Military Review

Perspective models of weapons of the XXI century: weapons from cubes (part 2)

72
Last time in the material "Advanced samples weapons The twenty-first century, what they can be ”we told about the concept rifle (or Martin Greer’s American concept carbine and the upgrading of existing small arms systems associated with this project. And the situation today is truly strange. Everyone believes that the gas engine weapon has reached the limit of perfection , and it’s hard not to agree with it. It’s not for nothing that all the improvements of modern automatic rifles go mainly along the path of upgrading and hanging them with Picatini slats of every kind there. Shnikova of the latest models, and of many other samples. Well, we’ve figured out how to place the reloading handle both on the right and on the left, especially for left-handers. Well, it’s not critical, and not too many left-handers serve in the army, and those who cannot master the “right-handed grip.” But ... they do it. They increase the level of comfort. But they didn’t bother with the new “Kalashnikovs” and ... why didn’t they become worse? M16 doesn't have a handle either rearranged and nothing, somehow shoots.



A mock-up rifle using the most advanced “cubes” design principles: “our response to Martin Greer”!

Specifically, from the new after the war in general, only the “bullpup” system appeared, according to which there are several serial models of weapons - for example, the French rifle FAMAS, the British SA-80 and the Swiss AUG. The goal, as we all know, was the most benign one — cut the length of the weapon, and leave the barrel length the same. The long barrel is good ballistics and no one argues with that. But the French abandon their "Clairon". Although why would it? Here are the pros and cons of this weapon.

Pros:
The rifle is compact.
It has a high accuracy of combat.
You can quickly modify it for shooting from both the right and left shoulder.
Allows you to shoot rifle grenades of different types, including hanging fire.
The weapon is quite ergonomic, there are removable bipods that increase the accuracy of shooting.
Handle reloading is available for both hands, and does not go beyond the dimensions of the body of the rifle.
It has a high rate of fire, with a relatively small loss of accuracy.
It has a composite case.
It is considered a reliable design.

Cons:
In the F1 model, the 25 charging magazine can be inserted upside down.
On sight, there are only two pillars: on the 100 m and on the 300 m.
When firing rifle grenades are used two types of ammunition, using the wrong cartridge grenade can explode directly on the barrel.
It has a high impact when firing rifle grenade direct fire.
Store capacity is considered insufficient.
Requires non-standard steel sleeve.
Unregulated butt, “rear” balance and ejection of sleeves near the shooter’s face do not please everyone.

As a result, the Germans with the Heckler & Koch HK416 rifle and the Belgians with the FN SCAR are fighting for a new machine gun for the French army. Moreover, both rifles have a traditional design with a gas engine located above the barrel, a modular system and are equipped with all fashionable novelties, such as telescopic butts and numerous rails for mounting optical and collimator sights, tactical lights, target designators and all kinds of attachments.

The earlier attempts to create "automatic rifles of the future" failed nowhere else, either in Europe, in the same France, or in the USA. The resulting samples had a large weight, of the order of 8,5 kg, and turned out to be very expensive due to the presence of all sorts of expensive electronics on them.


The same rifle. Right view.

However, as time passed, and electronics has fallen in price. Many technologies have been developed, new high-strength plastics have appeared. That is, there is simply a mass of ready-made cubes, of which today it is possible, like from the Lego, to collect anything. An example is the American AR-18 rifle. In fact, the same M16, but with a gas piston. Shops on 20,30 and even 40 cartridges, that is, for every taste. Reliability is higher than that of 16, which was not so much quality as marketing that helped spread the world. The Japanese began to produce it, but for a number of political reasons, it was subsequently abandoned. By the way, the length of its barrel is 494 mm, while the FA MAS 488 is mm, the SA-80 has 518 mm, and the AUG, depending on the modification, 407 has 508 mm.


Left view. Electronic control unit removed.

Hence the first conclusion: the barrel of the perspective rifle should be long, with a relatively small total length. Butt necessarily adjustable in length, that is, the scheme "bullpup" immediately disappears. The modular design principle is required. The rate of fire must be high, not less than 750 shots / min, the speed of the bullet is not less than 950 m / s, and better and the whole 1000 m / s and above. Store a minimum capacity of 25 cartridges, but the best is 50.

And here is the second conclusion, so to speak, “for growth”, and its essence is that in the near future, weapons should be manufactured at enterprises ... making computers, and not those equipped with a whole arsenal of turning, drilling, milling and other machines. and translating whole mountains of metal shavings. All this should be kept to a minimum and, pay attention, because all this is precisely the development of technology today!


Electronic control unit. In essence, this is a “mobile phone” to communicate with your rifle. The microprocessor in it monitors the number of shots in the trunks, is responsible for aiming, communicates with the computer of the unit commander ....

And now let's imagine what we can think of, knowing all this and based on the trends and conclusions we know. At first glance, the conclusion is paradoxical: the rifle of the future should be a “bullup”, and at the same time it should not be a “bullap”. It should have a long barrel, but be short, have a minimum of "mechanics" and a lot of "electronics", but so that all these cubes of it work with maximum reliability. Is it possible to combine all this? It turns out - you can, if you think. True, what you see here in the photo is just a concept. It is clear that in metal this structure may look completely different. But ... for now, at the level of ideas, it looks like this. Name of rifle EVSh-18 (Shpakovsky electronic rifle, 2018 year). And it may very well be that she will never see the light at all, but it is known that thought is material. Suddenly, someone more knowledgeable, someone more intelligent will read, think and ... do much better.

Here it is, shown in the photos presented here. The device (not shown and understandable why - the concept is “not metal”) is this: inside the case of impact-resistant plastic there is a block of 25 trunks with vertical or longitudinal fins (which one should look better) for better cooling. Between the trunks there is empty space. On the muzzle cut, respectively, the holes for air outlet, located around each barrel. At the end of the case is a flame arrester. When firing gases, escaping from the barrel, create cravings and thus pumped air through the body of the rifle. The more intense the shooting, the stronger the thrust, that is, the well-proven principle of cooling applied to the Lewis machine gun, which had a record-breaking rate of 1200 shots / min for its time. And did not overheat! The length of the barrels 610 mm, that is, longer than that of the RPK-74 light machine gun (590 mm). In this case, the total length of the rifle is only slightly larger - 715 mm. Why did this happen? The fact is that in the traditional rifles and automatic weapons behind the barrel are the bolt, return spring, shock absorber and, in addition, also the butt. There is practically nothing behind the barrels here, except for five vertical cylindrical valves, locking five trunks at a time. On each of them there is a bevel gear at the top, and above all the valves there is a horizontal shaft with five bevel gears and one cylindrical gear. The latter is turned by a worm gear at the end of the shaft, which goes over the body of the rifle in a small ledge in its nose. It also has a pair of bevel gears and the control knob for three positions - forward, all the way to the left and all the way to the right. It is spring loaded, that is, some effort should be made to control this handle. Right-handed and left-handed working with her is equally convenient. We need this gear in order to turn the valves before loading on 90 degrees. And it does not matter which way you turn the handle. The valves will turn and ... a small air outlet will open against each barrel. Why do you need it?


The rifle and its accessories: a control unit and two cartridges. However, the last soldier can take a lot.


The electronic control unit is installed. It can be installed both on the left and on the right!

But why, since the trunks are at the same time the chamber, they can only be charged in the old manner, from the barrel! To do this, there are two chargers for the rifle - two cartridges, one of which contains 25 shots, and the second - 50, and the charging holes on them coincide with the barrels. The cartridges are spherical cylinders with compressed air. The cartridge is inserted into the flame arrester, the cylinder is rotated left or right, a valve opens inside it and compressed air pushes warheads into the barrels. But since they enter into them very tightly, the air from the trunks just bleeds through the holes in the valves, and the charges themselves reach the end of the trunks.


Muzzle cut and flame arrester.

It now remains to raise the lever, the protrusion of which blocks the cartridge inside the flame arrester, and the air pressure that remains in the trunks will simply throw it away. The decision, as you see, is unusual, but there is nothing supercomplex in it. An ordinary magazine is replaced as follows: first, the empty one is removed (the magazine latch is pressed), after which a new magazine is inserted and the shutter is set. In this rifle, the handle turns to the side (the lock is removed inside the flame arrester, which otherwise does not allow the cartridge to be inserted), then the cartridge is inserted, the balloon is rotated to the stop, loading occurs, then the lock lever is released, the cartridge is automatically removed, and the shutter control handle put in the "forward" position. That is, the number of movements is about the same.


Two cartridges. View of the latch.


Two cartridges. View from above.


"Rifle mechanics." Two handles close each other.


The shutter control is in the “left” position. Cartridge lock raised. Now, according to the idea, the air pressure will throw an empty cartridge out of the flame arrester receiver.


That's the whole "mechanics" of the recharge system ...

To be continued ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
Prospective weapons of the XXI century: what they can be?
72 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 9 December 2018 06: 38
    +6
    I am delighted ! I am "trudging" from this Concept! For it reminded me of my youth! During my school years I was fond of "the ideas of the priest": that is. I was saddened that, for example, at the beginning of the 18th century. "Fuzei" (ie smooth-bore muzzle-loading guns) "dominated", but I thought that I could "make a splash" if I "got" at that time (time machine, etc.) ... I already understood that the necessary machines and other precise instruments will not be available and it is necessary to think over "cunning" designs, taking into account the "then" technologies! What did I not "create" then! Weapons: rifled, multiply charged, breech-loading ... smooth-bore, but with "tricky" bullets ... multiply charged, but loaded from the muzzle, incl. and "smooth"! I also "had" pneumatic (and not only pneumatic ...) charging cartridges for loading "from the muzzle"! How "yesterday" was! Well, how can I not feel sympathy for the Author after that !? fellow good
  2. riwas
    riwas 9 December 2018 07: 26
    +5
    Modern rifles have a heavy barrel due to the high pressure in the barrel.
    And if the rifle has 25 barrels! You have to sacrifice the characteristics or make the rifle unbearable. And with poor performance, no one needs such a rifle.
    1. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 9 December 2018 07: 38
      +1
      Quote: riwas
      Modern rifles have a heavy barrel due to the high pressure in the barrel.
      And if the rifle has 25 barrels!

      And if you put 250 trunks, then there will be a machine gun. yes
      1. riwas
        riwas 9 December 2018 07: 46
        0
        The picture shows the cartridge for the rifle "charging" for 25 barrels. Overkill.
    2. kalibr
      9 December 2018 08: 19
      +1
      You are absolutely right here. But in this case it’s a concept, and a concept can, in principle, be done to the maximum. You need to know exactly the characteristics of each barrel, and for this - its ammunition, right? And then add the weight of all the parts, trunks, hull and more. So in the end, you can get both 25, and 20 and just 5 trunks into which ... 25 cartridges are inserted. The length of the trunks allows this, and the computer again compensates for the difference in ballistic characteristics. But all this must be calculated very thoroughly, and not at the amateur level. It is simply one thing to describe an idea, and another thing - an idea + something material. The level is clearly higher, although it is still low in front of the firing sample. But better than nothing.
      1. riwas
        riwas 9 December 2018 08: 29
        +2
        The computer does not affect internal ballistics.
        An example of calculating the internal ballistics and wall thickness of the barrel in the application of my article:
        http://www.sinor.ru/~bukren1/anti_t_b.htm
        1. kalibr
          9 December 2018 08: 35
          +2
          You reason as a specialist and that’s good. But for me, this is the limit. If you count ... well ... I will be very grateful!
        2. kalibr
          9 December 2018 22: 27
          0
          A very interesting article, read with great pleasure. Thanks so much for the recommendation!
  3. riwas
    riwas 9 December 2018 07: 40
    +1
    Of the existing types of weapons, there is only one muzzle-loading - a mortar.
    And it can be made capable of laying fire and fire in bursts with mounted fire. More details:
    http://www.sinor.ru/~bukren21/MINOMET_w.doc
  4. alex-cn
    alex-cn 9 December 2018 09: 03
    +4
    Someone from the great atomic physicists in the 50s betrayed an aphorism:
    "the idea is crazy, but is it crazy enough to be carried out?"
    maybe I didn’t remember it exactly, but I kept the meaning ...
    Dare, Vyacheslav Olegovich, I liked it ...
  5. Decimam
    Decimam 9 December 2018 11: 51
    +5
    So, let's count. Suppose that this was done under a 5,45x39 cartridge and take the AK-74 barrel as its basis, only 415 mm long, not 610, but. The most approximate calculation shows that such a barrel will weigh about 0,7 kg. Accordingly, a block of 25 trunks will weigh 18 kg. The weight of the rest can be neglected. I can congratulate the author, he practically repeated the invention of Maxim. The body weight of his legendary machine gun without water is 20 kg. The only thing, the author forgot to develop a machine from which his wunderwaffe will mow down enemies, since it is difficult to imagine a hero shooting from such a rifle with his hands.
    It would be nice to think over how many fighters will be needed in the service staff. After all, these cartridges will need to be worn and equipped by someone. A can of compressed air weighs about 100 kg.
    Vyacheslav Olegovich, you stubbornly deny the centuries-old experience of mankind and are trying to create in an area where you lack the most basic knowledge.
    Speaking of the bulpap system. She did not appear after the war, but before the war,

    Anti-tank rifle PzB M.SS.41 / PzB-41 (t).
    1. andrewkor
      andrewkor 9 December 2018 14: 32
      +1
      Here he is, so is he, and even politely!
      1. Decimam
        Decimam 9 December 2018 14: 56
        +4
        You know, I did not set the author's goal to "get away". It's just a long-standing dispute about the need for knowledge in human activity. The author is not completely consistent on this issue. He terribly dislikes amateur and folk historians, but he himself is an inveterate "folk-gunner".
      2. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave 9 December 2018 21: 20
        +2
        This user is basically very polite and as correct as possible.
    2. kalibr
      9 December 2018 15: 39
      0
      It may very well be so. But these calculations are also approximate. And then it's a concept. And where does the air cylinder for 100 kg. I don't understand at all. Still, you need to read a little more carefully, and you, too, are like some VO readers, who glide over the text and write without having read to the end. You do not need to equip or refill cartridges. As for the weight, you cannot compare the weight of a weapon with an individual barrel for all occasions and ... like that. So you can safely reduce the weight in half, at least. This is already 9 kg. A lot too, right ?! But if you reduce the amount to 15 (30 charges), then even with your calculations it is already 8 kg. That is, the weight of the Browning BAR rifle. Served in more than one war. And no one put it to her in view of. The promising shooting systems developed in the USA, England and France (I will not shine with erudition and list them all over the years and all sorts of performance characteristics ...) also weighed about 8 and 8,8 kg. What is comparable. At the same time, fighting qualities are incomparable. And - yes, "they didn't go." But time passes, and who knows what may be tomorrow. So before you consider yourself in your favor, you should think that ... others also read and know something. A person is given a diploma for 5 years of studying textbooks in the Armed Forces. And in 15 years? And if you have been doing something since 1980? Yes, unprofessional, but without practice. But on a regular basis? Something, probably, will remain in my head, unlike the "folk historians" who read one Fomenko and then only once? Quantity, they say, turns into quality ... Isn't it?
      1. Mordvin 3
        Mordvin 3 9 December 2018 15: 55
        +2
        Quote: kalibr
        No need to equip or refill cartridges.

        Disposable? Quite an expensive pleasure when you consider the compressed air system.
      2. Decimam
        Decimam 9 December 2018 16: 33
        +4
        Let's start with the trunks. The barrel is calculated according to the conditions of strength, and it alone, or many of them, does not change anything at all. The cartridge in the barrel develops a certain pressure - the barrel must withstand it. So 18 kilograms - and not a gram less.
        Now about 1988. Even if you take 1888, it doesn't change anything. You do not have the base necessary to understand the issue. You did not study all the subjects that all the mechanics of the USSR universities studied in the first three courses, be it Izhmekh, Tula Polytechnic Institute, or ZII. Specialization began with the fourth. Therefore, for me "Basics of designing automatic weapons", "Manufacturing of small arms barrels" "Dynamics of automatic weapons" - a textbook, and for you - a Chinese letter. And there is nothing wrong with that, this is normal. "The trouble is, if the shoemaker starts the baking of the pies, and the cake-maker uses the boots." But you stubbornly deny objective reality and hope for the transition from quantity to quality. But there is no quantity! There is nothing to cross. You did not pass the resistance material, according to the laws of Soviet technical universities, it was even possible to marry only after passing the resistance material!
        A cylinder of 100 kg ... Well, you can and less. Let even without a balloon. How many single cartridges will you take to battle?
        1. Korax71
          Korax71 9 December 2018 20: 59
          +1
          Well, not really, of course repeat in fact, there are quite a few factors affecting the size of the barrel wall, just one of the main ones is the pressure in the barrel bore. rather, you even need to look more globally for what the barrel is intended. If this is a regular sample from ordinary Vasily, then it will be enough so that it doesn’t burst in the hands. if this is a sample of high-precision weapons, then increasing the thickness of the barrel walls we will minimize all kinds of vibrations and deformations when firing, respectively increasing the technical accuracy by a certain amount. hi and so I generally agree that this unit will not weigh like a feather, but here you still need to understand for what purpose it will be used. Well, with the caliber, too, there’s still some confusion request judging by the photo 2-3mm wassat
          1. Decimam
            Decimam 9 December 2018 21: 34
            +1
            As you saw, the most ordinary barrel of the most ordinary AK-74 assault rifle was taken for calculations. If you reduce the caliber, then to maintain an acceptable muzzle energy will have to increase the charge, which leads to an increase in pressure, hence an increase in wall thickness, a decrease in survivability, etc.
            I'm not talking about how to get to a target from such a block of trunks at a distance of more than 50 m.
        2. kalibr
          9 December 2018 22: 11
          +1
          I don't want to argue with you, let alone prove something. I only know that in 1980 my first development was looked at at the Research Institute of the Ministry of Education and was said that "no better than ...". Remarks were made. Yes. Then in 1992 the improved analogue was watched by the venture concern "Zeif", and then by specialists in Tula. Zeif approved. The Tula made comments ... stupid. Yours are just an example of professionalism. I can appreciate it. So not always specialists ... yes ... And in parallel with this there were O'Dwyer (after me!) And I was also told at one time that they caught Chinese in Moscow with a very similar cassette pistol ... So not all ideas belong to specialists, they do not always understand everything, and sometimes they are evaluated differently in different places. Once again, this is an idea. Let someone just read with interest and look at the beautiful photos. Someone will take 10,20,30% ... someone will prove that it is 100% dead-end - and this will also be a wonderful result. Is not it? But there is something to look at and something to talk about, right? And someone will sit down for the material. Good too, huh?
          1. Decimam
            Decimam 9 December 2018 22: 32
            +3
            Vyacheslav Olegovich, but who objects. I have long said that your articles, even if they have certain shortcomings, are at least purposeful in nature and serve as an object for interesting discussions.
            As for the Chinese with a makeshift gun ... There is one such wonderful place on Earth, the Tribal Zone is called, and there is a market in a local town. On it, local craftsmen sell weapons of their own production. Where are the Chinese. Maybe inspiration will flood somehow, I’ll write an article.
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 9 December 2018 22: 51
              +2
              Trouble Eria? Did you work there too?!?!
              1. Decimam
                Decimam 9 December 2018 23: 07
                +2
                No, God had mercy. You can stay in those "factories" forever.
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 10 December 2018 21: 36
                  +1
                  Damn, but to me, a sinful thing, revenge ...
          2. Decimam
            Decimam 10 December 2018 00: 32
            +1
            "the improved analogue was watched by the venture concern" Zeif "
            Is this the place you lectured to young entrepreneurs Simkin showed the layout?
            1. kalibr
              10 December 2018 07: 57
              0
              I don’t know what you are and who it is. It was they who made a request to Tula. Everything is official.
              1. Decimam
                Decimam 10 December 2018 09: 11
                +1
                There was once the PENZA ACADEMY OF YOUNG MANAGERS AND ENTREPRENEURS, didn't you participate? And Simkin is the president of "Zeif", he definitely participated in this Academy.
                1. kalibr
                  10 December 2018 12: 31
                  0
                  Quote: Decimam
                  PENZA ACADEMY OF YOUNG MANAGERS AND ENTREPRENEURS

                  Of course I lectured there. But there was led by another person, doctor of sciences, professor, Reznik S.D. I hear this name for the first time.
      3. Vladimir 5
        Vladimir 5 9 December 2018 17: 02
        0
        It is not in vain that a Kalash on sand and mud continues to work, but these 25 trunks are thrown into the mud once in the mud, and there is no loading. The fewer operations for a shot, the more reliable. And the main thing is that the cartridge has weapons, but everything is old-fashioned with the capsule tilted, the capsule will long be replaced by electric ignition, and a lot of parts and mechanics will not be needed. Start with a cartridge, and the powder has long been replaced by a more compact one (even start from rocket solid fuels) and the battery is already needed for all needs (electric ignition, electronics, communications, etc.) here are built-in, at least in equipment, at least uniforms, soft photovoltaic panels already asking ... The new rifle begins with a new cartridge, its first to create ......
        1. Decimam
          Decimam 9 December 2018 17: 26
          +2
          And what does this fundamentally change? Will the bullet itself find the target? Do you know an electric starter that guarantees the same reliability as a mechanical one? About PTT - a masterpiece. Each bullet has a rocket.
          1. alex-cn
            alex-cn 9 December 2018 17: 36
            0
            As for the electric fuse ... I have never seen misfires in the SPG-9 and BMP-1. With a wasp - another conversation, there surely are hacky cartridges.
          2. Vladimir 5
            Vladimir 5 9 December 2018 17: 37
            +1
            Your cell phone has often let you down, and as for hundreds of millions of users, there are misfires in the shooter much more often ... We are talking about improving SMALL weapons, and various conversations are off topic. A bullet - a rocket was tested for a long time, but the accuracy was not good, but as a throwing one it would be suitable ... Pistol samples of close combat with bullets-missiles, as low-noise, existed. Looks to you more "study, study, study" - as the leader bequeathed ...
            1. Decimam
              Decimam 9 December 2018 19: 14
              +3
              "See you more" learn, learn, learn "
              Yes, where we are opposed to "pistol samples of close combat."
              1. Vladimir 5
                Vladimir 5 9 December 2018 19: 19
                0
                For failures: pistols are classified for defeats: up to 15 meters, 25 m, 50 m, and more than 50 m. Melee is suspected up to 15 m ...
                1. Decimam
                  Decimam 9 December 2018 19: 29
                  +4
                  Yeah, you still forgot long-range, for firing from closed positions.
                  1. 3x3zsave
                    3x3zsave 9 December 2018 20: 56
                    +2
                    Exactly, with an airfire and fire adjustment.
        2. Leomobil
          Leomobil 10 December 2018 12: 56
          +1
          What happened before? Chicken or Egg? :) From the beginning, a state-loading system appeared, and then a unitary cartridge, and the main task that he solved was the breakthrough of powder gases. Until a new circuitry is created based on the new principles of weapons automation, there is no way to create a new ammunition. Can separate charging ?, or two-component chemistry, or an electric pulse? Time will tell, but the fact that it is necessary to move from a steam locomotive to electric traction has been proved by life (although 5000 pcs are on conservation of steam locomotives and 800 in a hot reserve, it does not interfere with the other).
    3. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 9 December 2018 21: 14
      +2
      "a hero ... it's hard to imagine"
      Is it difficult? Vaughn the former governor of California from the "minigun" felled adversaries. And that one weighs 30 kg, without ammunition and Akumm for the promotion of barrels.
      1. Decimam
        Decimam 9 December 2018 21: 41
        +3
        There, it seems, it is not he who shoots, but two other fighters. For the film, a special "minigun" was made for a blank cartridge, the cable was brought to it through the shooter's leg and a special support at the back so as not to be carried away.
    4. Korax71
      Korax71 9 December 2018 21: 51
      +1
      Well, if you look quite critically, even before the WWI, back in 1901 the Toynecroft offered a cavalry rifle with a magazine in the butt of the butt. With a barrel length of 700 mm, the length of the rifle was slightly less than a meter, despite the fact that the 1894 enfield with a barrel of 500 mm was 101 cm . simply more or less successful options were able to master years of commercials in the 70s hi
  6. kalibr
    9 December 2018 18: 38
    +1
    Quote: Vladimir 5
    A new rifle begins with a new cartridge, its first to create ......

    Yes, this is true for all 100%
  7. Lad
    Lad 9 December 2018 21: 06
    +1
    This is only a concept.
    Of the new in it is multilateralism and muzzle loading.
    In general, multi-barrel machines are constantly being tried for a tooth, which the hell is not joking, maybe they will punch their way. But a really wearable machine will still likely have only a few trunks.
    A muzzle loading has a great advantage. It assumes the absence of a shutter, a sending system and an engine, which greatly simplifies the design. But it also has big disadvantages. For example, the extraction of a spar cartridge is very complicated?

    Can these cartridges still not be loaded from the barrel, but inserted from the treasury instead of the store (or rather, instead of the breech), as they recently wrote about the attempts of the Americans? Only one drawback will be added: the "revolving" gap between the cartridge and the barrels.
    1. Decimam
      Decimam 9 December 2018 21: 49
      +1
      "Maybe these cartridges are still not to be loaded from the muzzle, but inserted from the treasury instead of the store"
      Everything new is well forgotten old.

      Austro-Hungarian Mitralez Montigny sample 1870
      The numbers indicate 1 - the lever of the reloading device, 2 - the store, 3 - the chamber
      1. kalibr
        9 December 2018 21: 51
        0
        I had an article about this here.
      2. Decimam
        Decimam 9 December 2018 21: 54
        +1

        Mitraleza Christoph. 1883 year. Exactly the sample you are offering. Black box - cartridge with cartridges.
        1. kalibr
          9 December 2018 22: 17
          0
          I do not understand why this is necessary. And what do you want to convince me of with these pictures? What I need to understand from your text, I understand immediately (from one!) And without pictures. I don’t need to give pictures twice. Extra work.
          1. Decimam
            Decimam 9 December 2018 22: 36
            +1
            This is not for you, this is Lada on his idea about loading from the treasury.
            1. kalibr
              10 December 2018 07: 52
              +1
              Dull, it happens. Excuse me!
    2. Papa Smurf
      Papa Smurf 22 January 2019 20: 00
      0
      Even in the REVOLVER Nagant won the "revolving gap" - by pushing the drum over the barrel. In this case, it will be much easier - the cartridge (in fact, the chamber block), when the lever is turned, moves onto the barrel block and is locked in this position. Of course, this is much better than the proposed muzzle loading system. In particular, the problem of removing stuck cartridges, their possible lack of delivery, is being solved, plus an unreliable pneumatic system is not needed.

      Everything would have turned out just fine, but the fundamental problem remains: 25 trunks are 25 times heavier than one.
  8. Korax71
    Korax71 9 December 2018 21: 38
    +1
    Thanks to the author for the article. wink quite interesting. not the only one as a small addition. the length of the barrel, taken separately, can only affect the speed of the bullet. this is of course an important factor, but only in the weapon-cartridge system. there is a minimum permissible barrel length for a certain type of ammunition, which is enough to give the bullet a certain speed and rotational speed to stabilize in flight. with an increase in the length of the barrel, you will change the initial and angular velocity of the bullet, which will most likely lead to a deterioration in performance and will require either a change in the rifling pitch, an increase in the mass of a bullet, a powder charge, up to the development of your own ammunition. there is no length-accuracy relationship. The "bun" scheme itself does not outperform the classic weapon layout due to the deterioration of the balance of the weapon itself. The most important advantages of this layout are its compactness and maneuverability when fighting, so to speak, in cramped conditions, roughly speaking, almost a full-fledged machine gun slightly larger than a submachine gun that hi Well, in general, we will wait for the continuation of the article good
    1. kalibr
      9 December 2018 21: 44
      +1
      Thank! It is always valuable when they give specific advice.
  9. kalibr
    9 December 2018 21: 45
    0
    Quote: Lad
    Can these cartridges still not be charged from the barrel, but inserted from the treasury instead of the store (or rather, instead of the treasury of the barrel), as was recently written about the attempts of the Americans?

    Thinking about it ...
  10. Leomobil
    Leomobil 10 December 2018 00: 48
    -1
    The main problem of modern tactical combat is limited control. Attempts to add electronics to the soldier, to seriously change something in operational management did not work. In order to apply at the tactical level all the advantages of the ASBU for controlling the battle, you need information about the tactical unit (soldiers and weapons). To plan combat actions, the commander operates a combat unit (barrel, tank, aircraft, weapon, etc.), and it is this information in real time that he does not have. Che there will miss a soldier in the cannonade of the battle, even if he has a direct connection with the squad leader, and he will pass it above (broken phone). Therefore, I believe that information is needed directly from the weapon. Where is it, how much ammunition, what is the intensity of the fire, in which direction the barrel is turned, and only then what is there with the soldier. It is with this information that the command can quickly control the entire unit down to the soldier. By indirect signs, even tracking the condition of the soldier, as well as determining his effectiveness, adjusting the fire and intensity in key areas. Therefore, I believe that such small arms development will allow (albeit not immediately) to change the picture of the battle for the better. And regarding the survivability of weapons (the ala Kalashmat sect) in battle - "even the most reliable weapon does not fight without a soldier, only a Warrior makes this weapon deadly for the enemy." We got these clever guys who make weapons for a soldier who fought in 45, climb up the swamps and sands yourself with these pukals :). You need a weapon to send more enemies to the next world, but for the "partisans" and "Koloshmat" it will do. It is the twenty-first century, and they are still arguing whether a machine gun will be able to shoot if the parachute does not open at the paratrooper :)?
    1. tracer
      tracer 10 December 2018 03: 11
      0
      Why have the laws of physics changed since 1945? Water stopped being wet, sand loose and frost stopped water freezing? Have humans developed any ability? Or did you only have dramatic changes in this matter? All the same, the twenty-first century ..
      1. Leomobil
        Leomobil 10 December 2018 12: 32
        +2
        The soldier has changed! Who used to wash more than once a week, but every day, he doesn’t know how to cook, wash and wear footcloths, he cannot imagine life without the Internet and ICQ, and so are we! And what will happen in ten years. This is the push-button generation :) that it understands what a screwdriver is and there is no hammer, it painfully hits on the fingers.
        1. kalibr
          10 December 2018 16: 38
          0
          Dear Lev Nikolaevich! Can this be used as an epigraph?
    2. Decimam
      Decimam 10 December 2018 09: 19
      +1
      "We need a weapon to send more enemies to the next world"
      And it would be nice if this weapon also ran around the battlefield, finding and destroying enemies, recharged itself and appeared to the owner only to report on the destroyed enemies and receive a new task.
      1. Leomobil
        Leomobil 10 December 2018 12: 36
        +1
        You forgot about Beer, which would bring a dog-dog move! You said everything correctly, only it will not run around the field soon (energy and AI are not enough), but what would kill and report to the command itself is already a reality.
        1. Vladimir 5
          Vladimir 5 10 December 2018 13: 15
          0
          Leomobil .. Your reasoning for the future is correct, only this will have to be achieved step by step. While the article is about replacing the old small arms with new small arms, with the same other conditions. The proposed option with muzzle "cartridges" is clearly not viable for many reasons, it is long to list ... That the process of searching for a new one is also good. But, as I said earlier, without changing the fundamentals (patron and other things), you cannot achieve a new one, only another modernization, which will improve by interest, which, as they say, will not be worth the game ...
          1. Leomobil
            Leomobil 10 December 2018 21: 26
            0
            With high-quality ammunition, and an electromechanical automatic loader (different schemes, at least like T-72 in the corresponding dimensions, accuracy of 0.5 MOA, rate of fire of 600-700), you can adequately meet the enemy with a unitary ammunition. But after creating a unified control system for electromechanical weapons, break in the battle control scheme through ASBU. Then the life of the catfish will tell you what needs to be changed in the small arms segment (maybe we’ll all fight manually with grenade launchers :) who knows?).
  11. tracer
    tracer 10 December 2018 03: 04
    +1
    Quote: Decimam
    Vyacheslav Olegovich, you stubbornly deny the centuries-old experience of mankind and are trying to create in an area where you lack the most basic knowledge.

    This is what fuels the interest of the creator. They can’t create an eternal engine? Yes, a couple of nonsense. .... These are the most dangerous individuals.
  12. Catfish
    Catfish 10 December 2018 03: 17
    +2
    Quote: Leomobil
    Therefore, I believe that information is needed directly from the weapon. Where is it located, how many ammunition, what is the intensity of the fire, which direction is the barrel turned, and only then what is there with the soldier.


    As for "then what is there with the soldier" ... I remember how in some old film from the base they give a request to some super smart robot:
    "What is the position of your companions?"
    The robot answers:
    "The position of my companions is horizontal."
    And the fact that they are already in full cut, a tin can not be aware at all. laughing
    But actually, of course, the idea ... yes.

    Thanks to the author and request to continue further. hi
    1. kalibr
      11 December 2018 12: 15
      +1
      Film PLANET STORM
  13. garri-lin
    garri-lin 10 December 2018 13: 56
    0
    When firing, the interaction of the "bullet-barrel" pair is important, the more monotonous and predictable the better. Trunk roads. 25 barrels is a high price and extra weight. And about the statement that the development of the shooter in the existing form has reached a dead end, this is nonsense. Development is limited by economic reasons and not technological ones. A simple example, if you replace gunpowder with a more energy-intensive cartridge in the 5,45 × 39 cartridge, then you will need it almost twice as much. We make a cartridge with a sleeve twice as small, increase the wearable ammunition and reduce the size of the weapon: the sleeve is shorter and the shutter rollback, respectively, is also needed twice as short. The weight of the weapon and the dimensions are also reduced. The question is that nobody needs it. The costs are huge and the benefits are minimal.
    In general, it seems that the existing riflemen of the military are satisfied.
    1. Tarikxnumx
      Tarikxnumx 10 December 2018 20: 25
      0
      Here it is not quite so in the example with a decrease in the volume of gunpowder. The use of more energy-intensive gunpowder will change the speed of filling the volume of the sleeve with the required amount of gas to push the bullet out of the barrel. Those. the pressure will increase more abruptly and this creates a lot of problems. First of all, it can begin to inflate the sleeves and they will begin to tear or inflate them until they become wedged in the breech. And this will be solved by increasing the wall thickness of the sleeve. Which will reduce all savings to nothing. There have been attempts of this kind. In the current used cartridges of caliber 5,45 * 39, the cartridge-gunpowder-bullet-weapon system is close to ideal.
      And yes, in most cases, the existing riflemen are satisfied with the military. There are some complaints, but in the general case they are insignificant.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 10 December 2018 23: 08
        +1
        Cited purely as an example. Although you can balance the amount of gunpowder, the burning rate and the amount of gas released. Nobody just needs it. Great interest can be achieved only if it is possible to create weapons that are twice as effective and in all respects.
  14. acetophenone
    acetophenone 10 December 2018 15: 34
    0
    I understand if the author of the concept is 12-14 years old. Ardent youths also need to invent this. But if this is a mature person, then there is another peeling.
    These mitrallises were and will be a dead end for the evolution of a firearm.
  15. kalibr
    10 December 2018 16: 36
    0
    Quote: acetophenon
    But if this is a mature person, then there is another peeling.

    Good thought, and most importantly - sensible.
  16. kalibr
    10 December 2018 20: 39
    0
    Quote: tracer
    These are the most dangerous individuals.

    You can’t even imagine how dangerous ...
  17. Catfish
    Catfish 11 December 2018 22: 59
    0
    Quote: kalibr
    Film PLANET STORM


    Right! There Zhzhenov also played the most natural American robot. And there was also a phrase issued by an American astronaut, from whom the entire male half of the cinema was laughing in delight:

    "A robot can figure it out, not a woman!" laughing
  18. cat Rusich
    cat Rusich 3 January 2019 21: 33
    0
    Guys, I’ll try to make my criticisms, maybe the author of this concept will read and explain his brainchild in more detail, and you think. This product is supposed to be produced at the factory where computers are made, I counted 12 bevel and 1 cylindrical gears, a spring, as well as the axes and shafts on which they will be mounted, where will they be made? 25 trunks, and where are they? Metalworking machines are still needed. Which caliber is 5,45, the other? The rifled barrel? Trunks collected in a bunch, how to aim for single shooting, rely on a smart sight? Instead of the old stores - a new disposable cartridge, which is recharged at the manufacturer's factory, this did not work on the G-11 - the United States didn’t pull the disposable stores for the M-16 - it’s expensive. The author writes the barrels and cartridge fit together very accurately, can mass production at different plants ensure accuracy? PPSh during the Second World War - 1 PPSh 2 shops relatives of the rest - do not fit. A lot of questions so what? The old man Hotabych conjured a marble phone for Volka — it doesn’t work, marble inside, so what, Hotabych doesn’t know what must be inside — think of it. Here, too, what's inside - think of it yourself - is a concept. Maybe it's easier to throw a grenade?
  19. Beard31
    Beard31 16 January 2019 16: 18
    0
    The author, in the rifle you are describing is not 20 or 25 barrels, but 5 vertically located trunks. You generally wrote nonsense from which the fucking mechanics of automatic reloading automation is incomprehensible.