Re[5]: Metal Storm (Long-ish)

Friday, January 18, 2002, 12:55:05 PM, Ryan wrote:

RG> At 11:58 AM -0500 1/18/02, Flak Magnet wrote:
>>Here's another couple of concepts inspired by what you described:
>>
>>Artillery guns firing salvoes using MST tech, so one tube can fulfill
>>the combat role fulfilled by a battery. Just reload the barrel and
>>fire away. Reducing the MST tech to a "round" instead of the
>>ammo/barrel assemblies envisioned by Metal Storm would eliminate the
>>need to zero, as the sight/calibration of the actual firing bore would
>>still be zero-able. If the tube of MST gun is mechanically

RG> If a very heavy barrel that has been manufactured to exact
tolerances 
RG> needs to be zero'ed why the heck do you think a 155mm metal storm 
RG> system wouldn't need to be? How exactly are you going to easily do 
RG> what tube artillery does?

I think the part of the concept that I failed to communicate
effectively was that the MST tube would fire the round into a
conventional barrel, which would already be zeroed.  The advantage of
using the technology that Metal Storm has developed as a ROUND rather
than a round+barrel is that a single reloading operation can now fire
and entire salvo, so perhaps one gun-bunny crew can reload tandem guns
without breaking "stride".  The cluster of MetalStorm tubes concept is
NOT present in my suggestion for an artillery piece using the
MetalStorm tech... just one (or two for constant firing) conventionaly
tube using the "stacked rounds" concept for the "shells".

RG> Metal storm in that caliber is going to be more like MLRS. You won't

RG> be able to select a particular type of round because they will 
RG> already all be loaded. Reloading the firing platform will take a bit

RG> of time even if you do it exactly the way that MLRS does it.

I have to admit that I'm not sure how large an artillery round is...
How big would one have to be to load 3-5 155mm rounds? Would something
like that be unwieldy for a gunbunny team to slam into the breach of a
hybrid MetalStorm/conventional barrel system? You can't tell me it's
going to be anywhere near the size of a single MLRS pod. Those things
are freakin' huge.  They're LOUD too... I ducked so fast the first
time I heard one my Sqd Leader indicated that he saw my helmet
floating in the air a brief second after it went off...  (I had my
chinstrap unfastened because I was choking down an MRE, so don't any
of you lifers try to sharp-shoot me on that.)

>>Using MST tech and two or more clusters of multiple barrels for a
>>Phalanx system, only one set of barrels fires while another is
>>automatically swapped out with a fresh set, dumping the heat with the
>>spent barrels.  Reloading of the ammo-feed system could be done while
>>the system was firing if needed...  Heat becomes a non-issue.

RG> That's a nice bit of fancy engineering you've got there.
Auto-loaders 
RG> mostly work when they are under cover and out of the elements on 
RG> ships. You want to move this large multi barrel assembly out on an 
RG> automatic system

Again, I admit ignorance of the phalanx system.  I didn't realize that
it was a self-contained bolt-on unit.  Remember that before implement
the rotating breach that lends the phalanx to it's phenomenal rate of
fire was a "nice bit of fancy engineering".  But with the phalanx
being used where such an autoloader would be too bulky, Metal Storm is
probably not a good option.

>>Also, someone complained about having to re-zero a weapon every time
>>they changed barrels... Automatic pistols can be made very accurate,
>>and the barrel is a moving part sitting inside the slide which has the

RG> Pistols are really accurate at 10-15 feet. Accuracy of a rife is 
RG> fractions of an inch at 100's of feet. Just swapping a barrel out 
RG> won't give you anywhere near the correct accuracy. You won't see 
RG> Metal Storm sniper rifles simply for the fact that the sniper won't 
RG> be able to zero his rifle to that barrel using his scope.

Never did I say it would make a good sniper rifle, rather to the
contrary I think it would apply major vacuum (suck). If precision
firing is the way to go, either hybridize the metal storm tech with
conventional barrels (as I described above) or forgo metal storm tech
entirely, sticking with conventional, mechanical feed systems.

RG> I suggest you speak with a few people on Sci.Military.moderated
about 
RG> the practicalities of how accuracy with tube artiller is achieved
and 
RG> a few folks on  rec.guns about just swapping a barrel and not
loosing 
RG> zero.

I monitor enough mailing lists, and I think I addressed the
accuracy/zeroing issues with the hybidized concept above.  Althought
by hybridizing it, you give up the advantage of dumping the heat every
time you change barrels... so now heat is an issue again, so you're
not going to get the phenomenal rates of fire using a single tube like
you would with a purely MetalStorm weapon.  It's a reasonable trade
off, when you have accurate fire, the rate isn't that critical, but
when you have a high rate, accuracy isn't as much of an issue (spray
and pray).
(An exception being with the Phalanx, as it has to stop a warhead and
obliterate it, though I've already admitted that Metal Storm isn't a
good candidate for a phalanx replacement).

>>
>>Still, I am curious about the system's susceptibility to EMP
>>attacks... If the electronics can be made resistant to EMP damage, I
>>think they'll be okay. An EMP pulse capable of frying microchips more
>>than likely doesn't generate enough current in target circuitry to
>>cause ignition of the propellant in a MST system... At least not an
>>EMP that could be generated without nuking the MST system anyway. If
>>the MST's circuitry is sensitive to low to mid-level EMP, then it's
>>got issues.

RG> An EMP pulse would likely see that barrel assembly as a really nice 
RG> antenna. Enough juice to fire those rounds all at once would likely 
RG> result. It doesn't take much to create a nice bit of current with
EMP.

I'm not certain about that without more details.  I mean, if the emp
pulse is strong enough to create current, that current is going to
find the path of least resistance... that path might be AWAY
from the resistors that ignite the propellant in the barrel...	Again,
it's something to test and design against.  If a computer can be
hardened against EMP pulse, a guns system can be as well.

RG> For the sci.military.moderated discussion see:
RG>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group:sci.military.moderated+insubje 
RG> ct:metal+insubject:storm&hl=en

RG> And for sci.military.naval
RG>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group:sci.military.naval+insubject:m 
RG> etal+insubject:storm&hl=en

RG> apparently noone on rec guns has given it a thought.

Again, I read enough mail groups, I don't want to get sucked in to any
others.

--Flak Magnet

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com