what make's the "boom" of the boom gun?!?!!?

[Borast]

very understandable about the "joke". my thing is this, many little slugs traveling that fast doesnt add up to me. ONE huge slug would make sense, not a buncha little ones though. maybe im thinking about his too much.

Consider...a 30 gram bolt. Give it a velocity of a few thousand feet a second. The bolt will go through a 1 inch steel plate.

The slugs they use in real-world rail gun tests only weigh in at a few hundred grams at most. The slug goes through 3-4 inch armour plate!!

[SoulofThunder]

damage and recoil are not in question. the BOOM is. even current rail guns DO NOT make a deafing BOOM. loud yes, but nothing deafening.

[Borast]

damage and recoil are not in question. the BOOM is. even current rail guns DO NOT make a deafing BOOM. loud yes, but nothing deafening.

It depends on how close you are to it when it goes off!

If you trigger one in the middle of a city, you'll set-off every car alarm in a several block radius (from the concussion of the sonic boom).

[Borast]

Actually wolfe...I was referring to the RL ones as well.

If you're standing in the room with one, you may run the slight risk of an eardrum rupturing if not wearing sound mufflers, and WILL be deaf for a while as the overstimulated nerve-endings in the ear shutdown temporarily.

As for the concussion effect, my statement about a RL railgun setting off car alarms within a several block radius is a quote from someone who deals/dealt with the beasts back in the early to mid ninties. Can't remember the specific show, but they had a segment on railguns, and showed one being test fired, and one of the guys interviewed stated that they where doing the research for actual application. He stated that the concussion front from the firing of the gun was strong enough to set of the seismic sensor of a car alarm. Believeable, when you consider that one idiot across the street from me has his car alarm set so sensitive that a transit bus or "unmuffled" motorcycle across the street can set it off! (One from it's a combination of it's mass vibrating the ground as it passes, air movement, plus engine noise, the other from pure engine noise!)

[Zer0 Kay]

According to (I believe) the Rifts novel series, the Boom Gun isn't a conventional railgun at all.

It's been a long time since I could remember what a coil gun is, so maybe this is the same thing, but in the novels they describe it as a "mass driver" which uses a pair of electromagnetic rings (the total length of the barrel is essentially divided in 2, one ring pushes the round forward, the next ring catches it and continues pushing it).

As for why it has a case ejector, my thought is that there is no sabot, and that the rods simply come flying out the end at high speed and for no particular reason don't spread out much as they go.

Now onto the sonic boom. The boom gun will make a sonic boom, guns we have now do. It will probably be very loud when it fires. Guns are pretty loud anyway, there's a reason why the military and most people with common sense wear ear protection when they practice marksmanship. Will it be loud enough to deafen everyone within 200 feet? Maybe, maybe not. But I'm willing to bet it would be damned impressive.

Also, Rifts is a friggin' pencil/paper RPG and any rules (including the rules of physics) that the GM doesn't like can be ignored.

Gee good thing the novels aren't canon material.

[Qev]

According to (I believe) the Rifts novel series, the Boom Gun isn't a conventional railgun at all.

It's been a long time since I could remember what a coil gun is, so maybe this is the same thing, but in the novels they describe it as a "mass driver" which uses a pair of electromagnetic rings (the total length of the barrel is essentially divided in 2, one ring pushes the round forward, the next ring catches it and continues pushing it).

Mass drivers and coilguns are the same thing, although the term 'mass driver' is usually reserved for very big coilguns, such as systems used to launch spacecraft or toss material from the Moon back to Earth. That sort of thing.

You know, it's kinda funny when you think about it... a particle beam is just a peculiar kind of coilgun, too!

[Zer0 Kay]

According to (I believe) the Rifts novel series, the Boom Gun isn't a conventional railgun at all.

It's been a long time since I could remember what a coil gun is, so maybe this is the same thing, but in the novels they describe it as a "mass driver" which uses a pair of electromagnetic rings (the total length of the barrel is essentially divided in 2, one ring pushes the round forward, the next ring catches it and continues pushing it).

Mass drivers and coilguns are the same thing, although the term 'mass driver' is usually reserved for very big coilguns, such as systems used to launch spacecraft or toss material from the Moon back to Earth. That sort of thing.

You know, it's kinda funny when you think about it... a particle beam is just a peculiar kind of coilgun, too!

As would be a plasma weapon, not the MDC flamethrowers as everyone claims all instances are in Rifts. Kittani aren't nor are Naruni, where is the evidence for any weapon besides missiles. I don't even recall the missiles description stating it was a liquid so saying it is an MDC napalm could simply be describing that it burns over an area over a time which is completely possible for the fourth state of matter if it can be maintained.

[Zer0 Kay]

Gee good thing the novels aren't canon material.

Never said they were, just how they described something.

Personally for the kind of velocity we're talking about here, mass driver seems very appropriate.

Again... coil guns don't provide as much energy as railguns so a mass driver also would not.

[Zer0 Kay]

Gee good thing the novels aren't canon material.

Never said they were, just how they described something.

Personally for the kind of velocity we're talking about here, mass driver seems very appropriate.

The term mass driver is misleading.

There are chemical mass drivers: firearms.
There are electromagnetic mass drivers: Coil guns, rail guns and quench guns.

I typically reserve the term 'mass driver' to large, planetoid scale weapons like the one from 'The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress'.

Well someone in this thread used it for a coilgun. I'm used to it being used in therms of a magnetic rail system that is used to launch unmanned spacecraft or asteroids with a reusable armature. The craft can't be manned because without innertial dampening the acceleration would kill.

Gauss Rifle is also missleading because all that means is a rifle that uses magnetics to propel the round, so it can also be either a coil or a rail.

So Electro-magnetic Weapons (EW) or Gaussian Weapons can be devided into two sub catagories. Those catagories are coil or rail. Mass-Drivers often refer to an external means of propulsion as in ship or vehicular but in some instances its properties are used as a weapon. For example, a mass-driver used to launch asteroids from the asteroid belt into Earth Orbit for mining, isn't meant to be used as a weapon but with some retargeting could be, just as a car or semi-truck could be. Often time in literature mass-drivers will be described in a way that lead one to derive that they are a rail system.

[Borast]

Easy way to figure it...a rail gun has paired rails running the length of the the barrel. Coil guns have electromagnetic rings spaced along the length of the barrel.

As for how a rail gun, I don't know HOW the rails could accellerate the shell faster than the coils in a coil gun could.

[Zer0 Kay]

Easy way to figure it...a rail gun has paired rails running the length of the the barrel. Coil guns have electromagnetic rings spaced along the length of the barrel.

As for how a rail gun, I don't know HOW the rails could accellerate the shell faster than the coils in a coil gun could.

What that got to do with figuring anything? We know rail and we know coil it's the massdriver or the gauss weapon or the EMW. Any of those could mean either of the weapons.

How a rail can accelerate faster... not necessarily faster, better. A rail doesn't split the power between multiple loads so it is more efficient. If you apply the same amount of power to a coil the projectile will be slower. Also it is more sturdy because railguns don't rely on timing circuits like coilguns have to. However coilgun elements don't need to be in direct contact with the projectile so it can be made wather proof and doesn't suffer from as much errosion or any of the welding problems. A railgun however doesn't have to have magnetic ammunition it propells using the magnetic forces created by electricity. So as long as the ammunition is conductive it can be fired. BUT even if the ammunition isn't conductive it can be propelled by an armiture.

[Drakenred®™©]

Ironicaly many of the railgun designers latly have been looking at useing a gas injection system to basicaly"pre fire" the projectile so that it is already moveing forward by the time the round gets to the Rails. and aparently it works.

[Zer0 Kay]

Ironicaly many of the railgun designers latly have been looking at useing a gas injection system to basicaly"pre fire" the projectile so that it is already moveing forward by the time the round gets to the Rails. and aparently it works.

That would probably also help with acceleration of coilgun rounds. Using the coils as amplifiers rather than drivers.

With the rails I could see how it can and can't help.
Pro doesn't have to move the round from the resting possition.
Con in order to maintain proper alignment the round and propulsion unit would have to be on the rails this may cause the round to not get optimal propulsion from the rails. Also due to inconsistancy of chemical propellants it may misalign the round or mess with the already bad errosion problem.

With a coil
Pro doesn't have to move the round from rest
Con the timing issue even more difficult to deal with due to inconsistancies of chemical propellants.

Hey I just thought of other cons for each system in general.

Coil easily misaligned (if a single magnet of the set is misaligned it will likely destroy the weapon with the projectile, though this is easily countered if the elements are placed in a foam or some other type of firm non-conductive substance that will keep them from moving.)

Rail round easily misaligned (if the round looses contact with the rails it will probably cause an arc and likely create a weld, making the weapon useless but not in as dramatic a way as the coil's misalignment)

Coil dependance on circuitry makes it more succeptable to EM which is strangely enough produced by the weapon.

Rail (think I've mentioned it before) dependance on conductive contact (which makes it impossible to fire in any material that is a better conductor to ground than the round or armiture, in seawater it is quite likely that the railguns will just cause an arc in the water damaging EVERYTHING in xyz radius and weld the round/armiture to the rails.)

[Shiva7]

I've recently changed my view on Rifts railguns...


I consider the rounds to be single solid projectiles witha mini-explosive cap in the rear. The cap is detonated when the triger is pulled the the forward velocity pushes the round into the acceleration chamber. The majority of the velocity is provided by a small set of rails only a few inches long, but the energy discharge is significant. The rest of the barrel is rifled and the round travel much the same way as a moder firearm.

Advantages:

Projectile does not require a casing and the gun does not need an ejection port.

Explosive charge can only be set off via electrice discharge. preventing "cook-off."

Projectile in motion when it comes in contact with rails, thus less chance of welding.

Rails are short, thus the rest of the barrel can be made of a much more resiliant material that doesn't need to be conductive. Wear is minimized and replacing the rails becomes a lot easier and cost effective.

Much shorter electrical discharge period, thus not as complicated or expensive as a setup that would accelerate the round down the entire barrel.

Rifled barrel allows for greater projectile stability on flight, no fins required.


Only real disadvantage would be the significant electric discharge requred for the acceleration.

Thus, if you take a look at the image of the Samus Railgun, the projectiles enter in via the belt, are fired forward into the rails which are directly before the cylindrical portion of the barrel. Everything after the raild is solid MDC material with rifling for stability.

[Borast]

Ironicaly many of the railgun designers latly have been looking at useing a gas injection system to basicaly"pre fire" the projectile so that it is already moveing forward by the time the round gets to the Rails. and aparently it works.

True...admittedly it is a fictional weapon, but I remember a rail gun in a novel that used a plastic slug with an aluminium skirt. It used a gas gun to pre-fire the slug at barely subsonic speeds. The non-magnetic slug enters the barrel, where the aluminium skirt strikes the rails and turns into a plasma, which is magnetic. The plasma enveloping the slug is used to accellerate the slug to hyper-sonic velocities. It could shoot holes in ships in low orbit - flat trajectories out to absurd ranges, etc...

As mentioned bys omeone else, this kind of system has the advantage of accellerating a moving mass, which is less energy expensive than the alternative.

[Zer0 Kay]

Considering how strong materials in Rifts earth are to begin with I don't think rail erosion would be as big of an issue. Railguns that use a plasma armature are much louder than ones than use a solid object as an armarture. If the railgun sealed in the gases, the pressure of the plasma could be used along with it's magnetic properties to propel a slug. At least thats how i'd think the boom gun could achieve it's effects.

Coilguns have a size issue compared to rail guns, at smaller sizes rail guns are far better at accelerating a projectile to higher speeds. At a certain point in size a coilgun would be more efficient because the resistance of the rails would star working agains a railgun.

Modern Railguns turn the solid armiture into plasma.

How do you figure no errosion? SDC round and armiture in SDC RG driven at SDC speeds = errosion to SDC rails.
MDC round and armiture in MDC RG driven at MDC speeds = errosion to MDC rails.
Plasma is detrimental to magnetism. Not to mention that a rail gun depends on electricity not magnetism the round nor the armiture need to be magnetic.

There's always lubrication... you heard it BG K-Y
yeah the bigger railgun would have friction working against it... or you could amp up power and keep the length the same. Where as in order to increase power on a coil gun you'll have to increase size other wise the mag field of one magnet will impede anothers, so you end up with a size problem with coilguns.

[Zer0 Kay]

I've recently changed my view on Rifts railguns...


I consider the rounds to be single solid projectiles witha mini-explosive cap in the rear. The cap is detonated when the triger is pulled the the forward velocity pushes the round into the acceleration chamber. The majority of the velocity is provided by a small set of rails only a few inches long, but the energy discharge is significant. The rest of the barrel is rifled and the round travel much the same way as a moder firearm.

Advantages:

Projectile does not require a casing and the gun does not need an ejection port.

Explosive charge can only be set off via electrice discharge. preventing "cook-off."

Projectile in motion when it comes in contact with rails, thus less chance of welding.

Rails are short, thus the rest of the barrel can be made of a much more resiliant material that doesn't need to be conductive. Wear is minimized and replacing the rails becomes a lot easier and cost effective.

Much shorter electrical discharge period, thus not as complicated or expensive as a setup that would accelerate the round down the entire barrel.

Rifled barrel allows for greater projectile stability on flight, no fins required.


Only real disadvantage would be the significant electric discharge requred for the acceleration.

Thus, if you take a look at the image of the Samus Railgun, the projectiles enter in via the belt, are fired forward into the rails which are directly before the cylindrical portion of the barrel. Everything after the raild is solid MDC material with rifling for stability.

two words... call lightning

But seriously we know that they do eject casing, or at least the BG does.

A standard railgun isn't complicated no matter how long it is, however a coilgun become more complicated as it's size grows.

[Zer0 Kay]

Ironicaly many of the railgun designers latly have been looking at useing a gas injection system to basicaly"pre fire" the projectile so that it is already moveing forward by the time the round gets to the Rails. and aparently it works.

That would probably also help with acceleration of coilgun rounds. Using the coils as amplifiers rather than drivers.

It would be unnecessarily redundant with Coil Guns, as they already can acclerate an object from a rest state. However rail guns need the round to be already in motion in order to operate. A two-stage 'rail' gun would likely be a coilgun to get the projectile up to the target speed with the rail gun taking over to provide the final 'kick'. Basically operating in the same way that scramjets are supposed to.

Hmm I don't ever recall the articles stating that the armiture had to be pushed into an already charged rail setup. A coilgun can only set an object into motion if the object is within the reach of it's gauss field. At one time I was thinking about making an add on for conventional firearms to accelerate the round using a coil system in Rifts... someone beat me to it. But the concept with magnetism is if an object is passed through the center of a gaussian field it will be accelerated. So if the object is already in motion the coilgun can cause more damage.

[Qev]

A railgun however doesn't have to have magnetic ammunition it propells using the magnetic forces created by electricity. So as long as the ammunition is conductive it can be fired. BUT even if the ammunition isn't conductive it can be propelled by an armiture.

Oddly enough, a coilgun doesn't necessarily need magnetic (I assume you mean ferromagnetic, ie. you can stick magnets to it) material either. Paramagnetic materials, such as aluminum and uranium, can also be fired from coilguns; I once saw an impressive demonstration of an aluminum-can-firing coilgun. Best way to crush cans, ever.

Heck, you could probably fire a lot of diamagnetic ('non-magnetic') materials, like water, or small frogs, out of a coilgun... but the power requirements would be stupendous.

[Shiva7]

:D two words... call lightning

But seriously we know that they do eject casing, or at least the BG does.

A standard railgun isn't complicated no matter how long it is, however a coilgun become more complicated as it's size grows.

Call lightning against an MDC armour human doesn't electrocute the target, but good try

Some rail guns would still use casing, including some Triax designs (cover of WB 5), but things like the NG and SAMAS rail guns wouldn't.

The principle of a rail gun is not complicated, but getting one to work in a practical manner is quiet difficult. Every component of the rail guns assembly posses some sort of problem.

The acceleration of the round forces the rails backwards which tends to cause them to separate, thus breaking the circuit. This is countered by clamping down ont he rails and putting the round under compression. Of course since the round in now under compression, it increases the chance of it welding to the rails if it isn't moving. Of course if you are going to shoot the round into the rail assembly, it becomes that much more difficult with the inter-rail gap being smaller than the round itself. Also, since the round is under compression, it increases friction and wear on the rail which has the added effect of increasing the vaporization of the round. The vaporization creates a plasma behind the round, but also between the contacting surfaces, which then reduces contact and thus the round has less acceleration. How do you fix that, increase the power to the assembly, but that just increase the chance of welding and also the amount of plasma being formed.

So you see, the idea is simple, but the application for practical use is very complicated. I wrote a paper on it in college, everything i wrote here represents current problem scientists are facing.

[Zer0 Kay]

Ironicaly many of the railgun designers latly have been looking at useing a gas injection system to basicaly"pre fire" the projectile so that it is already moveing forward by the time the round gets to the Rails. and aparently it works.

That would probably also help with acceleration of coilgun rounds. Using the coils as amplifiers rather than drivers.

It would be unnecessarily redundant with Coil Guns, as they already can acclerate an object from a rest state. However rail guns need the round to be already in motion in order to operate. A two-stage 'rail' gun would likely be a coilgun to get the projectile up to the target speed with the rail gun taking over to provide the final 'kick'. Basically operating in the same way that scramjets are supposed to.

Hmm I don't ever recall the articles stating that the armiture had to be pushed into an already charged rail setup. A coilgun can only set an object into motion if the object is within the reach of it's gauss field. At one time I was thinking about making an add on for conventional firearms to accelerate the round using a coil system in Rifts... someone beat me to it. But the concept with magnetism is if an object is passed through the center of a gaussian field it will be accelerated. So if the object is already in motion the coilgun can cause more damage.

http://www.powerlabs.org/railgun2.htm

Read about the 'Injector'.

and if you reread you will note that he states that it would be a waste to spend the power to accellerate the round from a state of rest... NOT that it can't and extra . While from what I understand of coilguns they amplify the motion as I stated before.

[demos606]

Most modern rifles have muzzle velocities in the mach 2-3 range (~2200fps for M16A2). Handguns are signifigantly slower with most muzzle velocities falling near the speed of sound (~1100fps).

The velocities here are pretty much accurate in my experience.

[Zer0 Kay]

Hmmm... more likely FefnaGale was saying that modern weaponry have muzzle velocities greater than the speed of sound.

Sure... but it still not ALL. Most civilian firearms are sub-sonic. All sound suppressed firearms need to use sub-sonic rounds or it's pointless since the shockwave travels with the round. All the supressor does is muffle the sound made by the excaping gasses.

[Zer0 Kay]

Ironicaly many of the railgun designers latly have been looking at useing a gas injection system to basicaly"pre fire" the projectile so that it is already moveing forward by the time the round gets to the Rails. and aparently it works.

That would probably also help with acceleration of coilgun rounds. Using the coils as amplifiers rather than drivers.

It would be unnecessarily redundant with Coil Guns, as they already can accelerate an object from a rest state. However rail guns need the round to be already in motion in order to operate. A two-stage 'rail' gun would likely be a coilgun to get the projectile up to the target speed with the rail gun taking over to provide the final 'kick'. Basically operating in the same way that scramjets are supposed to.

Hmm I don't ever recall the articles stating that the armature had to be pushed into an already charged rail setup. A coilgun can only set an object into motion if the object is within the reach of it's gauss field. At one time I was thinking about making an add on for conventional firearms to accelerate the round using a coil system in Rifts... someone beat me to it. But the concept with magnetism is if an object is passed through the center of a gaussian field it will be accelerated. So if the object is already in motion the coilgun can cause more damage.

http://www.powerlabs.org/railgun2.htm

Read about the 'Injector'.

and if you reread you will note that he states that it would be a waste to spend the power to accelerate the round from a state of rest... NOT that it can't and extra . While from what I understand of coilguns they amplify the motion as I stated before.

Basically, rail guns are useless for slow velocities and extremely inefficient. However at higher velocities you get more bang for your buck.

Wow this is starting to look like mine and Mech-Viper's conversations Anyway the coil would be the same a round accelerated into a coil is far more efficient than one started from a resting state... it's pretty much that way with anything. Is a two stage rocket efficient if only the second stage works? Or is it more efficient if it is first put into motion by the first stage?

A railgun CAN accelerate a round up to speed through it is inneficient.

A coilgun has to expand its field to attract the round which would add additional computations into the coil timing and power managements

[SoulofThunder]

i dont know what firearms you've been shooting , but most firearms (civilian or milspec - most shoot the SAME ammo ,including match grade) fire rounds over mach one and higher.


my issue with the "boom" is that many small munitions will not create the sonic assault that the game boomgun would. you would hear a crackling noise of the munitions much like a bunch of fireworks going off. if we were talking about the SR-71 going over your head , i would agree. if we were talking about a solid tungsten "round" and its sabot, i may agree there. but the GB boomgun is more akin to a highspeed shotgun . personally, i dont agree with that making a big 'ole boom.


edit -
mach 1 = 340.29 meters per second
mach 1 = 1 116.43701 feet per second
ak round - (7.62x39) 2104 - 2396 feet/second
ar-15/M-16 -(.223 remington) 3025 - 3241 feet/second (damn near Mach 3 !)

[Zer0 Kay]

i dont know what firearms you've been shooting , but most firearms (civilian or milspec - most shoot the SAME ammo ,including match grade) fire rounds over mach one and higher.


my issue with the "boom" is that many small munitions will not create the sonic assault that the game boomgun would. you would hear a crackling noise of the munitions much like a bunch of fireworks going off. if we were talking about the SR-71 going over your head , i would agree. if we were talking about a solid tungsten "round" and its sabot, i may agree there. but the GB boomgun is more akin to a highspeed shotgun . personally, i dont agree with that making a big 'ole boom.


edit -
mach 1 = 340.29 meters per second
mach 1 = 1 116.43701 feet per second
ak round - (7.62x39) 2104 - 2396 feet/second
ar-15/M-16 -(.223 remington) 3025 - 3241 feet/second (damn near Mach 3 !)

The MP5SD reduces the rounds speed to just below the speed of sound. OK OK the Best silenced weapons are subsonic. Obviously some just reduce the sound produced by the propellant explosion. How's that more accurate? BTW some pistols are subsonic as is the MP5SD. And not all rounds used in military weapons can be used in civilian counterparts. The Pancor Jackhammer's rounds are made larger so that a standard SG can't use them.

[SoulofThunder]

i dont know what firearms you've been shooting , but most firearms (civilian or milspec - most shoot the SAME ammo ,including match grade) fire rounds over mach one and higher.


my issue with the "boom" is that many small munitions will not create the sonic assault that the game boomgun would. you would hear a crackling noise of the munitions much like a bunch of fireworks going off. if we were talking about the SR-71 going over your head , i would agree. if we were talking about a solid tungsten "round" and its sabot, i may agree there. but the GB boomgun is more akin to a highspeed shotgun . personally, i dont agree with that making a big 'ole boom.


edit -
mach 1 = 340.29 meters per second
mach 1 = 1 116.43701 feet per second
ak round - (7.62x39) 2104 - 2396 feet/second
ar-15/M-16 -(.223 remington) 3025 - 3241 feet/second (damn near Mach 3 !)

The MP5SD reduces the rounds speed to just below the speed of sound. OK OK the Best silenced weapons are subsonic. Obviously some just reduce the sound produced by the propellant explosion. How's that more accurate? BTW some pistols are subsonic as is the MP5SD. And not all rounds used in military weapons can be used in civilian counterparts. The Pancor Jackhammer's rounds are made larger so that a standard SG can't use them.

the MP5SD is a LE or military only issue. illegal for cats like me. and yes most pistol rounds are subsonic . this is why someone can tell if a pistol has been fired or a rifle has. atleast here in the US . most military firearms have civilian counterparts. basically the same except the civilian versions cannot burst or autofire. and the jackhammer isnt even a military weapon. i think the remingtion 590 are being phased out for some new modular shotgun. i dont know the designation by heart.

[Borast]

I always thought it depended on the load for a chemically propelled slug...although barrel length helped a little.

[Shiva7]

I always thought it depended on the load for a chemically propelled slug...although barrel length helped a little.

Barrel length doesn't make a big difference for the most part unless you are talking about a significant difference. The load i far more important.

Amazing site for anyone interested in ballistics...

[Zer0 Kay]

i dont know what firearms you've been shooting , but most firearms (civilian or milspec - most shoot the SAME ammo ,including match grade) fire rounds over mach one and higher.


my issue with the "boom" is that many small munitions will not create the sonic assault that the game boomgun would. you would hear a crackling noise of the munitions much like a bunch of fireworks going off. if we were talking about the SR-71 going over your head , i would agree. if we were talking about a solid tungsten "round" and its sabot, i may agree there. but the GB boomgun is more akin to a highspeed shotgun . personally, i dont agree with that making a big 'ole boom.

Yeah but the Jackhammer may have been it just failed in testing for the new CAWS.

remember that when the rounds leave the barrel they are still almost a single mass. So it should be a little louder than a .50 cal but yeah no where near the "OH MY GAWD I'M DEAF... WHAT DID YOU SAY..."


edit -
mach 1 = 340.29 meters per second
mach 1 = 1 116.43701 feet per second
ak round - (7.62x39) 2104 - 2396 feet/second
ar-15/M-16 -(.223 remington) 3025 - 3241 feet/second (damn near Mach 3 !)

The MP5SD reduces the rounds speed to just below the speed of sound. OK OK the Best silenced weapons are subsonic. Obviously some just reduce the sound produced by the propellant explosion. How's that more accurate? BTW some pistols are subsonic as is the MP5SD. And not all rounds used in military weapons can be used in civilian counterparts. The Pancor Jackhammer's rounds are made larger so that a standard SG can't use them.

the MP5SD is a LE or military only issue. illegal for cats like me. and yes most pistol rounds are subsonic . this is why someone can tell if a pistol has been fired or a rifle has. atleast here in the US . most military firearms have civilian counterparts. basically the same except the civilian versions cannot burst or autofire. and the jackhammer isnt even a military weapon. i think the remingtion 590 are being phased out for some new modular shotgun. i dont know the designation by heart.

[Zer0 Kay]

I always thought it depended on the load for a chemically propelled slug...although barrel length helped a little.

Barrel length doesn't make a big difference for the most part unless you are talking about a significant difference. The load i far more important.

Amazing site for anyone interested in ballistics...

I must be missing what you guys are talking about... unless it was my comment on how the MP5SD's barrel makes the round subsonic. It may have nothing to do with length otherwise I doubt they'd refer to it as specially designed. Also if the round is only just above sonic then they wouldn't have to slow it down... much to get it to be sub-sonic.

[Borast]

Not a problem ZK...

What I/we was/were referring to is that the velocity of a slug in a chemical weapon is primarily a function of the power of the propellant. Barrel length has some influence, but is not overly significant...unless the barrel goes to extremes in one direction or another, in which case, you actually end up with a bullet travelling slower than it should for the load.

[Zer0 Kay]

Not a problem ZK...

What I/we was/were referring to is that the velocity of a slug in a chemical weapon is primarily a function of the power of the propellant. Barrel length has some influence, but is not overly significant...unless the barrel goes to extremes in one direction or another, in which case, you actually end up with a bullet travelling slower than it should for the load.

OK so I was right. That must be what the SD's barrel does than.

[Borast]

Couldn't tell you...

I don't know the stats on the SD.

However, from what I understand, an uber-long barrel slows a bullet because the pressure wake from the chemical explosive used to propel the slug begins to loose energy, and the friction between the bullet and the slug begins to slow it down.

For a super-snub barrel, the problem goes in the opposite direction, the pressure wake disperses into the air before it can fully accellerate the slug.

Please note, that I may have the specifics wrong, even if the general outcome is correct - I'm not big into ballistics, I just retain odd bits of "trivia" if I think it's interesting.

[Zer0 Kay]

Couldn't tell you...

I don't know the stats on the SD.

However, from what I understand, an uber-long barrel slows a bullet because the pressure wake from the chemical explosive used to propel the slug begins to loose energy, and the friction between the bullet and the slug begins to slow it down.

For a super-snub barrel, the problem goes in the opposite direction, the pressure wake disperses into the air before it can fully accellerate the slug.

Please note, that I may have the specifics wrong, even if the general outcome is correct - I'm not big into ballistics, I just retain odd bits of "trivia" if I think it's interesting.

Hmm So if the number of twists in a rifled barrel are increased does that slow the bullet? If within the barrel portions are either A) narrowed physically slowing the bullet (aren't barrels already alamost impossibly tight?) or B) widened allowing some gas to escape around the bullet (which I figure would normally make a gun louder... but the SD has an integral silencer so it would likely be made to compensate for that also.

[Borast]

ZK - Believe it or not...yes.

The greater the rifling of a barrel, the slower the bullet.

When they first started making rifles, one of the things that gunsmiths and their customers noted was that while the rifle was obscenely accurate (compared to a smooth bore long-arm), the range was less. As for why...the tighter the rifling, the more energy is used up in making the bullet spin.

Now admittedly I am not a ballistics expert, so I don't know what the ratio is of lost range to increased accuracy.

[SoulofThunder]

the "silenced" weapon has a silencer on it and subsonic ammunition is used. subsonic ammo has a reduced amount of propellant in it. this ammo is for close quarter combat. MP5's LE dont have the option of having a long barrel.

silenced sniper rifles work slightly differently. the used of long range being a great part of its stealthy capabilty.

[Zer0 Kay]

ZK - Believe it or not...yes.

The greater the rifling of a barrel, the slower the bullet.

When they first started making rifles, one of the things that gunsmiths and their customers noted was that while the rifle was obscenely accurate (compared to a smooth bore long-arm), the range was less. As for why...the tighter the rifling, the more energy is used up in making the bullet spin.

Now admittedly I am not a ballistics expert, so I don't know what the ratio is of lost range to increased accuracy.

OK then that is probably exactly what they did. I was just asking since someone said that there really isn't anything that could be done aside from bending the barrel (that just sounds wrong to me.

[Zer0 Kay]

the "silenced" weapon has a silencer on it and subsonic ammunition is used. subsonic ammo has a reduced amount of propellant in it. this ammo is for close quarter combat. MP5's LE dont have the option of having a long barrel.

silenced sniper rifles work slightly differently. the used of long range being a great part of its stealthy capabilty.

According to H&K they use a specially designed barrel, on the MP5SP, to make the round subsonic while using the SAME ammunition as the standard MP5.

[Borast]

ZK - Believe it or not...yes.

The greater the rifling of a barrel, the slower the bullet.

When they first started making rifles, one of the things that gunsmiths and their customers noted was that while the rifle was obscenely accurate (compared to a smooth bore long-arm), the range was less. As for why...the tighter the rifling, the more energy is used up in making the bullet spin.

Now admittedly I am not a ballistics expert, so I don't know what the ratio is of lost range to increased accuracy.

OK then that is probably exactly what they did. I was just asking since someone said that there really isn't anything that could be done aside from bending the barrel (that just sounds wrong to me.

Ok...I'm confused a bit, but ok...

In any case, Interesting Historical Trivia, the German Army in WWII had a rifle that could fire around corners! the bullet was provided the usual spin for gyroscopic stability, and caused obscene amounts of damage to anyone unlucky enough to be caught by it. It started tubling right out of the barrel!

[R Ditto]

Interesting.

In the RMB, under weapons, under rail guns, Rail Guns for Rifts are referred to as "electro-magnetic system mass driver".
To me, that means neither rail guns or coil guns.
I consider them... well, EM mass drivers, using a bunch of electro-magnets along the barrel to accelerate the rounds, with the rounds never touching the barrel.

In 2098, it's probably easy for the electronics in a child's toy to pack the computing power needed for a complex series of electro-magnets that are able to accelerate each round, even despite minor variations in mass/density/shape, with near perfect precision, so it seems simple for a military system to be able to easily handle such a complex acceleration system.
Rounds go fast, they don't need to be built to exact specifications, and there is no wear and tear on the barrel.
Heck, such a system could be adjustable and be able to fire more or less any suitable projectile that would fit in the barrel and which the ammo feed system could into the weapon.
Imagine a SAMAS rail gun tweaked to have a second setting that pulses it hundreds or thousands of times a second. Not enough power per pulse for a 12.7mm sized round, but enough for oh, say, a bunch of BB sized pellets, with the secondary ammo feed being a funnel and a bucket of BBs.

It also makes sense that the BG have a 'pre-accelerated" setup. The slugs are 1in long each, but the cartridge is 7in, so there is 3in of unexplained size/space, enough for something like a 50mm "shotgun shell" that fires off a sabo round packed with 200 slugs.
It also explains the big boom, from a high powered explosive propellent charge.

Also explains why the CS never even tried to reverse engineer the BG, maybe a "chemical propellent" is part of the "inferior design" excuse the CS uses for not using any of the "tech" that would make a GB possible. Who cares if they don't like the GB itself, the weapon tech of the BG alone seems like something the CS should have jumped on top of at the first possible chance, but having a chemical propellent would explain why they never bothered with reverse engineering the mighty BG itself.

[Qev]

Interesting.

In the RMB, under weapons, under rail guns, Rail Guns for Rifts are referred to as "electro-magnetic system mass driver".
To me, that means neither rail guns or coil guns.
I consider them... well, EM mass drivers, using a bunch of electro-magnets along the barrel to accelerate the rounds, with the rounds never touching the barrel.

Just to nitpick... that pretty much is the definition of a coil gun.

It also makes sense that the BG have a 'pre-accelerated" setup. The slugs are 1in long each, but the cartridge is 7in, so there is 3in of unexplained size/space, enough for something like a 50mm "shotgun shell" that fires off a sabo round packed with 200 slugs.
It also explains the big boom, from a high powered explosive propellent charge.

From what I understand, railguns have problems operating without pre-acceleration, as the armature tends to weld itself to the rails if it isn't already moving. Coilguns don't really need pre-acceleration, but could use it anyway...

If the boom gun is a railgun, perhaps it's using a plasma armature to accelerate the round, and the sudden expansion of the superheated gas is what makes the boom?

[TechnoGothic]

741 mph to break the sound barrier at Sea Level...


Mach One = 741 mph

Mach Two = 1,482 mph

Mach Three = 2,223 mph

Mach Four = 2,964 mph

Mach Five = 3,705 mph


------------------------

Mach One = 12.35 miles per minute

Mach Two = 24.7 miles per minute

Mach Three = 37.05 miles per minute

Mach Four = 49.4 miles per minute

Mach Five = 61.75 miles per minute

------------------------

Mach One = .2058333 miles Per Second

Mach Two = .4116666 miles Per Second

Mach Three = .6175 miles Per Second

Mach Four = .8233333 miles Per Second

Mach Five = 1.0291666 miles Per Second

---------------------------


Boomgun takes 2 seconds to hit something 2 miles away


But it take about 10 seconds to hear the boom 2 miles away

You can fire maybe 5 times before they hear the first shot

[Borast]

Boomgun takes 2 seconds to hit something 2 miles away


But it take about 10 seconds to hear the boom 2 miles away

You can fire maybe 5 times before they hear the first shot

True...but the first shot is likely to knock-down almost any small 'borg or 'bot, or smaller unit (like a trooper in body armour)...so the shots after the first are not necessarily going to hit... (Since you'll pull the trigger about the same time as the 'borg or 'bot falls down.)

[KLM]

Just a small point... the notion that there is no wear and tear on the barrel of a Railgun is extremely erroneous. The replusive magnetic forces involved in accelerating a round to supersonic velocities like that would rip apart any conventional material - of course, MD weapons would be made of MD materials, but they'd still need pretty substantial maintainance on a regular basis... or even funky, HMG-style barrel changes, degrading in performance until one is performed.

I agree with you in the case of true railguns.

Yet, in Rifts, railguns can be used underwater, so they might not be
railguns at all (not to mention railguns with muzzle flash).

Plus the lack of repair rules - maybe the horrendous cost of armor
repair covers that too.

Adios
KLM

[KLM]

Well, apart from shielding your electronics from salt water, there's no reason at all why you couldn't use high-powered EM weapons (such as Rail or even Plasma guns) - assuming you didn't mind the immediate and severe side-effects.

Errr.... A rail gun must connect to the projectile, to conduct
electricity. Now, when you have to fire 40 or 80 projectiles
per burst, it is hard to keep the connectors (you know, the ones
which wear and tear) out of water... And you know what happens
when water gets into the barrel.

As for the muzzle flash... uhhh... maybe some sort of atmospheric action with the round or a thin plastic/nylon layer on the outside of the slug burning off?

Yeah, and those are not casings but actually miniature batteries,
ejected from the gun, right?

IMO, the WB5 cover suggest that the Dyna-Max have machine gun
appendages, which fire pumpgun ammunition (for logistic's sake).
Now, having two machineguns, which fire bursts of like 20 rounds
each, and each shell does 4d6 MD...

Adios
KLM

[KLM]

Railguns underwater:
I would go with coilguns and maybe with superconductor rings
(with low, but almost "permanent" current running in them)
built in the projectiles... That way, the "bullets" do not contact
the barrel's inside, and therefore it can be coated with an
MDC ceramics... So the water will not short circuit the armatures
/connectors.

I'd not noticed the Dyna-max guns... let's see, twenty times 4D6... that's 1D4x10, right? ^_-

Definitely. It is more than enough for an anti-gargoyle/anti-armor
mecha, and it does not violate the Holy Boom Gun dogma.


And burn all the WB5's, where the Jager's recoilles Flak canon
does the same damage as a 300 years olds design, the Holy
Boom Gun.

And there was rejoice.

Adios
KLM

[Malice Faith]

displacement...is it not like clapping...REAL hard?
Remember that time you heard an atom split?

[KLM]

displacement...is it not like clapping...REAL hard?
Remember that time you heard an atom split?

Huhh? I lost in this one.

Adios
KLM

[Qev]

Why would anyone want a railgun/coilgun to fire underwater? The whole advantage of a railgun is, apparently, being able to accelerate a projectile up to ridiculous velocities. This cannot happen underwater. Unlike air, water can't be compressed. It's not going to get out of the way of a hyper-velocity projectile; you might as well cap the end of your railgun barrel with a solid steel ingot ten inches thick.

You could certainly use it to launch lower velocity projectiles underwater... but then why bother with a railgun/coilgun?