But what I mean is that they have about 8 inch long tubular mags. If you look at the FFW Concept Weapon, and the pouch for ammunition on the latest Future Warrior Concept, you will see what I mean.

Yeah, but keep in mind that's just a concept. Automobile manufacturers develope concept cars every year to show off ideas, but those cars don't translate into production autombiles, and not all the ideas make it to the assembly line either.

http://www.natick.army.mil/soldier/media/fact/individual/FW.htm


The Weapon Subsystem, Lethality Central, permits direct and indirect target engagements. The weapon weighs 5 pounds, and combines 5 tubes of soft-launched, 15mm intelligent seeker munitions and 1 tube of stacked 4.6mm kinetic energy projectiles for close quarter combat.

Doesn't sound like a whole heck of alot of ammo. Sounds alot like when the Air Force & Navy decided they didn't really need guns anymore on the F-4's right before Vietnam.

[22.5degrees]

So what is so wrong with the Phalanx CIWS??? It seems to hand ass with little problem? Same goes for conventional MG's and SMG's. I like the idea of fewer moving(almost nill) parts. Might not be a bad system for homeland defense, where prolonged storage with minimal effects and maintence are desired.

22.5

[Gene2]

http://www.natick.army.mil/soldier/media/fact/individual/FW.htm


Read This

[Gene2]

Nulltrem! You posted that the same time that I did!

[nullterm]

Nulltrem! You posted that the same time that I did!

Beat ya by 6 minutes! hahaha p-)

It's funny because I had 5 or 6 links to articles, and that's the one we both chose.

[Gene2]

What can I say---we are mind readers!!!!!!


I did a little figuring with an inert 5.56 round I have, and an 8 inch tubular magazine could hold about 15 rounds of that caliber (including the propellant)!

Just in case you were wondering.

[StukaJr]

If you put so much trust into concepts, then I hope you are still saving that garage space for a flying car, jet packs or servant robots powered by miniature nuclear reactors... Time will show how little these designs have to do with the actual future. Easiest way to tell Science Fiction is by clothes that people wear in purpoted future - sure, it's 1992 but every "man of the future" is wearing skin tight pled pants, aviator glasses and has a inbred of a mullet and an afro gone wront... Same with this FW BS - producers from TV and Films have been trying to put soldiers in Motorcycle helmets for as long as TV was around...

I'm sure MOLLE systems, rail systems and red dot optics (just to name the modern improvements in tools of modern combat) first appeared in the government proposals and in the Soldier of Fortune articles in the late 70's... Link between this Sci-Fi and the real world? Non-existent. You will first hear of the future weapon when the given government is putting some pain with it on polygons for a real show and tell... As for this - nice marketing hoopla and investor money magnet...

[StukaJr]

They forgot that Future Warrior will be invisible:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061019/ap_on_sc/cloak_of_invisibility

[nullterm]

They forgot that Future Warrior will be invisible:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061019/ap_on_sc/cloak_of_invisibility

I want my jetpack.

They already are invisible...

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/VRTours/C7/images/big/C7_Gunner.jpg

[Hollis]

I didn't vote. How many of us here seen one in real life? Not I said Ed.


Nor I, and what about the person who wants more, or both.

More is prefered to Less............ I don't need a choice, I want them all......

[StukaJr]

I want my jetpack.

They already are invisible...

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/VRTours/C7/images/big/C7_Gunner.jpg

In that thick of vegetation and not moving - a guy dressed like a subway sandwich would be invisible.

It's an odd story, but my co-worker's dad survived the Korean War while a lot of his squadmates didn't... He summed up his survival to being color blind - he was the first in his squad to spot movement in the thick brush...

[Hollis]

In that thick of vegetation and not moving - a guy dressed like a subway sandwich would be invisible.

...

Your right that does look like a vegetarian sandwich with Olives...........


or It is dinner time here.

[StukaJr]

Olives...........



Oh, snap! It's Martini hour!

[Hispeed1]

Maybe as a vehicle mounted weapon but I'm not sure about it for a hand-held weapon system. Ever watch Futureweapons on the Discovery Channel? It was on one time.

[nullterm]

In that thick of vegetation and not moving - a guy dressed like a subway sandwich would be invisible.

It's an odd story, but my co-worker's dad survived the Korean War while a lot of his squadmates didn't... He summed up his survival to being color blind - he was the first in his squad to spot movement in the thick brush...

Unless the invisibility sheild is perfect (and I mean Invisible Woman perfect) the human eye has knack for being able to spot any movement in it's peripheral.

[StukaJr]

Unless the invisibility sheild is perfect (and I mean Invisible Woman perfect) the human eye has knack for being able to spot any movement in it's peripheral.

Considering that the given technology blends the test subject with any surrounding enviornment - it can be almost near perfect if the wearer utilizes the given strengths and weaknesses to the best of its abilities... Making an object blend in a sterile white walls of a lab set up is considerably more impressive than any camo can... I imagine the demostration is performed in the optimal enviornment but still - I'd like any camoflauge that can work in a wooded enviornment become partially invisible in a lab with spotlights and white wall. Being partially invisible robs the target of being identified and targeted as a target that stands out against the background. On the contrary, training can make partially invisible/refracting light operator more invisible if they know how to take advantage of the technology in the given surroundings.

Either way, it's a safe bet that the real FW would display characteristics of "Predator" like properties...

[Greek soldier]

A Volley gun-like CIWS:

Spanish Navy Meroka

http://img284.imageshack.us/img284/9711/merokatr3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

A presentation by Izar (now Navantia) of the Meroka multi-barrel CIWS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW8ilPgWc7s

Clearly Metal-Storm is suitable for naval, CAS and land operations.

My 2 Eurocents.:)

[Jabroni]

A Volley gun-like CIWS:

Spanish Navy Meroka

http://img284.imageshack.us/img284/9711/merokatr3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

A presentation by Izar (now Navantia) of the Meroka multi-barrel CIWS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW8ilPgWc7s

Clearly Metal-Storm is suitable for naval naval, CAS and land operations.

My 2 Eurocents.:)Similar to the 'Ripper Chaingun' i posted earlier.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-88791.html

[nullterm]

Considering that the given technology blends the test subject with any surrounding enviornment - it can be almost near perfect if the wearer utilizes the given strengths and weaknesses to the best of its abilities... Making an object blend in a sterile white walls of a lab set up is considerably more impressive than any camo can... I imagine the demostration is performed in the optimal enviornment but still - I'd like any camoflauge that can work in a wooded enviornment become partially invisible in a lab with spotlights and white wall. Being partially invisible robs the target of being identified and targeted as a target that stands out against the background. On the contrary, training can make partially invisible/refracting light operator more invisible if they know how to take advantage of the technology in the given surroundings.

Either way, it's a safe bet that the real FW would display characteristics of "Predator" like properties...

I'll believe it when I (don't) see it. :)

[Ratamacue]

Similar to the 'Ripper Chaingun' i posted earlier.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-88791.htmlYou've got to be f*cking kidding.

[Death.]

Similar to the 'Ripper Chaingun' i posted earlier.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-88791.html

Uhhh...................................

[GazB]

My personal opinion of metal storm is that it is a solution looking for a problem. Its best feature is rate of fire. However rate of fire is not a problem for most weapons except anti aircraft weapons.


Metal Storm:

The Good—
1.Electronically fired means no moving parts
2.lightweight (in some cases)
3.Pretty much Jam-Proof
4.Takes different kinds of munitions

point 2 A heavy barrel will weigh more than a box magazine. The inability to reload mags in the field will also mean the supply chain will be stretched. Factory reloading of mags is what has largely killed caseless ammo so far.

Point 4 is questionable. You need specific barrels for specific rounds, so if the barrel is loaded with tracer and you don't want to be noticed then you can't fire from that barrel. With a conventional rifle you can have mags loaded with or without tracer... change mag and cycle the action to lose the first round.



The Bad---
1.Could you fry a circuit in one of the electronic parts?
2.I question the accuracy
3.High Cost!

Or in an arctic region where batteries last 10 minutes... Accuracy is a huge problem as each round has a different length of barrel to travel down. At different temperatures and humidity levels propellent burns at different rates. Equally the barrels are expendible so what sort of quality are we talking about (to keep costs down they will be cheap).




vs
Conventional Weapons (assault rifles):

The Good---
1.Accurate
2.lightweight
3.simpler
4.In some cases cheaper

The Bad---

1.Jamming problems
2.Rusting (In some cases)
3.Usually only one type of munition.


A properly maintained weapon will not have rusting problems. I dare say neglected weapons of any type will rust whether they are made by metal storm or not.
point 3 most assault rifles can use many types of rounds, tracer, armour piercing, ball, or incendiary. As the soldier loads mags himself he can vary his load to suit his tastes or the situation. He can also load one mag up for particular purposes (ie tracer and AP). He can also use loose rounds or stripper clips to load his mags in the field.


Another pro of Metal Storm is that the actual firing of the weapon would likely be virtually silent.


If you are referring to the noise the action of an automatic rifle makes during firing compared to the noise the supersonic gas escaping behind the bullet when it leaves the barrel and the bullet itself flying at supersonic speeds the noise of the action is minimal.


The ammunition comes in, what I call, "tubular magazines", not seperate barrels.

The ammo is loaded in the gun barrel. One barrel might have 10-15 rounds in it so to carry a decent load of ammo you need 10-20 barrels at least.

The problem arises when you get the contract and need to cut costs to increase profit. Look at the M16 magazine problems... cheap and crap. Now imagine if that cheaply made piece of crap is not the device feeding ammo into your gun but is the part of the gun you rely on for accuracy to actually hit the guy that is shooting at you...

Conventional rifle for me please.

[Gene2]

Good points, but I am just stating what I have read. Why do you say that the ammo is stored in barrels? I have seen different sources saying that the ammunition is stored in tubular magazines (Natick Sites).

[DeltaWhisky58]

What a totally pointless poll!

[Straker]

Metal storm may have it uses in the future, especially in the idea of a lightweight under barrel grenade launcher as the Australians are looking at as the AICW project. However, it inherantly is always going to have the problems of ballistics and weight, is the trade off of multiple rounds without a magazine and necessary feed system that much better.

[Vandervahn]

You've got to be f*cking kidding.

Sadly, he isn´t.

[Belial]

Someone surely could take the best of both worlds and create a magazine-fed electrically firing weapon. This would, while not totally removing moving parts drastically reduce their ammount and maintain some of the advantages of that electronical thingy whatever.

[nullterm]

Someone surely could take the best of both worlds and create a magazine-fed electrically firing weapon. This would, while not totally removing moving parts drastically reduce their ammount and maintain some of the advantages of that electronical thingy whatever.

Yeah, I had a similar idea. But I realised there still needs to be a mechanical operation to move the next round into the barrel and to eject the spent casing. Electrical firing would replace the firing pin. If you used caseless, then you wouldn't need the ejection, but caseless never caught on.

To cycle the next round, you either need a electric motor (really really bad, will break down) or use the same cycling mechanic that's already used to move the round from magazine to barrel and out, so the design is more complex because it now relies on electronics (bad thing). Also, there's always the chance the electrical contacts between the gun and the round could get gummed up with dirt or something, so the round wouldn't ignite.

A firing pin smacking the round is still the best way to get the bullet out the barrel, not an electrical spark.

The idea might have merit, but as far as I could think it out the electronics only made things more complicated and more likely to fail.

[Hollis]

Someone surely could take the best of both worlds and create a magazine-fed electrically firing weapon. This would, while not totally removing moving parts drastically reduce their ammount and maintain some of the advantages of that electronical thingy whatever.


good points but if it doesn't bake a great pizza what good is it.

I know I should not post near dinner time... :bash:

[StukaJr]

Don't forget the EMP :D