PKK12 Gauss Pistol/M72 Gauss Rifle

Magnetic Monopole

Why not make a section-fragmented tube, than you could pass a eletrical charge trought each 1cm fragment to change its polarity don't?
 
On SuAside's comment about the length of the 2mm EC ammo, I think that when you get projectiles up to large velocities you get better stability with a large length:caliber ratio. I'm thinking of the saboted depleted-uranium penetrators fired by tank main guns starting in the 80s. With a 6,000 feet per second muzzle velocity, I think the projectile length is about 10x the diameter. It has a long taper in front, reaching full diameter about halfway back, and the rear quarter or so tapers again.

The length might also allow more mass, offsetting the issue of the tiny caliber.

Perhaps the length would also give more molecules to charge up, so the magnets can better propel the projectile.

Good post (and thread) btw. Makes me wish On The Bounce was still posting. I'll shut up and read that wiki page now.
 
a sabot tank shell has wings, Vault Maker, so that's another problem altogether. it's more a flechette than it is a stick.

in a bullet, longer means quicker tumbling.

still, it's easy to assume that Fallout's gauss weapons create such a velocity that that doesn't matter, even at long range.
 
That's true, though I think I recall seeing an article on saboted rounds in...um...a Popular Mechanics article in about 1981 (I'm so focking old) that showed unfinned and finned types. Might have been for the old 105mm guns, or even something else (chaingun ammo possibly?).

Come to think of it, all those 80's games like Assault and Twilight 2000 listed tank ammo types, and I think they made a distinction between APDU, APDSDU, and APFSDSDU (armor piercing DU, armor piercing discarding sabot DU, armor piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot DU). I believe that the 120mm ammo was all fin-stabilized though.

I might have to dig that box of games out of the closet sometime. It just pains me every time I do, since it reminds me of passing up a mint copy of SPI's Hof Gap in the early 90's that was only $40.

Ah, SuAside, you have given me a good grognard moment, even though you're probably spot on about the ammo.
 
I doubt you could ever make a 'gauss gun' in real life. The limitations of magnetism alone just don't allow for the acceleration required to move a bullet.

Edit: To note, the James Bond episode of Mythbusters covered exactly how limited magnetism is. To produce enough counterforce to deter a chemically propelled bullet, you'd need an electromagnet powered by a small nuclear reactor. Then again, Mythbusters isn't the Source Of All Scientific Knowledge(tm), so maybe other ways could be found to create an appropriate force.
 
Grimhound (while other technology) we already have naval railsguns...

it's far from being as unlikely as you think.
 
SuAside said:
Grimhound (while other technology) we already have naval railsguns...

it's far from being as unlikely as you think.

Railguns are quite different devices than coilguns, from what I know.

Railgun = Compound. Set projectile between rails, create electrical field, rails tax projectile to propel. Electric ballista.

Coilgun = Simplistic. Set projectile in tube, pump in energy to magnetize coils, throw objects. Magnetic spear-thrower.

Or that's how I understand it, anyway. Coilguns have a higher energy requirement if you want to propel something, as you're purely using that energy to launch the projectile.

Railgun to Coilgun is like a Slingshot to a Sling in their methods. To match the slingshot, which can be effective with only the force required to draw tension, the sling requires energy directed in large quantities and a lot of expertise to manage.

In utilizing the magnetic field to run a compound device that applies a greater level of physics, the railgun is the superior weapon. The coilgun would require vast, vast amounts of energy to match what the railgun can do in terms of projectile force, because you have to manipulate an electromagnetic field to produce enough energy that the general idea of the field would probably rip the fillings out of a person's mouth long before it could propel a slug to a velocity grand enough to where it could manage any adequate penetration or even forceful contact against a target.

AKA: Look for someone to make a coilgun to launch a can of beer to them directly from their fridge while they're sitting on the couch cramming Doritos down their maw long before you'll see them in any credible form as a military weapon.

It's like rigging a mill to a water wheel VS rigging a mill to a chain of slaves in stocks and chains pulling a labor wheel thing. Water wheel is cheaper, easier, and only requires upkeep on servicable parts.

NOTE: Then again, in the Fallout universe, they developed Micro 'Fusion' Cells. Fusion as we all know is something which currently is under intensive research by several agencies, but has so far turned out to be very difficult to manage. More-so, if in the Fallout universe the fusion they use is 'cold fusion'*, then that's a completely different ballpark. If you could find a method of doing cold fusion, yes, you could easily make a coilgun launch a depleted uranium slug so fast it could hit the man in the moon in the eye for critical damage as you misfire from the depths of the Mariana Trench.

NOTE 2: Honestly, it's interesting that the weapons of war change so little over time. The technological advents of electricity and chemical energy didn't kill the crossbow or the catapult, it just made people dream up new version of them.

*Being portable in nature and not giving any intention of needing to be cooled, I'd say it's a confirmed 'yes' on the question as to whether or not it's cold fusion.
 
I saw some photos (i don´t remember the site) that shows a metal plate shot by some coilguns.... One -almost- penetrated the plate.... And remember that its home-made coilguns.
Railguns are a LOT heavier than a coilgun, but a lot stronger too. Coilguns even lacking power, with a -little- more development can turn into lethal weapons.
 
Back
Top