Military Review

Electro-thermochemical tank guns. A weapon of the distant future

57

Modern "chemical" gun 2A82 at the stand. Photo Bmpd.livejournal.com


One of the ways of development tanks is the creation of advanced weapons systems. The possibility of further increasing the caliber and firing characteristics, as well as introducing fundamentally new schemes is being discussed. In recent months, after certain News, there was renewed interest in the so-called. electrothermal or electrothermochemical guns (ETP / ETHP).

Almost a sensation


The newest Russian T-14 tank is equipped with a traditional "powder" cannon 2A82 of 125 mm caliber. For several years, the possibility of improving the combat characteristics of the tank by using the 152-mm 2A83 gun or a similar product has been discussed. At the same time, scientists are already working on the possibility of further strengthening tank guns - through the introduction of fundamentally new technologies.

At the Army 2020 forum in August, the 38th Research and Testing Institute of Armored Vehicles and Armaments presented its views on the tank of the future, which may appear by the middle of the XXI century. and replace the current samples. The presented concept uses the most original solutions, incl. an unusual complex of weapons based on ETHP.

ETCP should use promising propellant charge compositions with electrical impulse ignition. A highly effective charge will allow you to get hypersonic projectile speeds and corresponding combat qualities. The operation of the gun will be provided with an automatic loader. It is expected that a tank with such weapons will have extremely high combat characteristics and surpass the current models. However, the exact parameters of this technique remain unknown. Such a tank of the future and an ETH cannon for it are still only concepts without clear prospects.

Electro-thermochemical tank guns. A weapon of the distant future
Experimental gun 60 mm Rapid Fire ET Gun of American design. Photo by US Navy

The concept project from the 38th NII BTVT naturally attracted attention, and its discussion continues to this day. For obvious reasons, it is the fundamentally new "main caliber" that has its own advantages and disadvantages arousing the greatest interest in it.

Principles and Benefits


The well-known ETHP projects are generally similar and provide for general operating principles. Such a gun must have a rifled or smooth barrel, as well as a breech of a special design, which ensures the implementation of all processes. It is possible to use unitary, separate-sleeve or modular propelling charges on a solid or, in theory, a liquid substance.

Some variants of the ETHP concept suggest heating the propellant before it is fed into the chamber; the feed itself can be carried out under pressure. Then, with the help of an electrical control system, the plasma source is ignited, which ignites the propellant charge. Energy from electrical ignition is added to the energy of the charge and increases the overall performance of the weapon. In theory, such a gun can control the rate of combustion of the main charge in order to optimize performance.

Thus, the combination of a traditional chemical propellant charge and new electrical means can give a significant increase in performance. For example, a tank with ETHP will be able to shoot further and / or hit targets with more powerful protection. There are also projects like weapons for ships and other platforms.


Drum of the American cannon. Photo by US Navy

From theory to practice


The concept of an electrothermochemical gun appeared quite a long time ago, and by now several experimental projects of this kind have been created. However, the number of such projects is small, and their results were much more modest than expected. As a result, not a single ETKhP has gone beyond the experimental ranges.

At the turn of the eighties and nineties, a rapid-firing 60 mm ETHP was developed in the United States. The experimental gun 60 mm Rapid Fire ET Gun received an automatic system based on a drum with 10 chambers for unitary shots, as well as special fire controls. The gun was tested in 1991-93. and showed the fundamental possibility of creating a workable system of a new class. However, the project was not developed due to technical difficulties, high cost and lack of significant advantages over "chemical" artillery.

During the same period, a similar system was being developed by British specialists from Royal Ordnance. The ROSETTE project (Royal Ordnance System for Electrothermal Enhancements) envisaged the creation of several experimental ETC with a sequential improvement in characteristics. In 1993, he managed to create and test a cannon capable of accelerating a kilogram projectile to a speed of 2 km / s. The work continued, incl. with the involvement of foreign organizations, but the real result has not yet been obtained. British and foreign armored vehicles, ships, etc. continue to use traditional artillery.

In the early nineties, the development of ETHP was undertaken by the Israeli scientific center "Sorek" in cooperation with several US organizations. The SPETC (Solid Propellant Electro-Thermal Chemical) project proposed the use of a gun based on available components with an existing propellant charge, which had to be supplemented with new electrical components. It was found that plasma electric ignition can increase the energy of the projectile by 8-9 percent. In particular, this would make it possible to disperse sub-caliber projectiles of 105-mm cannons to 2 km / s and more. However, the SPETC project also did not leave the testing stage.


SPETC projectile design. Graphics Center "Sorek"

In our country, the topic of ETHP got interested quite late. According to known data, real research in this direction began only in the tenths. The topic of ETH guns was studied along with other methods of increasing the combat characteristics of tanks. Nothing is known about the production of prototypes. So far, we are talking only about theory and concept projects that demonstrate theoretical capabilities.

Technical challenges


Well-known ETHP projects show how difficult it is to implement the original concept. Several different engineering problems need to be solved, some of which require completely new and unusual solutions. In fact, the ETHP project can be divided into several areas: an artillery unit, ammunition, means of ignition and fire control.

The barrel and breech system will have to be redesigned. The use of ready-made components, as the SPETC project shows, does not allow obtaining a significant increase in characteristics. In addition, the savings in components are minimal. When creating a system with a large increase in characteristics, it will be necessary to develop a reinforced barrel that can withstand increased loads, a breech of a special design for feeding shot components, as well as means for storing and supplying ammunition.

To obtain maximum characteristics, a shot for ETHP needs new solutions in the field of projectile materials. New propellants or alternative formulations are needed, as well as a means of generating plasma. Certain results have been obtained in both areas, but the revolution in artillery is still far from it.


Plasma projectile igniter SPETC. In the picture above, such devices are marked with numbers. Photo Center "Sorek"

The formation of plasma during firing is carried out using a high-power electrical impulse, which is why the ETHP needs an appropriate source of energy. Systems with the required characteristics so far can be used only on large ships or as part of containerized complexes. Compact platforms such as a tank or an ACS cannot yet count on a high-power source of energy.

Already in the early nineties, the level of technology made it possible to create an experimental electrothermochemical gun, albeit with limited characteristics. Further development of technologies allows counting on the growth of parameters and capabilities, but so far the concept of ETHP is not ready for the development of practically applicable systems and for their implementation in the troops.

Weapons of the future


The ETHP concept has been known for a long time and was even implemented in practice in the form of early prototypes. However, further work did not progress, and priority was given to other options for "alternative" artillery. The current level of technology does not yet allow creating the desired ETH cannon, and the military of the leading countries, apparently, do not yet see the point in it.

However, science and technology do not stand still. In the coming decades, we can expect the emergence of new technologies capable of providing a breakthrough in all promising areas. It should be remembered here that the concept of a tank from the 38th NII BTVT belongs precisely to the distant future. And by the beginning of its development, the necessary solutions and components may appear at the disposal of tank builders.
Author:
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Asad
    Asad 13 November 2020 05: 52
    0
    Explain to an amateur why there is such a complexity between a projectile and a rocket?
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 13 November 2020 06: 35
      33
      A rocket is when not a shell flies away, but the whole gun.
      And not only in terms of mechanics, but also finance.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 13 November 2020 09: 57
        0
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        A rocket is when not a shell, but the whole gun flies away

        And who drove the MLRS?
      2. Bolt cutter
        Bolt cutter 13 November 2020 12: 18
        -4
        Is the cannon free and does not wear out?
        1. Mountain shooter
          Mountain shooter 13 November 2020 13: 15
          +4
          Quote: Bolt Cutter
          Is the cannon free and does not wear out?

          Of course wears out. But not all at once. Most of all - the barrel ... 300 shots approximately, on shells with high ballistics maybe less. And still, a projectile from such a gun is many times cheaper than a rocket with similar parameters. Otherwise, the cannon artillery would have died long ago.
      3. astepanov
        astepanov 13 November 2020 15: 20
        10
        Let's count. For an analogue, let's take a 2A46 tank gun with a caliber of 125 mm, and an analogue of a projectile - a sub-caliber gun with a mass of 5,67 kg. The departure speed of such a projectile is from 1715 to 1800 m / s, from here find its kinetic energy (you can check); from 8,34 to 9,2 MJ. The energy of the powder charge is naturally higher. A tank gun is the same heat engine, and with a high (up to 60%) efficiency, from here we get the combustion energy of the charge: from 13,9 to 15,3 MJ.
        To increase the kinetic energy of the projectile by 20 percent (and the speed by 9,5%), you need to increase the energy of the shot by the same 20%, i.e. add to what is from 2,78 to 3,1 MJ.
        In this case, the departure speed will be from 1878 to 1971 m / s, and the average speed in the bore (we assume that the movement is uniformly accelerated) - from 939 to 985 m / s.
        The barrel length of the 2A46 gun is 6 m, hence the duration of the shot: from 0,0064 to 0,0061 s. Now it is easy to estimate the power of the energy source ((useful, without losses on internal resistance): from 434 MW to 508 MW (i.e., up to 7 million horsepower - if that is simpler).
        No battery is suitable for this. Conventional capacitors have a specific energy in the region of 0,001 MJ / kg, i.e. for a shot you need a battery weighing about 3 tons, or even more. Newfangled electrochemical capacitors don't look good either, they have a lot of internal resistance.
        How big is the mass of such a battery, is it worth building a garden for the sake of a relatively small increase in the energy of the shot at the cost of making the structure heavier, more complex and more expensive, and whether there is where to place it - it's not for me to judge: not a tanker. Maybe someone will comment?
        1. sergo1914
          sergo1914 13 November 2020 16: 21
          +2
          Quote: astepanov
          Maybe someone will comment?


          The gun was already there. Since the mid 80s. "Battery" - the size of a railway carriage. All together did not fit into the tank.
          PS High-temperature superconductivity would have saved the topic. But alas.
          1. astepanov
            astepanov 13 November 2020 16: 53
            +3
            No, I wouldn't. Induction storage devices based on superconductors have specific characteristics not much better than capacitors. I found the numbers - only the mass of the winding (without a cryostat and power electronics) will be more than a ton, and even then in promising, not existing products. In HTSC, the critical field induction is lower than in LTSC, and there will be no gain in mass.
            1. sergo1914
              sergo1914 13 November 2020 18: 03
              +2
              Quote: astepanov
              No, I wouldn't. Induction storage devices based on superconductors have specific characteristics not much better than capacitors. I found the numbers - only the mass of the winding (without a cryostat and power electronics) will be more than a ton, and even then in promising, not existing products. In HTSC, the critical field induction is lower than in LTSC, and there will be no gain in mass.


              Well there is no way. I was told in lectures that it would be possible to shove it into the rear ledge of the tower.
        2. bootlegger
          bootlegger 14 November 2020 10: 15
          +2
          This is an assessment from the energy sector. But there is also wear and tear on the tool. Given that the resource is already 300-400 shots, the increase in characteristics does not rest on the energy of the weapon, but precisely on the resource ...
        3. Alexey LK
          Alexey LK 20 November 2020 08: 33
          +1
          Firstly, 508 MW is not 7 million horsepower, but 690880, and secondly, it is not at all necessary to make a gun purely electromagnetic. This can be used in addition to the usual energy extracted from the explosive of the propellant charge - say, to increase the pressure of the propellant gases, and / or impart rotation to the projectile in the bore to obtain the effect of a rifled cannon in a smooth barrel, or make the bottom of the breech moveable ... yes you never know options! You should not be so straightforward about solving a problem.
          1. astepanov
            astepanov 20 November 2020 08: 44
            0
            If you read carefully, you would notice that it was the increase that was calculated - by 20%, as in the article. Thanks for the clarification, but I did the calculation in the SI system and the conversion to horsepower did not affect the final result. And the last thing. The calculation was carried out for an idealized battery without losses - ohmic and inductive. Real energy should be even more, and much more. It is not for nothing that railguns are planned to be installed on aircraft carriers, where the mass and difficulties of placement are not so urgent. And it doesn't matter that the railgun is constructed differently: energy is also energy in Africa.
  2. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 13 November 2020 05: 53
    0
    The first thing that comes to mind when you read about the supply of fuel under pressure and electric ignition is the internal combustion engine.
    Conventional gasoline internal combustion cylinder.
    Cylinder - breech.
    The piston is a projectile.
    The design has been worked out to the point.
    1. alma
      alma 13 November 2020 08: 21
      15
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      The first thing that comes to mind when you read about the supply of fuel under pressure and electric ignition is the internal combustion engine.
      Ordinary gasoline internal combustion cylinder

      Yes, it seems. Electronic injection engine. It is also possible to construct a diesel weapon - with compression ignition. Only again, no advantages over traditional ones.
      1. Jacket in stock
        Jacket in stock 13 November 2020 11: 11
        0
        Quote: alma
        Only again, no advantages over traditional ones.

        In theory, there are advantages.
        Liquid fuel energy is higher. You can dose more accurately, almost to a gram. ... ...
        1. Non-fighter
          Non-fighter 14 November 2020 10: 27
          0
          Liquid fuel has its own problems: (Otherwise, it would have been used long ago.
    2. Narak-zempo
      Narak-zempo 13 November 2020 10: 23
      -1
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      The first thing that comes to mind when you read about the supply of fuel under pressure and electric ignition is the internal combustion engine.
      Conventional gasoline internal combustion cylinder.
      Cylinder - breech.
      The piston is a projectile.
      The design has been worked out to the point.

      It remains to equate the internal combustion engine with a firearm - and to use even a car, even a brushcutter, register in the entire form laughing
      1. Karabin
        Karabin 13 November 2020 13: 19
        +1
        Quote: Narak-zempo
        register on the whole form
        Used the engine, dismantled it and into the safe wink
  3. fa2998
    fa2998 13 November 2020 06: 11
    +6
    The main advantage of artillery is the cheapness of a shot. But with such "tricky" shells, it is lost, then it is possible for the UR-is there even a controlled flight? hi
    1. Cympak
      Cympak 13 November 2020 11: 11
      0
      The projectile does not change, the charge changes. In addition to increasing the speed of throwing the projectile, they plan to get charges that are resistant to fire and shrapnel. Those. plan to increase the survivability of the tank and crew in case of defeat.
  4. Ros 56
    Ros 56 13 November 2020 06: 44
    +1
    This technology, at least on long-range guns, has been worked out, what is there to talk about tanks. Stir the air.
    1. Crash
      Crash 13 November 2020 10: 07
      +2
      Quote: Ros 56
      Stir the air

      According to your logic, then it is possible to use long-worked catapults, so why conduct promising developments? Science does not stand still, and even an erroneous result is also a positive result.
      1. Ros 56
        Ros 56 13 November 2020 12: 16
        -1
        You have no logic at all, you don't even understand what I mean.
        1. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 13 November 2020 15: 32
          0
          Quote: Ros 56
          You have no logic at all, you don't even understand what I mean.

          But there was some sort of Belgian, or Dutch. who built such a gun to Hussein.
          And after all, they believed in her and removed that very "inventor" ...
          1. cat Rusich
            cat Rusich 14 November 2020 01: 04
            +1
            Quote: SovAr238A

            But there was some sort of Belgian, or Dutch. who built such a gun to Hussein.
            And after all, they believed in her and removed that very "inventor" ...
            "Project Babylon" - caliber 1mm (prototype 000mm), designer CANADIAN Gerald Bull - killed in March 350 in Brussels. All available parts of the "cannon" were confiscated ... The principle is "active-rocket projectile"
            active rocket scheme
            152mm rocket projectile
            Here is an active-reactive 152mm 3OF22. The entire Babylon Project is based on the HAARP project.
  5. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 13 November 2020 07: 34
    10
    The most interesting thing is that I first read an article with a similar title in the "technology of youth" in 1984, if I'm not mistaken.
    Even then, it was said that "electric / liquid fuel cannons" would appear on armored vehicles a little more.
    Then, in the early 90s, in a military school, one of the departments set up experiments and also considered them promising ...
    Another 30 years have passed. And the perspective is still the same ...
    1. NDR-791
      NDR-791 13 November 2020 08: 15
      11
      At 84m in TM there was a railgun. Although about ETHP and I read about the same time as about the near future.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 13 November 2020 10: 00
        +4
        Quote: NDR-791
        At 84m in TM there was a railgun. Although about ETHP and I read about the same time as about the near future.

        Wai! Did the shikoko write about artillery on the ZhMV ?! fellow
        1. NDR-791
          NDR-791 13 November 2020 11: 13
          +2
          They really wrote a lot about ZhMV. Only about him in Young Technique. The competence is wassat
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 13 November 2020 11: 39
            +4
            Quote: NDR-791
            Only about him in Young Technique

            Oh, young, green! So, they haven't grown to the "Foreign Military Review"? ...
            1. NDR-791
              NDR-791 13 November 2020 12: 59
              +1
              Then it's not. It is also chipboard boiled
              1. sergo1914
                sergo1914 13 November 2020 16: 16
                0
                Quote: NDR-791
                Then it's not. It is also chipboard boiled


                Not boiled. The subscription could be made by mail.
                1. bk0010
                  bk0010 13 November 2020 21: 46
                  +1
                  Not boiled. The subscription could be made by mail.
                  Maybe not everyone could subscribe? The magazine came in an opaque envelope.
              2. Nikolaevich I
                Nikolaevich I 13 November 2020 17: 58
                +2
                Quote: NDR-791
                It is also chipboard boiled

                Particleboard bulo "Military foreigner" ... "Foreign military review" ("successor" of "Military foreigner" ...) is gone!
    2. alma
      alma 13 November 2020 08: 22
      14
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      Another 30 years have passed. And the perspective is still the same.

      The technology hasn't arrived yet.
  6. mongol9999
    mongol9999 13 November 2020 08: 17
    -7
    As soon as I came to the victorious report that the projectile could develop hypersonic speed, I stopped reading. Already, the shells travel faster than the speed of sound.
    1. Narak-zempo
      Narak-zempo 13 November 2020 10: 56
      +4
      Quote: mongol9999
      As soon as I came to the victorious report that the projectile could develop hypersonic speed, I stopped reading. Already, the shells travel faster than the speed of sound.

      That is, you are completely out of topic, since you do not distinguish between supersonic and hypersonic?
  7. Pashhenko Nikolay
    Pashhenko Nikolay 13 November 2020 08: 20
    +4
    "It was found that plasma electric ignition allows you to increase the energy of the projectile by 8-9 percent" / And just an increase in the propellant charge by the same amount does not allow you to achieve the same? It's a delusional idea. Then let's propose to inject nitrous oxide so that there is a theme in the wake.
  8. Undecim
    Undecim 13 November 2020 08: 25
    12
    Another stream of infusion with a minimum of information from this author.
    In recent months, after certain news, interest in the so-called. electrothermal or electrothermochemical guns (ETP / ETHP).
    This interest arose at least thirty years ago and has not disappeared since then.
    Army Research Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, FMC Corporation, General Dynamics Land Systems, Olin Ordnance, Soreq Nuclear Research Center are working on this topic only in the USA.
    Germany, Britain, France, Israel and China are doing similar work.
    Then, using an electrical control system, the plasma source is ignited, which ignites the propellant charge. Energy from electrical ignition is added to the energy of the charge and increases the overall performance of the weapon.
    The nonsense was written by the author. Plasma ignition of the charge allows you to get a more efficient combustion process, thereby increasing the characteristics of the weapon.
    1. Cympak
      Cympak 13 November 2020 11: 00
      +3
      By the way, the "Coalition-SV" used a microwave-ignited propellant charge.
      "Instead of RDX, a substance of much higher density was used in the cannon. It was detonated using plasma initiation - a special discharge. Due to its high density, the detonation speed is also higher than that of conventional explosives ...."
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 13 November 2020 11: 40
        +8
        Microwave initiation is completely different.
        "Instead of RDX, a substance of much higher density was used in the cannon. It was detonated using plasma initiation - a special discharge. Due to its high density, the detonation speed is also higher than that of conventional explosives ...."
        And this is generally nonsense. RDX is not used as a propelling explosive.
        1. mat-vey
          mat-vey 14 November 2020 08: 19
          -1
          Quote: Undecim
          And this is generally nonsense.

          YEAH - I can imagine the size of the funnel .. Although no, I can't.
  9. Tektor
    Tektor 13 November 2020 11: 11
    +1
    I would recommend researching an additive to gunpowder in the form of aluminum and titanium powders in the required proportion, which will allow raising the temperature of the expelling gases above 1500 C. It is especially effective for induction ignition in the entire volume of the propellant charge. Titanium with aluminum enters into a violent exothermic reaction at a temperature of about 800 C (due to gunpowder, for example, or induced induction current). Up to this temperature, the mixture is completely neutral and safe.
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 25 November 2020 11: 21
      0
      Small correction. Because it is aluminum and titanium that enter into the reaction, then it is more correct to cut the "vermicelli" from the pressed two films (foil) of aluminum and titanium. Select the thickness of each layer of "sandwich" based on the desired proportion. Then, upon reaching 800 C, titanium and aluminum will immediately enter into a reaction, i.e. they will not have to look for each other in a gas suspension at the moment the charge detonates.
  10. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 13 November 2020 12: 05
    +3
    At the moment, it is irrational, because the West is clearly not betting on tanks, but for artillery it is quite satisfied with increasing accuracy (excluding especially exotic projects, which are sometimes mentioned here). In theory, such weapons could be useful to the Navy - but even here the research is not in favor of electrothermochemical weapons - the same USA is developing a railgun that has much better prospects and is more suitable for the Navy.
    1. daveduff
      daveduff 14 November 2020 13: 43
      0
      Where are such conclusions from? The West just produces and improves the most modern tanks. Germany and France with their Leopards and Leclercs can hardly be called any laggards, to put it mildly, plus they have a joint project - the Leopard chassis, the Leclerc tower. The British - yes, they were blown away. Again they started talking about giving up their centurions. They actually had tanks almost shit all the way. The United States is launching a new medium tank with a turret from Abrams into production (they have been launching the Armata for many years now). Their Abrams, they also constantly lamp. We screwed the Trophy active protection onto them.
      Rather, the Russian Federation does not particularly rely on tanks (and rightly so, the military budget is not rubber). Repaired and modernized a huge fleet of old T-72 / T-90 tanks. There is a promising tank (platform) Armata, but has not yet gone into production. And when it does ... the T-15 will probably go first. More relevant.
      1. Knell wardenheart
        Knell wardenheart 14 November 2020 14: 13
        +1
        Well, turn on the logic - why do Western countries need super-mega guns on tanks if, first of all, they rely primarily on aviation, and secondly, their potential adversary is not able to quickly and radically strengthen their current tank fleet, which is currently breaking through perfectly and existing examples of tank guns / anti-tank missiles. If we abruptly went into quality, then yes, perhaps. But even then, not immediately, because the re-equipment of new design cannons of current vehicles would cost a pretty penny, and a small series would turn out to be unprofitable in terms of providing a new type of ammunition (in a small-scale version)
        Rhinemetal guns are already powerful enough, the experience of the last couple of decades of military conflicts shows that tanks are more often killed by aircraft and missiles than by other tanks.
  11. Karabin
    Karabin 13 November 2020 13: 23
    14
    There is a tank, all so pretentious, an electrothermoturbochemical cannon. And then a drone with an engine from a brushcutter arrives ...
  12. Nadrub
    Nadrub 13 November 2020 15: 27
    +3
    In the distant future, there will be no tanks, there will be stone axes and clubs :)
  13. garri-lin
    garri-lin 13 November 2020 16: 26
    +2
    The most important plus in the text was given one line. And in the comments just generally ignored. And the most important plus is the controlled combustion intensity. In fact, you can change the initial velocity of the projectile over a wide range. Modular charging on a completely different level. A tank capable of sending the same projectile to a dozen kilometers and throwing a mortar over the nearest hill. And if for tanks such an option is not very necessary, then for BMPs it is even very relevant.
  14. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 13 November 2020 20: 07
    +5
    It is a pity that the article cannot be minus. And did the author hear about light-gas cannons? A difficult thing, but as an aeroballistic stand it has been used all over the world since the 50s of the last century. The projectile velocity limitation is related to the molecular weight of the combustion products. On gunpowder, more than 2 km / s, in principle, cannot be obtained, at least with what to initiate it. Therefore, to achieve 5-6 km / s on such aeroballistic installations, two barrels are used: the first shoots a polyethylene projectile at the second, filled with hydrogen or helium, with a low molecular weight. Deforming, the plastic projectile creates a shock wave in the light gas, and this wave already pushes the object at a speed of up to 6 km / s. At the Institute of Mechanics of Moscow State University, in the basement there is just such an installation, the first stage based on the KS-19 with a caliber of 100 mm, and the second, light gas, has a set of replaceable barrels.
  15. riwas
    riwas 14 November 2020 06: 42
    +1
    Then, using an electrical control system, the plasma source is ignited, which ignites the propellant charge. Energy from electrical ignition is added to the energy of the charge and increases the overall performance of the weapon.

    In 2S35 "Coalition-SV" the shot is carried out by the microwave charge initiation system. This ensures a one-time combustion of the powder and, as a result, better ballistics.
  16. Momotomba
    Momotomba 14 November 2020 22: 02
    +1
    The idea is interesting, but, unfortunately or fortunately, it is still unrealistic ... We do not know how to make a lot of electricity with the help of a small generator ... as soon as we learn, we will immediately get a huge leap in many areas ... In the meantime, if the speed of the projectile is at limit, let's increase its mass and shoot more gunpowder.
  17. Martian
    Martian 15 November 2020 10: 18
    0
    Well, why such difficulties with the gun? In order to destroy and defeat Russia, it is enough to spend quite a bit of money on bribing officials, deputies and krem_ladyas. And given that there are mostly non-Russians, the problem is simplified to lintus ... Which was done with the USSR.
  18. Shkworen
    Shkworen 15 November 2020 10: 35
    +1
    in fact, this is a close to reality embodiment of a bolt projectile and a bolt cannon from the game universe of warhammer 40000, where a bolt is a mass rocket projectile, in fact a miniature rocket, the future is getting closer and closer :)
    most likely, the authors took the concept of an electrothermochemical gun as a basis, since the principle is similar :)

  19. the same doctor
    the same doctor 21 November 2020 12: 45
    0
    Just count the energy of gunpowder, and then estimate how much electricity is needed to, say, doubling it. Divide by time, get the amperage. And get the conclusion - useless nonsense. Of course, ultra-high-speed projectiles require gases with a higher molecular velocity than gunpowder gives. But this is easier to achieve by injecting, for example, oxygen and kerosene into the breech chamber. If you experiment with the trajectories of the jets, it is possible to obtain ignition after the completion of injection, acceptable injection pressure characteristics and closing the valves before ignition.
  20. Vladimir Vlasov
    Vladimir Vlasov 26 November 2020 10: 34
    0
    Is such a gun enough for three shots? Hardly? There are other technologies, flow control, speed is not limited.