Military Review

Sailing bullet

82
We continue the topic


“And the bullet is ... all the same, full of holes !!!”, again mossy orthodoxes from artillery will say if they read this, the second, article from the cycle “Weapon from the pass.

And again they will be right, really the bullet as it was, and remained full of holes.

But this is again not on purpose, since the unshakable laws of physics were ordered.

Sailing bullet


«And the bullet is ... full of holes !!!”, Was the name of the first article on the topic of aerodynamic acceleration of bullets up to speeds of 5-10 km / sec. It proposed and justified the method of aerodynamic acceleration of a bullet (projectile) in the barrel. So that no one had any doubts, a standard lead bullet and a primitive mock-up of a sailing bullet, which was a scrap of a self-tapping screw with a diameter of 4.5mm, was shot from a conventional air rifle. The shooting was carried out on an aluminum sheet 12 thick millimeters, the usual bullet could not penetrate it naturally, but the “holey” and very “clumsy” sailing bullet easily pierced it.

The results of the shooting were filmed and posted in the article, but apparently the photo turned out not very convincing, so this video will be posted a video of the real shooting.

For greater effect and clarity, the rifle was upgraded for shooting with sailing bullets. As they say, feel the difference ...

American recruit turns into a Russian conscript



This American "recruit" company "Krosman" will be forcibly turned into a Russian draftee.
Not even a draftee, yet only in a conscript.


The American "recruit" with a slight movement of the arm with a grinder and "some kind of mother" turned into a Russian "recruit" optimized for shooting with sailing bullets. The upgraded rifle did not lose power and when firing conventional bullets (on the contrary, it began to shoot harder). Alteration of the rifle was required because of the significantly greater gas consumption when fired by a sailing bullet. In a traditional shot, all gases are locked in the barrel by a moving bullet, respectively, during aerodynamic acceleration, some gases pass between the walls of the barrel and the body of the bullet through the sailing surfaces of the bullet and a larger gas charge is spent on one shot.

But the gas does not go away in vain, this gas transfers the kinetic energy of its movement to the sailing surfaces of the bullet and additionally accelerates it. Actually the increased efficiency of the aerodynamic bullet is due precisely to the energy of this additional flowing gas stream.
In the case of firing conventional bullets, the additional gas charge also works, but not efficiently enough, and part of it is simply lost.

In addition to increasing the volume of the gas charge, a transition was made from compressed air to carbon dioxide. There is also a small trick related to the physics of the process of dispersing a bullet. For an ordinary bullet, the density (more simply, the weight of a gas molecule) of a gas charge does not matter that it is hydrogen, that it doesn’t care for air, as long as the pressure is the same at its bottom.

But for a sailing bullet, gas density is of fundamental importance. Since kinetic energy is exchanged between the bullet and the gas jet on the sailing surfaces, the higher the gas density, the more efficiently the gas jet transfers energy to the sailing surfaces of the bullet. And that is why the “recruit” was transferred to carbon dioxide, it is one and a half times heavier than air at the same pressure.

How to shoot



Such a “shaved” Russian conscript turned out
In addition to the necessary improvements of the American "recruit", my sense of beauty required me to remove everything unnecessary from him.
Left bare functionality, nothing superfluous.


All that was not needed for firing, and only made it heavier and cluttered the product was ruthlessly cut off.

For convenience of experiments, the gas was poured into a two-liter bottle and connected to the rifle with a flexible high-pressure hose. The reducer was not used and the pressure in the cylinder (slightly less than 60 atmospheres at room temperature) is directly flowed into the barrel bore when fired (with the battery capacity of 5 cubes in front of the combat valve naturally).

So, despite the exotic look, we can say that this is a regular gas rifle, the type of those that work on 12g. cartridges with carbon dioxide. It is certainly not as powerful as rifles in atmospheric air compressed to 300, but the bullet flies out of it as well, if not better. There was an idea to heighten the effect, too, to switch to pressure in 300 atmospheres, but after sorting out the "recruit" and finding inside the plastic stuffing, I refused this idea. I still need my fingers and eyes ...

What we shoot



The transition to carbon dioxide allowed to increase the power of the shot. For the disposal of this power, the sailing bullet itself was refined, it became corny longer.
And we will compare the sailing bullet in terms of the power of the shot with the fastest and most powerful bullet for pneumatics, the standard steel copper-coated ball.


If the sailing bullet needed three rifled sails on compressed air, then carbon dioxide required five rifling holes and its length was about 11 millimeters. We will compare it with the standard and most powerful bullet for pneumatics, the standard steel ball, on these bullets because of the lack of friction on the rifles, the power of the shot in pneumatics increases by 10, due to the accuracy of course.

But about accuracy while we are not talking, this is the topic of another article, and our primitive, unbalanced bullet from trimming screws will not allow you to shoot for sure, God forbid that you would not tumble in flight and especially when confronted with a target.

So, only the power of the shot will be compared, and we will evaluate it according to the traditional technique of pneumatics - shooting at the tin cans. Only shooting will complicate for clarity of comparison, instead of the banks we will use the computer building that has served its purpose, the steel there is 0.8mm, this is not a tin one.

Oh, those copyrights ...



Simultaneously with the unhurried modifications of weapons had to do paperwork.
In the picture, of course, not my patents, I have much more of them, and I do not keep them in frames.
Having a wealth of experience in patenting inventions and working in a team with an experienced, reliable patent specialist, it was not difficult to fill out an application.


Three applications for filing were filed at once. Applications turned out to be principled, not for a specific device, but for a method; such applications are much harder to substantiate and they are reviewed for at least a year. Applications cover all aspects of the aerodynamic method of dispersing a bullet aerodynamically, they are:
- way to accelerate the missile
- a method of imparting rotational motion to the missile projectile
- a method of reducing friction throwing projectile in the barrel

Due to the specifics of Russia, patents are certain symbols of professional pride and nothing more. There is no material benefit from them, if there is a benefit, it is purely moral, and I have complete skepticism about these three applications, they are said to be “impassable”.

The fact is that applications in the section of the patent heading "weapons" for obvious reasons, are subject to mandatory examination. Who and how it makes me perfectly aware, I don’t have any illusions about them, most likely, all three applications will be rejected with a wording like: “technically untenable decision”.

And now about the main thing, I don’t consider myself the author of these inventions, the maximum I can claim is the title of reenactor. There are good reasons to believe that weapons on similar principles have already been created and used in the distant 1959 on the Dyatlov Pass. It was the bullets implementing the principle of aerodynamic acceleration that killed nine tourists. Other reasons for their mysterious death can not be explained.

But enough of the lyrics, here's a video of a comparative shooting

All the most important things happen in the Russian kitchen, so I had to do the shooting in the same place. The actor, director and cameraman is zero, but ... "do not shoot the pianist, he plays as he can." The main thing is still visible there. And yet, there was accidentally music in the video, this is “Karunesh”, I have nothing to do with Muslims, I just like his music.
Video filmed from one perspective, one unmounted roller. He shot what is called an emphasis in order to fit the whole process into the frame from loading to hitting the target. At a distance of a meter from the target, it is only realistic to compare the power (energy) of the shot at the muzzle. So let's compare the energy of an ordinary piston bullet and a sailing bullet.



I think the conclusion from what I saw is obvious, the holes from the sailing bullet in steel 0.8mm thick surprised even me, especially in comparison with the frivolous dents from standard steel balls.
Now specifically on the topic.

About the obvious



Here are two holes for sailing bullets, the first through, from a bullet with five cuts.
The second, torn hole with traces of overturning, from an elongated bullet (seven cuts), she tumbled into a collision.
The effect of overturning and yawing of a rotating bullet is caused by precession, which occurs due to the imbalance of the center of mass relative to the axis of rotation.
So the main problem for the sailing bullet is balancing.


Production of sailing bullets will not be cheap, they must be made on high-precision equipment and pass the control of balancing. To use such bullets will be expensive. But this is about the negative, now about the positive.

Three completely new physical principles of operation for artillery were involved in the sailing pool, the sum of their positive effect and led to such impressive results. The physical mechanisms used are described in the respective patent applications.

The first of these is a method of aerodynamic acceleration, when an additional kinetic energy is communicated to the throwing projectile by transferring the energy of the outgoing gas layer moving in the bore through sailing surfaces on the body of the projectile.

Secondly, this is a method of imparting rotational motion to a missile projectile when a radial component of pressure on sailing surfaces installed at an angle to the vector of gas flow in the bore is used to tighten the bullet (in other words, the principle of “oblique sail”).

The third principle is to reduce friction of the missile projectile against the walls of the barrel when gaps for free flow of the gas stream between the walls of the barrel and the throwing projectile are created, eliminating physical contact between the walls of the barrel and the throwing projectile (using the principle of gas suspension).

Now about the non-obvious



This is a snapshot of the classic “holey bullet” made using partial gas suspension technology.
Also not a cheap product by the way.
Product, piece and the price is not small ...


If the first two physical mechanisms involved in the sailing pool are fairly obvious and have obvious analogies from other areas of technology (sailing engines and wind generators for example), then the principle of gas suspension is little known. This is what is called exotic.

The main problem with the use of the gas suspension principle is the stabilization of the projectile motion, excluding the possibility of its contact with the walls of the barrel and yaw.

In classical piston systems, the barrel-projectile dilemma was that in order to stabilize the projectile it was necessary to twist it around the axis of movement, and in order to tighten it, it was necessary to ensure contact with the barrel walls to interact with the rifling. It turned out a vicious circle.
In the case of aerodynamic acceleration of the sailing bullet, the spin of the missile projectile around the axis of motion occurs without the participation of rifling in the barrel and does not require contact with the walls of the barrel.

But this is only the first part of the problem, the second part is due to the fact that the barrel in the process of firing can also fluctuate and it is necessary to compensate for these fluctuations. Here everything is much more complicated and one cannot do without the use of the principle of an aerodynamic pillow.

The essence of this physical effect (it is also called “screen”) is that when the flow channel of the moving gas layer narrows, a pressure jump occurs that is perpendicular to the axis of the flow of the gas layer.

And in our case, the ends of the sailing surfaces will play the role of such “narrowers” ​​of the outflow of the gas layer on which high pressure zones will be created centering the projectile on the axis of the bore.

Thus, the sailing surfaces of the bullet work not only with their main planes, they also work with their ends, ensuring the stabilization of the bullet in the barrel channel relative to its central axis.
That's how difficult it is with this simple at first glance trimming screws, but the only way to implement the principle of gas suspension in practice.

And what's next?



As always, you need to start with the name, because “as you call a bullet, it will fly like that.”
Everything new is a well-forgotten old, so the name BOLT immediately comes to mind.
This is the name of the crossbow arrow (in the photo), the threaded fasteners, and in all fantasy, this is the bullet of the weapon of the future.



So while this article was being written, the first of the necessary has already been done, the name was invented, as it seems to be a very apt name, “Bolt”, sounds short and meaningful, maybe it will take root ...

And most importantly, it recalls continuity. An old crossbow missile, a short metal arrow with plumage on the sides, is ideally a sailing bullet. The modern bolt with its carving also resembles a sailing bullet. And the “bolt-bullets” from the future have the same fantastic properties as sailing bullets.

Well, this is a joke, seriously, while the plans are modest, you need to make a normal sailing bullet. The current bullets from the trimming screws is a pitiful semblance of what needs to be done. Most importantly, the sailing bullet must be balanced along the axis of rotation. For this, rifling should be done in pairs and opposition. In addition, you need to perform the edges of the rifling in a special aerodynamic profile to enhance the effect of centering on the axis of the bore and significantly lengthen the bullet itself.

Only after that it makes sense to check the "purity" of such bullets. Of course, in theory, everything should be just fine, but in practice it may not be so rosy, it’s not just a matter of a pool, it’s a rifle that shoots.

Obviously, the available rifles are not very suitable for shooting such “bolt-bullets”; substantial improvement is required. It is necessary for firing "bolts" to make the corresponding small arms - "BOLTER".

So for a special gun for shooting sailing bullets immediately found a capacious name. Moreover, it turns out as in the song; "..We were born to make a fairy tale come true ...". After all, "Bolter" is a weapon from the future, appearing in all combat fantasy.

It's a joke again .. But seriously, firstly, you need to increase the pressure in the barrel, for pneumatics, the optimum pressure will be 250 atmospheres, with this pressure you can provide bullet energy in the 100-150 joule, and effective lesion distance in 300- 500 meters. It will already be a full-fledged military weapon, not a toy.

Secondly, the barrel should become smooth, the rifle with a smooth barrel sounds today as absurd, but apparently it will soon become commonplace.

Thirdly, it is necessary, if not strange, to reduce the caliber of the barrel. And while the bullet itself is lengthened, it should essentially turn into an arrow. The optimum gauge for pneumatics will be about 3 millimeters in diameter, and the bullet length about 30 millimeters.

And one more completely not obvious step contradicting the traditional principles of design of rifle systems - the barrel length of a rifle should be reduced.

The fact is that the force of the shot directly depends on the speed of the outflow of the gas jet, and it in turn depends on the length of the barrel, the shorter the barrel, the higher the rate of outflow of gas. On the other hand, other laws work for a sailing bullet than for an ordinary piston bullet; it accelerates much faster, because the gas pressure is transmitted not only to the bottom of the bullet, but also to its lateral sailing surfaces. Therefore, it is possible to provide the required acceleration at much shorter barrel lengths.

If we talk about pneumatics, aerodynamic bullets for the powder systems open up quite ambitious prospects, but I’m not going to do this later, purely theoretically. I will deal with a fundamentally new type of rifle systems, intermediate between pneumatics (gas) and powder (solid-state) systems, and, as is known, there is also a liquid one between gas and solid state.

That it represents the greatest interest for aerodynamic acceleration.
Author:
82 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. 311ove
    311ove 22 October 2013 08: 28
    13
    "The Russian land has not become scarce" ... Article plus. Respect and respect to the author for the "uncomfortableness" I especially liked the idea with the backlight wink hi
  2. Peacemaker
    Peacemaker 22 October 2013 08: 38
    +5
    I am glad that there are people striving to create something new smile
  3. anykind
    anykind 22 October 2013 09: 38
    +1
    smacked of wunderwafes .... to draw so many conclusions, unfounded ... only on the basis of one experiment. mdya (((
    1. My address
      My address 22 October 2013 10: 42
      +7
      But the author canceled a bunch of laws of physics and internal ballistics (like the science of the movement of a projectile in the barrel).
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 22 October 2013 23: 55
        +1
        Quote: My address
        But the author canceled a bunch of laws of physics and internal ballistics (like the science of the movement of a projectile in the barrel).


        I wanted to write - it seems to me alone that the author, as it were, would ignore physics?
        I saw your comment
        +1
    2. sasska
      sasska 27 November 2013 12: 22
      +2
      yo-my ... the author of this opus is clearly "alternatively gifted" fool
      such topics are encountered in the Hanse. there, too, "innovators" crawl out: "Yes, I am from my Rat 1377 with five swinging punching a bar of 50x50 at fifty kopecks through and through" (etc.).
      12mm aluminum punch with a piece of self-tapping screw ?? nude ...
      I read about this prodigy to this place and left it.
  4. Tommygun
    Tommygun 22 October 2013 09: 44
    0
    And where is the first article in the Weapons from the Pass series?
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 22 October 2013 23: 58
      0
      Quote: Tommygun
      And where is the first article in the Weapons from the Pass series?


      I could be wrong, but since half a year ago there was an article about the dead Sverdlovsk tourists (Dyatlov Pass), where the author suggested that it was the effect of bullets at a speed of several km / s.
      Maybe a sequel?
  5. RPG_
    RPG_ 22 October 2013 09: 59
    +2
    The idea is certainly good, but the "bolt" caliber for example 125 mm. will probably cost like a light aircraft, and the increased length will greatly reduce the wearable ammunition. IMHO mass production of such projectiles requires a strong leap forward in material handling and casting.
    1. Airman
      Airman 22 October 2013 10: 23
      0
      Quote: RPG_
      The idea is certainly good, but the "bolt" caliber for example 125 mm. will probably cost like a light aircraft, and the increased length will greatly reduce the wearable ammunition. IMHO mass production of such projectiles requires a strong leap forward in material handling and casting.

      I see a prospect in the use of such weapons in special forces, though gas cylinders are not a small powder charge. The idea is interesting.
      1. RPG_
        RPG_ 22 October 2013 11: 26
        +4
        And why is it special units? Pneumatics will be large uncomfortable and cumbersome, and gunpowder will flash 7 terrorists and 120 hostages through and through.
  6. roial
    roial 22 October 2013 10: 28
    26
    During the war, intensive development of rapid-fire aircraft machine guns was carried out. One of the options that passed the test at the training ground was a machine gun designed by Sokolov (it seems he didn’t go into the series - with his rate of fire allowing to cut posts in one turn, the ammunition quickly ended, and the service life was short).
    And now, at the training ground, where comparative tests of machine guns were conducted, the designer arrived. He talked fraternally with weapons technicians, among whom were simply assaulters on machine gun firing, and in the course of the conversation he slightly aroused them:
    - Can any of you put out a candle from a machine gun, let's say from 50 meters?
    The guys immediately caught fire, got candles, installed them at the test site ... but they just did not have time to move away from the lit candle, as the wind put out the wind here.
    Fortunately, some sort of shed stood at the training ground. Here is a candle in this shed and set. It is more visible at the same time. The door is certainly wide open, measured the distance. Well, since the machine gun fires only bursts, they simply loaded one cartridge each. And then it turned out that the task is not so simple.
    There were a couple of snipers who managed to interrupt the candle, but decided that this was not according to the rules - it only had to be extinguished. In general, when everyone tried it and decided that it could only be done by accident, the designer said: "Okay, let me try."
    I must say that the weapons designer themselves rarely decently shoot themselves, but respected, gave way to a machine gun, trying not to smile. Sokolov long and carefully aimed, then fired, the candle went out. Run away checked, intact darling. The designers were sharply respected.

    When the delegation returned to the car, the driver, who brought Sokolov to the test site, quietly asked:
    - I saw that you loaded the machine gun with a cartridge, which you removed from your pocket. Is this special, target any?
    Sokolov grinned.
    - No, the cartridge is ordinary, only the hole is drilled obliquely in the pool. When flying, such turbulence creates - a fire can be put out, not like a candle.
    - And what have you been aiming for so long?
    “You know, I was afraid I wouldn’t get in the door of the barn,” Sokolov answered sadly.
    1. kori
      kori 22 October 2013 14: 36
      +3
      as always with us, with humor and cognitively)
    2. Assistant
      Assistant 22 October 2013 22: 54
      0
      And here the question arises of the bullets called sailing by the author of the article: are there any assumptions about the turbulence they generate in the air?
      I mean, can such turbulences play the role of a damaging factor if the sailing bullet continues to rotate at high speed after overcoming the armor barrier (unless, of course, all the sailing elements on the armor are left).
      And another question: is the front part of the helical sail so necessary? How much will the acceleration and balancing efficiency in the barrel of the considered bullet decrease if its front end is left with the edge of the self-tapping screw?
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 23 October 2013 00: 00
        0
        Quote: Assistant
        And here the question arises of the bullets called sailing by the author of the article: are there any assumptions about the turbulence they generate in the air?
        I mean, can such turbulences play the role of a damaging factor if the sailing bullet continues to rotate at high speed after overcoming the armor barrier (unless, of course, all the sailing elements on the armor are left).
        And another question: is the front part of the helical sail so necessary? How much will the acceleration and balancing efficiency in the barrel of the considered bullet decrease if its front end is left with the edge of the self-tapping screw?


        It’s interesting to disperse a mass of air into vortices - doesn’t it lead to huge losses of bullet energy?
    3. grapefruit
      grapefruit 26 October 2013 12: 38
      0
      In the border school, the teacher set the same task .... The solution to the problem was exactly the same.
  7. bootlegger
    bootlegger 22 October 2013 10: 33
    +3
    The idea is fascinating of course, but it is not clear at the expense of what a huge increase in speed and, accordingly, bullet energy is planned?
    After combustion of the powder charge of a pistol 9 mm cartridge, 0,25 g of powder gases remain and 950 J of energy is released. And the maximum energy possessed by bullets of this caliber is 650-700 J.
    From this it follows that the efficiency of firearms is already about 70%. It turns out that the increase in energy is limited to a maximum of 30%. It is unlikely that this figure is capable of revolutionizing firearms.
    To increase the efficiency of any system by 10-15%, this is certainly not bad, but the question is the price of this?
    1. Alexey
      Alexey 22 October 2013 11: 49
      0
      growth not only due to efficiency. The article also talks about increasing the powder charge.
      1. bootlegger
        bootlegger 22 October 2013 12: 16
        0
        Yes, there’s also talked about caliber reduction.
        Everything goes to a multiple increase in energy per unit area of ​​the barrel. There is still room for improvement in pistols, but in tank guns the resource is already limited to several hundred shots. What will happen if energy grows further?
        There are no materials for such tools.
        1. Storyteller
          Storyteller 22 October 2013 14: 04
          0
          If we use the principle proposed by the author, then armor-piercing blanks can be thrown through some 30-mm barrel, like in the "Terminator" with an efficiency of 125 mm. And throw bombs and rockets over a large caliber. The trunk will be more intact.
        2. galiullinrasim
          galiullinrasim 22 October 2013 17: 27
          -1
          it is lighter than titanium and cheaper every 50 times this is an aluminum glass alloy harder or rather tighter than titanium
  8. ramsi
    ramsi 22 October 2013 10: 34
    +2
    Well, but what about the effect when the incoming air stream tends to "twist" such a bullet to the opposite rotation, given by the gas in the barrel?
    1. Storyteller
      Storyteller 22 October 2013 14: 07
      +1
      At high speed, the bullet’s forehead will create a cavity and the side surfaces with grooves will be in a vacuum, where, as you know, there is no aerodynamics.
      1. ramsi
        ramsi 22 October 2013 14: 12
        +4
        it’s if the forehead is on a cone, then there’s nothing like that
        1. Storyteller
          Storyteller 23 October 2013 10: 47
          -1
          On the contrary, to create a cavitation effect on the forehead of different high-speed discs, a flat platform is made, with the help of which a cavity is created, eliminating friction of the medium on the side walls.
          1. ramsi
            ramsi 23 October 2013 20: 41
            +1
            but forehead it slows down for the most do not indulge, and the rear stump too
            1. Kir
              Kir 23 October 2013 21: 13
              0
              Here is something that tells me that the author specifically provokes us to discuss technical and other nuances, and then you look at the next author, honestly came to this conclusion after re-reading his article, especially this place
              ..... I have a lot more of them, and I don’t keep them in frames.
              That is, like I have it like in the spring of dirt, well, I believed that I suffered from this, if of course I didn’t have the opportunity to sit next to someone else’s.
              1. ramsi
                ramsi 24 October 2013 07: 21
                +2
                yes it’s not a pity, all the same with beer we sit. I can advise you to use not ordinary screws, but there are ones that go only under the clamps in the dowels, they have a sharpened spiral on one side, they will slow down less ... In fact, the idea, of course, can be checked; it cannot be compared with SPEL, but at least there will be fewer ricochets even under a pistol cartridge - there could even be nothing
  9. My address
    My address 22 October 2013 10: 39
    +1
    Down with gas dynamics! Long live the sailing bullet!

    Does the author not know that the pressure in gases is the same in all directions? And what is this "power of the shot" mentioned in the penultimate paragraph? And the author has already canceled the property of long projectiles, without tail, to somersault? There are a lot of absurdities.

    Article minus.

    The administration is also a minus. Such articles are published in Opinions.
    1. Alexey
      Alexey 22 October 2013 11: 45
      +4
      It looks like you don't know that the pressure of gases is the same in all directions only if you neglect the accelerations (inertial forces). Many of the above "absurdities" have nothing to do with the main idea and, in principle, can be solved.
      1. My address
        My address 22 October 2013 11: 57
        +1
        When accelerating the bullet, the "sail holes" will not accelerate, but slow down. Think a little. But this is only at speeds comparable to the speed of sound in a given gaseous medium.
        And so I can say that the author is illiterate, but stubborn.
        1. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 22 October 2013 22: 00
          +2
          If you really think a little, then the author wants to implement an effect similar to the effect of an oil wedge in sliding bearings for a pair of "bullet-bore". I do not undertake to evaluate the effectiveness of the idea, massive calculations are needed, and most likely you will not be able to do without full-scale tests and charting. But the "literate" fairies from the first chapter of the textbook are also not very convincing.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  10. FunkschNNX
    FunkschNNX 22 October 2013 10: 58
    0
    Maybe such rifling in the barrel will help accelerate the projectile, but in flight they will slow down the projectile. Maybe it's better in a "leaky" pool that the channels in the photo should be done not perpendicularly, but at a certain angle. Then they will create a pillow and twist the projectile and will slow down less in flight.
    1. RPG_
      RPG_ 22 October 2013 13: 15
      +1
      For some reason, the sails did not slow down the ships and even helped sail against the wind.
      1. ramsi
        ramsi 22 October 2013 14: 27
        +4
        with sails against the wind they sailed in zigzags, directly possible only with the help of a vertically set rotor
        1. Kir
          Kir 22 October 2013 15: 16
          +3
          Just not in zigzags, but in tacks, and it sounds like a hole in a part was drilled, and they didn’t swim, only a known substance floats, but they walked.
      2. FunkschNNX
        FunkschNNX 22 October 2013 16: 42
        +3
        Well, if you make the bullet "go steep tack", then it is quite possible :-)
      3. Prohor
        Prohor 23 October 2013 11: 57
        +1
        laughing So the wind blew into the sails !!! And will the author blow into a bullet after departure? In the trunk - a sail, after departure - a parachute.
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 23 October 2013 00: 06
      +2
      Quote: Фкенщь13
      Maybe such rifling in the barrel will help accelerate the projectile, but in flight they will slow down the projectile. Maybe it's better in a "leaky" pool that the channels in the photo should be done not perpendicularly, but at a certain angle. Then they will create a pillow and twist the projectile and will slow down less in flight.


      Can’t you make the channels in the detachable bullet pan?
      1. FunkschNNX
        FunkschNNX 23 October 2013 17: 51
        +2
        it will already be a long-known sabot projectile and not a sailing bullet
  11. crambol
    crambol 22 October 2013 11: 13
    +2
    From the point of view of aerodynamics and ballistics it is very chaotic, but extremely interesting. Great success to the author (especially regarding patenting - be it three times wrong!).
    1. crambol
      crambol 22 October 2013 11: 35
      -1
      By the way, a hypothetical situation. Invented something, the expert review is negative: It won’t work! Patented over the hill. Can I then sue Rospatent for incompetence?
      1. Kir
        Kir 22 October 2013 12: 23
        +2
        And you are sorry I'm sure that the experts understood correctly? Something I heard a lot different sit down to strive for it, yes there is one, or if a person is weak, they will buy it or worse, and then you look at someone for a place of you, well, of course, most of the time with a little nuances the authorship already has, etc. So it smells not of incompetence, but it stinks much more seriously.
      2. 311ove
        311ove 22 October 2013 13: 29
        +1
        Of course you can sue. .... and what will be awarded there .... repeat
      3. scientist
        scientist 22 October 2013 15: 52
        +4
        In my opinion, Rospatent is patenting everything in a row. For Rospatent, the functionality and effectiveness of the invention is not the main thing. The main thing is that there would be no obvious plagiarism. Because for them, as for any similar organization, this is a way of earning. If you were refused, then most likely due to an incorrectly executed application and description of the invention. Actually, according to the rules, correspondence should begin, and the experts of Rospatent should help you with this. Everything is strict here.
        I don’t know how it is with your foreign language, but even in Russian correctly formulating the formula and description of the invention is a very difficult task, especially for the first time.
      4. vanaheym
        vanaheym 23 October 2013 08: 36
        +1
        American as well as patent offices of many countries consider applications for inventions only from the point of view of their novelty, and not physical feasibility, and not its compliance with the laws of physics. For example, the same patent 6,867,514 from 2005 describes a perpetual motion machine and does not bother anyone.
  12. report4
    report4 22 October 2013 13: 40
    +4
    The experiment is mildly unscientific. A cut screw is much heavier than a steel ball. To compare duck in a human way - what kind of thread is a center drill (hardened cylinder) and a piece of a self-tapping screw, then we would have known that all bullets should be replaced by red-hot blanks because they are the best laughing
    1. Storyteller
      Storyteller 22 October 2013 14: 22
      +2
      In theory, the screw and the ball should have the same energy, because are accelerated by the same gas charges. Accordingly, a heavier self-tapping screw should have a lower speed. As for the purity of the experiment, punching holes is not an indicator for me, because the self-tapping screw has sharp edges at the end, which, all other things being equal, will poke holes in a tin can much more fun than a round ball. I suggest that the author round off the front ends of his bullets and repeat everything with an encore.
      1. report4
        report4 22 October 2013 14: 48
        +3
        Quote: Storyteller
        In theory, the self-tapping screw and the ball should have the same energy, because accelerated by the same charges of gas.

        You inattentively read the "article" - gas is supplied there in excess, so there is no need to talk about the same energy)
      2. old rocket man
        old rocket man 25 October 2013 17: 22
        +1
        Quote: Storyteller
        I suggest that the author round off the front ends of his bullets and repeat everything with an "encore"

        And we’ll also suggest moving 10 meters away, I'm not sure that he will be able to get 3 out of three into this locker, at the same time we will clarify the effect of breaking through laughing
    2. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 22 October 2013 14: 51
      +2
      Quote: report4
      The experiment is mildly unscientific. A cut screw is much heavier than a steel ball.

      Lead is heavier than iron. wink But think correctly, the difference between shells is that the self-tapping screw is harder than the ball and does not flatter when hit by iron, therefore it breaks. Only I would advise the author to shoot from 10 meters, at least, then they would see that they will lose speed faster and what the results will be. Those who dabbled in experiments with bullets for pneumatics know that the ball is not the most powerful of them. Bronze bullets with plastic belts are even more effective at firing at pieces of iron, and steel cores are even better.
      1. Kir
        Kir 22 October 2013 15: 00
        0
        And why the core from VK6M is trifling, generally with a bang, and if the hands come from where and the corresponding tool is available, it is possible in the same 4.5 and fit the caliber.
  13. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 22 October 2013 15: 24
    +3
    I conscientiously read the entire article.
    I understood almost nothing.
    request

    Little material.
    It is written in a highly specialized language, without decoding into a more accessible one.

    Maybe I'm just not special.
    Although it would be interesting to understand the author, the topic is unknown ...
    IMHO.
    1. ramsi
      ramsi 22 October 2013 15: 29
      +3
      by and large, nothing new: feathered sub-caliber projectile and smoothbore gun - you know all this
      1. scientist
        scientist 22 October 2013 16: 28
        +4
        The idea with an aerodynamic cushion, for centering, and according to the author, even compensation for vibrations, is quite new for use in ammunition. The only thing I didn't like was comparing the penetration of a steel ball and a bolt. Firstly, different mass, therefore, different% of energy loss from air resistance, and secondly, the aerodynamics itself is different. Therefore, the comparison of a ball and a bolt is incorrect. The author needs to use for comparison the bolt of the same weight and shape, but without the "sail" holes. Then the increase in energy will be clearly visible under equal conditions.
        1. ramsi
          ramsi 22 October 2013 16: 36
          +1
          and shustovannye rifled trunks for the citizen are very different in this regard?
      2. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 22 October 2013 16: 39
        +1
        Quote: ramsi
        by and large, nothing new: feathered sub-caliber projectile and smoothbore gun - you know all this

        Igor, I am aware of my "crowbars", although they are rarely fired upon in the troops.

        Explain, pliz, how are they similar to this tricky opus called "article"?
        In a nutshell, I don’t jerk, but really ask.

        Never hesitated to ask something not entirely understood.
        1. ramsi
          ramsi 22 October 2013 17: 18
          +4
          as I understand it, the guy wants to abandon the rifling, but to maintain the accuracy of the rifled weapons. The smooth barrel and light weight of the bullet allow you to increase the initial speed, and the spiral spiral to give rotation, the central hole and the breakthrough of gases on top of the spiral center and relieve the bullet from friction in the barrel.
          I see two "buts": the dubious benefits of the breakthrough of gases, and - an internal hole that increases the already increased friction against the air
          In fact, all kinds of turbines have long existed in smooth-bore hunting weapons, but there are no special enthusiasms about this
  14. DZ_98_B
    DZ_98_B 22 October 2013 16: 30
    +1
    The air rifle, introduced initially, with a pressure of a maximum of 20 bar can 50, but no more. connected cylinder pressure 150 ... 180 bar. Do you feel the difference?
  15. Massik
    Massik 22 October 2013 16: 51
    +4
    Relatively recently, electromagnetic guns were also considered fiction, wait and see, the author is well done, he is trying to experiment and create something new at least, but for me it is a dark forest, thoughts are much more mundane ...
  16. Alex_T
    Alex_T 22 October 2013 18: 36
    +4
    The author should be prohibited from taking hard drugs, as well as forced to study the literature on internal and external ballistics. The article is an example of pseudo-engineering and pseudo-scientific work (if the author is a student or a humanist, then you can understand, forgive .. if you studied strength of materials, then take away your diploma). To assess the energy of a bullet, first of all, it is necessary to measure its speed and mass (chronograph + scales). The hardness + the shape of the bullet strongly affects the punching of the sheet, in this case the tip is flat like that of the punch, the metal of the target is deformed and breaks only along the edge of the hole, and at the ball the entire contact area with the ball is subject to deformation, whoever worked as a punch on sheet metal will understand me. From the video: I picked up a CO2 balloon, but it's a little useless, probably the factory valve remained. The original valve does not greatly increase the volume of "injected" air, it needs to be improved.
  17. wei
    wei 22 October 2013 20: 00
    +2
    note to the author
    how to achieve more pressure
    use the receiver as the barrel cartridge of your choice

    and develop an assessment methodology
    bullet (bolt) 1 gram bullet ball 1 gram
    pressure 1 atm 1 atm
    distance 1 meter 1 meter
    number of steel 1mm punched sheets
    bullet (bolt) 10 bullet ball 0
    Well, as it so
  18. DZ_98_B
    DZ_98_B 22 October 2013 20: 29
    +1
    Just for reference, just pneumatic. Rifle rifle !!! Pressure 8 bar. in the tires of your car pressure is 2 bar !!!! in KAMAZ 6 barrels.
  19. akm8226
    akm8226 22 October 2013 21: 00
    +5
    I read everything carefully. From the point of view of me, as an engineer, there are a couple of objections.
    First.
    The efficiency of the system is higher, the less exhaust erupts between the bullet and the barrel wall. In a system with a self-tapping screw, this efficiency is at the level of the efficiency of the Cherepanov steam locomotive. From here, the conclusion is that the cartridge for such a system will be a waste of ammunition.
    Second.
    When fired, according to the theory of the author, the oblique helical grooves on the pool work like a sail, taking energy from the powder gases overtaking them !! (this is important!). But! this sail also works in the same way for braking a bullet in the air, after it leaves the trunk.
    That is, to evaluate the energy of a shot, the author had to stupidly weigh both bullets and stupidly shoot them at a distance from the same angle. After that, calculate muzzle energy in both cases is easier than a boiled turnip.
    This was not done, therefore, all arguments about the effectiveness of the new bullet are no longer valid.
    However, I admit that a gas bearing from a bullet and a barrel can be quite effective if you somehow "fold the sails" on a propeller bullet after it leaves the barrel. But then it will no longer be a bullet in the general sense, but a product with the managed! plumage and, which is quite possible, then the question of its stabilization in flight will disappear.
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 23 October 2013 00: 11
      0
      Quote: akm8226
      I read everything carefully. From the point of view of me, as an engineer, there are a couple of objections.
      First.
      The efficiency of the system is higher, the less exhaust erupts between the bullet and the barrel wall. In a system with a self-tapping screw, this efficiency is at the level of the efficiency of the Cherepanov steam locomotive. From here, the conclusion is that the cartridge for such a system will be a waste of ammunition.
      Second.
      When fired, according to the theory of the author, the oblique helical grooves on the pool work like a sail, taking energy from the powder gases overtaking them !! (this is important!). But! this sail also works in the same way for braking a bullet in the air, after it leaves the trunk.
      That is, to evaluate the energy of a shot, the author had to stupidly weigh both bullets and stupidly shoot them at a distance from the same angle. After that, calculate muzzle energy in both cases is easier than a boiled turnip.
      This was not done, therefore, all arguments about the effectiveness of the new bullet are no longer valid.
      However, I admit that a gas bearing from a bullet and a barrel can be quite effective if you somehow "fold the sails" on a propeller bullet after it leaves the barrel. But then it will no longer be a bullet in the general sense, but a product with the managed! plumage and, which is quite possible, then the question of its stabilization in flight will disappear.


      Efficiency depends not only on the gas obturation, but also on the friction of the bullet on the barrel. The author is trying to reduce the pressure. About sailing - God knows him
  20. limmor
    limmor 22 October 2013 21: 00
    +1
    Quote: My address
    When accelerating the bullet, the "sail holes" will not accelerate, but slow down. Think a little. But this is only at speeds comparable to the speed of sound in a given gaseous medium.
    And so I can say that the author is illiterate, but stubborn.


    For starters, you would do something as an author, and then prove it. And just blow on the water !!!
  21. akm8226
    akm8226 22 October 2013 21: 05
    +3
    If we further develop this topic, I see a bullet in the form of a badminton shuttlecock - or several! frills, nested in each other's ass, sorry.)) That is, the trunk is sealed with fluffy tails - and minimum flight resistance - with folded tails.
  22. Captain45
    Captain45 22 October 2013 22: 07
    +3
    I put the article "+", although I am a humanist and a layman in the exact sciences, but I added it because I have been reading the author's articles with interest, probably for a year, and I see that a person has an inquisitive mind, maybe he is not a professional and not in he understands everything, I don't know, I can't judge, but a person is trying to do something, trying to figure out the reasons for the death of the Dyatlov group on his own, looking for possible reasons, experimenting. And the reasoning of some members of the forum reminds me of an episode from the movie "Ivan Vasilyevich changes his profession":
    - I also had one. Wings came up, I wanted to fly.
    -Well, so what?
    -I put him on a barrel of gunpowder. Let him fly! "
    By the way, many famous gunsmiths started with a file and a piece of metal.
  23. uzer 13
    uzer 13 22 October 2013 22: 11
    +2
    I have read this article before. This, of course, is an interesting projection from the realm of fiction, which, unfortunately, has nothing to do with real ballistic processes. But thanks for that, humor jokes in our boring life will also not hurt.
  24. VP123
    VP123 22 October 2013 23: 12
    +2
    For a long time I saw bullets for pneuma, a steel bullet with plumage, a simple brush. I hollowed my mother.
    1. Aleks tv
      Aleks tv 23 October 2013 00: 21
      0
      Quote: VP123
      steel bullet with plumage simple brush.

      yes
      The mustache childhood hollowed by them in a shooting gallery at targets ...

      I did not like bullets and shooting at all kinds of hares.
      Namely, arrows with a brush on round lined targets, "10" in the center ... I liked that.
      Thank you for the memories.
      From the heart, plus.
      wink
  25. Yon_Silent
    Yon_Silent 23 October 2013 06: 57
    +2
    The article is clearly zamususnovat.
    Consideration is as follows: in the system of equations describing the internal ballistics of the motion of a projectile (bullet) under the influence of expanding combustion products, the equation of energy balance is the first.
    It follows from this that in the process of moving along the bore, the missile body receives energy from the gas pressure at the bottom of the projectile, from the work of expanding the combustion products in the projectile volume, and from the heat that these combustion products possess. And he spends on working on his own movement, on aerodynamic drag, on cutting a belt (for a projectile) or a shirt (for a bullet) into the grooves of the barrel channel, on heat transfer to the barrel walls.
    Usually the second, third and fourth types of energy consumption are combined into one type of losses and evaluated by the so-called fictitious coefficient.
    The efficiency figure of 70%, which appeared in the comment above, is very optimistic - in fact, for other systems it is much lower. And the higher the muzzle velocity, the lower the efficiency.
    According to the author's idea, it is proposed to introduce another kind of work, which will be performed by the thrown body - giving rotational motion with the simultaneous rejection of obturation. And here a strong doubt overcomes me (I repeat, this is my personal feeling) that the loss of a decent part of the energy-rich gases during the forcing period (the very beginning of the shot, when the projectile did not budge) can somehow increase the muzzle velocity. The fictitious coefficient will not become less - instead of work on deformation of the belt (shirt) on the grooves, work will appear on the formation of vortices on these "sails" and on the spin of the projectile. I can intuitively estimate that these energy costs will be even higher than traditional ones.
    Well, the most interesting, but where can you get such a bullet?
  26. Cpa
    Cpa 23 October 2013 07: 25
    -1
    In World War II, the Germans developed a long-range artillery system based on the projectile sailing effect. They were going to shell Britain through the strait from it. So the idea is not new, they could simply neglect the cost of the projectile for the psychological effect. If you find a cheap way to produce sailing ammunition without changing the range weapons, then the government will seize on the idea. Any appreciation will be skeptical.
  27. makarov
    makarov 23 October 2013 08: 08
    -1
    Uv. author. Not only do you have a bunch of patents, someone may have more. Be more modest. After all, no one disputes your level of intelligence. In addition to the idea declared on paper (patent), there is also its need recognized by the consumer, that is, introduction into production. In my opinion, your research will be unclaimed, since it "floats" in theory and will be unacceptable in practice.
  28. Storyteller
    Storyteller 23 October 2013 11: 53
    +1
    The experiment, of course, is interesting, but something tells me that this bullet cannot reach hypersonic speeds. To achieve such a result, it seems to me, the most promising method described in one of the previous articles is the "scissors" method, when the bullet is accelerated by pressure on its lateral surfaces of gases coming through the bore holes. Something like a cumulative effect.
  29. akm8226
    akm8226 23 October 2013 15: 31
    +1
    Quote: cdrt
    Quote: akm8226
    I read everything carefully. From the point of view of me, as an engineer, there are a couple of objections.
    First.
    The efficiency of the system is higher, the less exhaust erupts between the bullet and the barrel wall. In a system with a self-tapping screw, this efficiency is at the level of the efficiency of the Cherepanov steam locomotive. From here, the conclusion is that the cartridge for such a system will be a waste of ammunition.
    Second.
    When fired, according to the theory of the author, the oblique helical grooves on the pool work like a sail, taking energy from the powder gases overtaking them !! (this is important!). But! this sail also works in the same way for braking a bullet in the air, after it leaves the trunk.
    That is, to evaluate the energy of a shot, the author had to stupidly weigh both bullets and stupidly shoot them at a distance from the same angle. After that, calculate muzzle energy in both cases is easier than a boiled turnip.
    This was not done, therefore, all arguments about the effectiveness of the new bullet are no longer valid.
    However, I admit that a gas bearing from a bullet and a barrel can be quite effective if you somehow "fold the sails" on a propeller bullet after it leaves the barrel. But then it will no longer be a bullet in the general sense, but a product with the managed! plumage and, which is quite possible, then the question of its stabilization in flight will disappear.


    Efficiency depends not only on the gas obturation, but also on the friction of the bullet on the barrel. The author is trying to reduce the pressure. About sailing - God knows him


    You probably meant friction on the trunk.
  30. I think so
    I think so 23 October 2013 23: 12
    +2
    I want to note that the effect named by the author as "the principle of gas suspension" has been widely used and is applied in mortar artillery. There, the mine in the bore is centered with the help of gases escaping along the body of the mine and falling into the annular cuts made on the mine ... So, the idea of ​​the "gas suspension principle" need not even try to patent, it is already widely used. Everything else described by the author is at least controversial. Well, the speed of 10 km per second for such a principle of acceleration is, in principle, unrealistic ... Acceleration to speeds of tens of kilometers per second is possible using the cumulative funnel principle, but here they do not smell ... alas ...
  31. sergerz
    sergerz 25 October 2013 05: 09
    +1
    To increase the speed of the bullet's departure, I think I need to increase the pressure as the bullet spans the barrel. With the electronics existing today, this will not cause problems, but it is possible to make a valve with a variable cross-section, without the presence of electronics. But in general - well done!
    1. ramsi
      ramsi 25 October 2013 08: 24
      -1
      in my opinion, in this regard, nothing real, except for the tapered barrels of "great Germany" is observed
      1. sergerz
        sergerz 26 October 2013 07: 33
        -1
        Well, so new, this is not always forgotten old, as it turns out, you can do something new on the basis of new knowledge. With increasing pressure during the passage of a barrel bullet, the air velocity increases and the bullet accelerates.
  32. alex86
    alex86 27 October 2013 22: 08
    +1
    "Pig wheel apparatus"! The person, apparently, is carried away by his idea, but there are big problems with its justification. The tests are incorrect, the idea of ​​"windage" of the bullet seems to be clearly fictitious, the centering of the bullet due to the flow of gases has nothing to do with the speed (or rather, it reduces it), the entrainment of any amount of air during movement only reduces the speed, an increase in speed can only be due to a decrease in mass bullets due to the presence of holes (less mass), while the bullet will lose speed faster, etc., etc. Weapon-based graphomania. And the people are seriously discussing. Like children, by God ...
    1. alex86
      alex86 29 October 2013 19: 54
      0
      Quote: alex86
      Arms-related graphomania. And the people are seriously discussing. Like children, I swear ...

      Apparently, the author was offended ...
  33. Grishka100watt
    Grishka100watt 28 October 2013 15: 13
    -1
    Amazing article. I read it with pleasure. Thank.

    PS: The Dyatlov group was eliminated not with weapons, but with well-developed hand-to-hand combat techniques. What is lucidly, thoroughly and convincingly described in Rakitin's article "Death following the trail", which took me 4-5 hours to read. I recommend.
  34. CAPILATUS
    CAPILATUS 5 November 2013 01: 24
    0
    Dear author,
    Thanks for the article and for research in this direction, albeit on the knee.
    Special thanks for giving the opportunity to get acquainted with a wide circle of readers with your research.

    Nevertheless, I hope healthy criticism is accepted. As you read the article, several of the following thoughts arose immediately.

    1) on the fact of breaking through a sheet of iron and aluminum (in a previous article), I think the breakdown is more determined by the material of an impromptu bullet (it has a greater hardness) than by some side effect of the changed shape of a new bullet. Think about it, because in this pneumatic weapon the material of the bullet and its shape were not chosen by chance, but due to the improvement of ballistic characteristics. This is a sporting weapon - you need to hit the target at some distance.

    2) I think you do not fully imagine the aerodynamic effect of the sail, or rather, in our case, a hard profile sail. In such a sail, the pushing resulting force is generated not from the direction and source of pressure, but from the creation of the lifting force of such a wing, which under certain conditions (angle of attack, wing profile itself) will be greater than the wind force. Therefore, on such sails, yachts can accelerate to a speed exceeding the actual wind speed.

    Actually the opinion is. The idea is not new, although you intuitively go in the right direction, but the lack of knowledge does not allow you to advance in your research. I think you just need to shovel a bunch of material on the aerodynamics, properties of materials in order to come close to creating a truly breakthrough product in terms of its characteristics. In addition to knowledge, you will need serious modeling of the environment with a bullet placed there, with its blades, since only a certain shape and angle of the blades will allow it to accelerate to a speed exceeding the speed of gas movement in the barrel. Otherwise, come to a product that has been used for decades - a kind of sub-projectile.
    A patent is good, I could be wrong, but as far as I know, the idea cannot be patented, only the final product that you still have to go and go.
    I sincerely wish you success in this interesting field of research.
  35. Taras
    Taras 19 March 2016 19: 22
    0
    okay, the author is not in his own mind, but how many brothers have he been diagnosed with !!!!! 67 to 6 fool
  36. Taras
    Taras 19 March 2016 19: 22
    0
    okay, the author is out of his mind, but how many brothers have he been diagnosed with !!!!! 67 to 6 fool