h a l f b a k e r yAlas, poor spelling!
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This shotgun shell has within it a smaller shell, with yet a smaller
shell inside that. BUNGCO shell artisans are determining whether
the firing of one shell is enough to trigger the next, or whether a
short magnesium fuse should be installed in the back of the inner
shells, to allow them some
flight time before going off.
The benefit of this is that range might be longer, and the video
made with these shells will attract much traffic on YouTube.
Shrapnel shell
https://en.wikipedi...wiki/Shrapnel_shell
Simple and effective [8th of 7, May 19 2018]
[link]
|
| |
'Matryoshka', derived from the familiar form of Russian 'Matryona', which means 'lady'. In the same way that Mongolian people don't live in yurts and all those cold war B movies actors who ranting on about 'Ivan' when Ivan means 'John'. |
|
| |
If I could find a bit of video with John Wayne talking about Ivan, it might become too recursive, except his first name was Marion. |
|
| |
Exponential failure, the smaller the charge and mass
therefore reduced distance on the next stage. Although, a
greater explosive that is better controlled could be used. |
|
| |
If there was some magical triggering system then wouldn't
gamma radiation be the last doll? |
|
| |
wjt: let us not have the good be the enemy of the perfect. Although good is envious of perfect's sweet shoes and posh accent. I am interested here not in the fact that interior shells are smaller than exterior (the other way around almost never works) but whether firing a shotgun shell out of a shotgun shell would cause the interior shell to go off, preferably at some distance in front of the gun. |
|
| |
Does a smaller shell fire in the same direction as
the larger shell from which it is born, or in the
reverse direction? This might have a bearing on the
nature of the protective clothing recommended to be
worn by the shooter. |
|
| |
This sounds like something for [taofledermaus] to test.
[+] |
|
| |
Google search for [taofledermaus] got me there - searching the 'bakery for a user by that name was confusing. |
|
| |
He makes some beautiful rounds, but word to the wise - stick to storebought for home use. Custom loads get juries all excited. |
|
| |
Hmm...like the Space X rockets, is it possible to get the initial shell to autonomously make its own way back to the shotgun? |
|
| |
//range might be longer// |
|
| |
Or then again, it might not be. |
|
| |
Consider. You have slightly less propellant, in total, in your nested shell than in a simple shell of the same size. Also, when the second shell detonates, it is using the first one as a chamber, and the first shell has less mass than the gun, and therefore will absorb more of the energy as recoil. Theresofore, your overall range will be reduced. |
|
| |
/slightly less propellant/ - how so? All the propellant
of the first shell, plus that of second plus that of the
third. At least double the propellant. |
|
| |
My goal is for this to be like rocket stages. I would
like second shell to detonate in flight, which is why I
was pondering substitution of the primer with a fast
fuse. |
|
| |
Effectively at infinite shells this converges to a rocket. |
|
| |
Yes! That's the kind of productive commentary we need. |
|
| |
//All the propellant of the first shell, plus that of second plus that of the third. At least double the propellant. // |
|
| |
Hmm. But your final projectile is quite small, no? So, the "first" shell could instead contain just the small projectile, with the remainder being all propellant. Compared to that, your nested shells must have less propellant. |
|
| |
//The benefit of this is that range might be longer//
yes, there is a
certain likelyhood of that.
The probability is precisely zero, but we
can save that for another time. |
|
| |
/the remainder being all propellant/ |
|
| |
Because drag increases as the square of velocity,
my hope is that limiting velocity will reduce
energy lost too drag. A "staged" approach like this
allows the small projectile to top up to its (low)
muzzle velocity. |
|
| |
Lovely lurch: my sojourns into the Stack Exchange
have stoked my groupie-like appreciation for
physics. If you are motivated to wield the chalk I
would delight in some learning. I am certain I am
not alone here. |
|
| |
/This sounds like something for [taofledermaus] to
test. [+]/ |
|
| |
Yes, it was that site that got me pondering this.
They fire some very interesting things out of
shotguns. But no rocket ammo! Some the artisans
who make these slugs could no doubt craft a
beautiful little rocket. For myself I thought I could
put a 20 gauge shotgun shell, tip it with the
nosecone from a 4th of July rocket, and place it
inside a 12 gauge shell. |
|
| |
It is within my imagination to replace the charge in
the 20 gauge shell with something slower burning
like a solid rocket motor, replace the strike pin on
the back with a magnesium fuse, and hope that
the hole left when the magnesium burns thru to
the rocket is adequate to channel the thrust. |
|
| |
//drag increases as the square of velocity// |
|
| |
That reasoning sounds plausible to me. I know you can drive a
car further per litre of fuel if you don't accelerate it above its
comfortable cruising speed - so you might be able to push a
pellet further per gram of propellant if you don't burn that
propellant all at once. [+] |
|
| |
But, by igniting a shell outside of the gun, you forgo the
benefit of a barrel to contain and focus the force of the
expanding gas. |
|
| |
//by igniting a shell outside of the gun, you forgo the benefit of a
barrel// |
|
| |
So, you need a gun that shoots a smaller gun, which flies through the
air for a distance and then discharges its projectile (while somehow
remaining accurately pointed at the target). |
|
| |
It's called a shrapnel artillery shell <link>, and it's Baked and WKTE. |
|
| |