Joined
·
1 Posts
i have submitted an idea for a recoilless automatic weapon to lots of manufacturers. most with no reply. a few years ago H&K did not have the funding for a new and radical weapon they said. a few months ago general dynamics didn't see sufficient benefit to continue reviewing the idea.
man. they never even tried.
I was in the army once and i remember while using the 3 round burst on targets 300 meters away the 3 shots would land a few/several feet apart from each other. even with the light recoil of the m16a2; that little tap on the shoulder makes a helluva difference at that range.
the principal is real simple; divide the kinetic energy of a fired round in half and disperse in opposing directions at an equal rate. the result is that the two forces push into one another and cancel each other out.
i read about a fighter plane sometime back in the 20's that fired two large caliber rounds simultaneously back-to-back; the result was a recoilless weapon allowing the plane to maintain high speeds while going in for an attack. it was phased out quick because the rearward moving round was a friendly fire hazard. but it gave me the idea anyway.
the idea involves pry 6 magnets, a gear and axel, an attachment to the rear of "the big round heavy thing in the a2 that breaks down into like 8 parts"- bolt housing?- can't remember term at the moment- and probably a thin but high strength steel wire. there are a few variations in this idea because im not sure which one will work best; but i've even aticipated things like venting gas from the fired round to balance out unequal transfer of kinetic energy due to loss from friction.
the best idea i have though is very simple- the fewer the moving parts; the less friction; the less chance an unavoidable loss of energy will be unbalanced.
anyway; just wondering about what everybody thought and if anyone could help. seems none of the major manufacturers will listen.
man. they never even tried.
I was in the army once and i remember while using the 3 round burst on targets 300 meters away the 3 shots would land a few/several feet apart from each other. even with the light recoil of the m16a2; that little tap on the shoulder makes a helluva difference at that range.
the principal is real simple; divide the kinetic energy of a fired round in half and disperse in opposing directions at an equal rate. the result is that the two forces push into one another and cancel each other out.
i read about a fighter plane sometime back in the 20's that fired two large caliber rounds simultaneously back-to-back; the result was a recoilless weapon allowing the plane to maintain high speeds while going in for an attack. it was phased out quick because the rearward moving round was a friendly fire hazard. but it gave me the idea anyway.
the idea involves pry 6 magnets, a gear and axel, an attachment to the rear of "the big round heavy thing in the a2 that breaks down into like 8 parts"- bolt housing?- can't remember term at the moment- and probably a thin but high strength steel wire. there are a few variations in this idea because im not sure which one will work best; but i've even aticipated things like venting gas from the fired round to balance out unequal transfer of kinetic energy due to loss from friction.
the best idea i have though is very simple- the fewer the moving parts; the less friction; the less chance an unavoidable loss of energy will be unbalanced.
anyway; just wondering about what everybody thought and if anyone could help. seems none of the major manufacturers will listen.
